Cindy Sheehan gives up fighting the war

[Butterscotch]

http://news.yahoo.com/i/718;_ylt=Aj_...ysDoqshYtn.3QA


I found these lines especially interesting and disturbing:


When Sheehan first took on Bush, she was a darling of the liberal left. However, when I started to hold the Democratic Party to the same standards that I held the Republican Party, support for my cause started to erode and the left started labeling me with the same slurs that the right used, she wrote in the diary.

What she found, she wrote, was a movement that often puts personal egos above peace and human life.

She said the most devastating conclusion she had reached was that Casey did indeed die for nothing ... killed by his own country which is beholden to and run by a war machine that even controls what we think.

[anitram]

I think she spoke out before many others were willing to, and before hating this war became a matter of mainstream. She tried to give some meaning to her son's death, but she sounds worn out and exhausted and maybe she lost herself somewhere along the way, I don't know.

It is an ugly truth that people are dying there for nothing.

[JCOSTER]

Being a mom of 2 sons, I honestly don't know how I would go on if something like that happened to us.

I give her credit for fighting and standing up for what she believes in.

[Dreadsox]

Originally posted by Butterscotch
http://news.yahoo.com/i/718;_ylt=Aj_...ysDoqshYtn.3QAHowever, when I started to hold the Democratic Party to the same standards that I held the Republican Party, support for my cause started to erode and the left started labeling me with the same slurs that the right used, she wrote in the diary.

Aint that a surprise. I have said pretty consistently in here that we need to do this.

But nobody wants to. God forbid we hold them all accountable. That is the sorry state of our democracy. I did not have a lot of respect for her initially. Maybe because she fell off the radar for me I did not notice her taking aim at all of DC.

[Jeannieco]

I think we are all disgruntled after Congress let us down last week on the war spending bill.

It's incredibly frustrating, I can only imagine what Cindy is feeling.
I don't blame her for packing it in. She gave her all and still it wasn't enough. It's really sad.
We are in deep trouble when our voices start falling on deaf ears.
Where is our Democracy?

[MsPurrl]

It caved in to our "commander in chief", that's what. I can't help agreeing that the almost-2000 people have died for nothing. And I agree with JC--I don't know how I would go on if I lost my son!

[Angela Harlem]

Originally posted by anitram
I think she spoke out before many others were willing to, and before hating this war became a matter of mainstream. She tried to give some meaning to her son's death, but she sounds worn out and exhausted and maybe she lost herself somewhere along the way, I don't know.

It is an ugly truth that people are dying there for nothing.

Maybe it seemed a good way to battle the grief, only to find now she is too tired, that all that really matters is her boy is not here anymore? We hear remarkable stories of people gaining incredible strength when fighting for something after someone is gone. Maybe she sought that, but never found it.

They certainly are dying for nothing.

[Vincent Vega]

Originally posted by MsPurrl
It caved in to our "commander in chief", that's what. I can't help agreeing that the almost-2000 people have died for nothing. And I agree with JC--I don't know how I would go on if I lost my son!

It's a bit higher than almost-2000:
http://www.icasualties.org/oif/

U.S. Deaths Confirmed By The DoD: 3456
Reported U.S. Deaths Pending DoD Confirmation: 11
Total 3467
DoD Confirmation List
Latest Coalition Fatality: May 28, 2007

[Ormus]

Originally posted by Dreadsox
Aint that a surprise. I have said pretty consistently in here that we need to do this.

But nobody wants to. God forbid we hold them all accountable. That is the sorry state of our democracy.

A realization I hit myself a little while back too. The state of our "democracy" is in pretty bad shape.

[MrsSpringsteen]

politico.com

Peaceniks not all sorry to see Sheehan go
By: Ryan Grim
May 29, 2007 06:08 PM EST

Cindy Sheehan is going out the way she came in, with a symbolic gesture widely covered by the mainstream media. A Google News search of her name showed more than 500 articles about her announcement yesterday that she was resigning as the “face” of the anti-war movement.

Much less a typical press release and more a zigzagging screed, her letter of resignation, which she sent to Daily Kos, is titled “Good Riddance Attention Whore.”

Sheehan’s anti-war campaign, which was sparked by the April 4, 2004, death of her son Casey in Sadr City, Iraq, has been defined by emotion, which is in full display in her farewell posting: “The most devastating conclusion that I reached this morning was that Casey did indeed die for nothing.”

The insult that seems to have finally driven Sheehan back to her California home was delivered by a Democratic Party she helped bring into power in November. Dubbed by the anti-war movement as the “Memorial Day Betrayal,” the new Congress gave President Bush funding for the war in Iraq last Thursday with no timeline for troop withdrawal.

“There is absolutely no sane or defensible reason for you to hand Bloody King George more money to condemn more of our brave, tired, and damaged soldiers and the people of Iraq to more death and carnage,” she wrote in her previous Daily Kos diary, which she posted Saturday morning.

Sheehan also slapped the anti-war movement on her way out, writing, “I have also tried to work within a peace movement that often puts personal egos above peace and human life. This group won’t work with that group; he won’t attend an event if she is going to be there; and why does Cindy Sheehan get all the attention anyway? It is hard to work for peace when the very movement that is named after it has so many divisions.”

Division within anti-war movements is nothing new, which Sheehan knows—she helped foster some of it.

When Sheehan first began to actively oppose the war in Iraq, she linked up with the group Military Families Speak Out, said Nancy Lessin, a co-founder.

“There was an anti-war movement building in this country in the fall of 2002, but the media didn’t pay attention to it,” she said. “Cindy became active in that after her son’s death in 2004 and she began speaking out against the war and she joined a group of Gold Star families crisscrossing the country.”

A year later, in August 2005, she camped out in a ditch in Crawford, Texas, asking to meet with a vacationing President Bush so that she could ask him why her son had died. (She had previously met with the president but said she was unsatisfied with their talk.)

Her action became an immediate national story, drawing the attention of a bored White House press corps as well as elements of the anti-war movement. “The second day she was in the ditch, we were working with her,” said Dana Balicki, spokeswoman for Code Pink, a left-wing anti-war group.

MoveOn.org, a liberal group that is politically to the right of Code Pink, also got involved, encouraging its members to support Sheehan. True Majority, another more mainstream organization, helped with her expenses and paid Fenton Communications, a Washington public relations firm, to work with her.

But by the end of that summer, she was working mainly with Code Pink and other more radical groups while openly disparaging MoveOn, even dinging some of the group’s leaders by name for not opposing the war vigorously enough.

“There have been frustrations in the past with MoveOn not wanting to take the public position: ‘Bring our troops home now,’” Lessin acknowledged.

“It’s very black and white for her. You’re either for the war or against the war,” said Mark Goldstone, who served as an attorney adviser for Sheehan when she was arrested with 370 others in a large demonstration in front of the White House in September 2005. “All this Mickey Mousing in Congress is very frustrating to her.”

Her black-and-white perspective prompted criticism from other liberals. “I think it’s naïve to think that the Democratic Party has the power in its hands to end this war,” said Todd Gitlin, a radical anti-Vietnam War figure who has since become more moderate. “She was not promoted for her political acumen; she was promoted for her symbolic force.”

Tiffany Burns, an organizer and media coordinator for the Camp Casey Peace Institute, said today that Sheehan was on a plane and unavailable to respond. However, Burns elaborated on Sheehan’s position.

“What Cindy’s talking about is the bigger picture and just trying to get one message that the anti-war movement can get behind and stand together. And at every turn different organizations had their own motivations,” Burns said. “I think she’s been very frustrated with that.”

Moderate Democrats called Sheehan’s political acumen into question when she criticized Israel at least twice and visited Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez in January 2006. For the right, she quickly became lumped with Michael Moore as a caricature of an anti-war activist.

“When she did start to speak out beyond just that she was a mother in pain,” said Balicki, it became “difficult for a lot of people to swallow, even people in the anti-war movement.

“It gets a little murkier than just going after George Bush, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld.”

Within the left of the anti-war movement, she was also under attack for her celebrity—hence the “attention whore” label, which Lessin dismissed. “Anybody put up there as a spokesperson will be attacked,” she said.

Under attack from all sides, Sheehan needed a break, Lessin said. “It’s difficult day after day after day to make speech after speech, exposing your pain and never letting it heal.”

Burns, though, said the announcement should be looked at less as a permanent retirement and more as time off.

“Even though Cindy is, quote-unquote, retiring from the movement, she’s really just taking more of a break,” said Burns. “She’s not going away. Stay tuned."

[anitram]

I completely agree with her re: the Democrats capitulating. It's an absolute embarrassment. The media has constructed a false narrative suggesting that cutting off funding means that next week they'll run out of bullets. Total bullshit.

The Democratic party is 100% useless. The Republicans are stupid and wrong, but at least they're consistently wrong and don't back off from being wrong even when it's patently obvious. It's almost perversely admirable.

[trevster2k]

^Wouldn't that be an interesting campaign strategy by the Republicans?

"Look, we are a bunch of fuckups and they still can't figure out how to take political advantage of us. Don't vote Democrat, they can't even defeat a bunch of idiots like us."

[diamond]

Originally posted by anitram
. It's almost perversely admirable.

more please.

[Angela Harlem]

you take pride in that, diamond??

[EdgeIsTooSexy]

shes a mofo

[Diemen]

That's just a wee bit uncalled for.

[Zoomerang96]

Originally posted by anitram
I completely agree with her re: the Democrats capitulating. It's an absolute embarrassment. The media has constructed a false narrative suggesting that cutting off funding means that next week they'll run out of bullets. Total bullshit.

The Democratic party is 100% useless. The Republicans are stupid and wrong, but at least they're consistently wrong and don't back off from being wrong even when it's patently obvious. It's almost perversely admirable.

oh anitram... i know i can always count on you to say what i always mean to, without actually having to!

i couldnt have said it better. the republicans are shit, no question - that's OBVIOUS to everyone living outside of america, but it's not like the democrats are any better. they're just more useless, is all.

[Earnie Shavers]

Yep. From the outside, the Democrats look as incompetent as the Republicans look evil.

[Earnie Shavers]

Originally posted by anitram

The Republicans are stupid and wrong, but at least they're consistently wrong and don't back off from being wrong even when it's patently obvious. It's almost perversely admirable.

All they have to do is stick to those few bullet points and they are 90% of the way there: "I'm pro-gun, anti-abortion, dedicated Christian, pro family (anti-gay), pro military. Something something freedom, something something liberty. God Bless America. Goodnight."

Hammer those louder than the others and you get the nomination. Successfully position yourself as the defender against an attack on one of those (real or imagined) and you get the vote.

Having those never changing strong points to hammer for ever and eternity is the Republicans greatest strength and the Democrats greatest weakness. They may be stupid and wrong - or it may say exactly that about those who believe in and vote for them - and the Democrats may never be able to put forward such a simplistic (for simpletons?) formula for success, but they need some sort of genius strategy like that. Some absolute definition.

[BVS]

Originally posted by EdgeIsTooSexy
shes a mofo

Thanks for bringing something productive to FYM...