" So who are we honorin' here?" said Bush to a dead soldier's parents...

[iflitifloat]

Posted: 8/14/05 at 12:40pm

Smearing Cindy Sheehan
Conservatives are attacking her as a dupe of the left who’s exploiting her dead son. Some relatives have piled on too. But the grieving mother says her well-timed Crawford visit is "my idea, my mission, my vision."

- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Farhad Manjoo

Aug. 13, 2005 | August was supposed to have been a quiet month for George W. Bush. Last year, the president cut short his customary weekslong vacation in order to campaign for reelection, so this year, unencumbered, he'd planned to spend more than a month in the sweltering heat of his ranch in Crawford, Texas. Then, last week, Cindy Sheehan, a grieving Northern California woman whose son was killed in Baghdad, Iraq in April 2004, showed up on Bush's vacation doorstep. She refuses to leave until Bush meets her in person. Nothing's been quiet in Crawford ever since.

It wouldn't be quite right to say that Sheehan's stand has vaulted the war back to the forefront of the national consciousness. Fresh horrors in Iraq daily are enough for that. But Sheehan is clearly forcing Bush to personally and publicly confront the consequences of his choices. And she's forcing reporters to pay attention, too. On Thursday, Bush was asked to respond to Sheehan's protest. "I sympathize with Mrs. Sheehan," Bush said. "She feels strongly about her position. She has every right in the world to say what she believes. This is America." But Bush also said that he disagrees with those Americans, like Sheehan, who want U.S. troops to pull out from Iraq. And he didn't suggest he'd be meeting with Sheehan anytime soon, either.

Sheehan insists that she's prepared to wait until Bush changes his mind. Sheehan, a founder of Gold Star Families for Peace, an antiwar group composed of families of troops killed in Iraq, has always been vocal in her opposition to the war. She participated in many rallies during the election last year, and even starred in an anti-Bush ad for MoveOn.org. She says that her late son Casey, a 24-year-old Army specialist who was killed in a rocket attack just two weeks after getting to the battlefield, felt the same way. And just as Casey went to Iraq to do his duty, Cindy Sheehan says she's got to take a stand in Crawford to do hers.

As a matter of politics, Sheehan's stand is brilliant. Bush's chief political asset is his embrace of the troops and their families; the longer he refuses to meet with Sheehan, the more unconcerned -- and even callous -- Bush risks looking to the public. And by providing a genuine news event in the hot, sleepy confines of Crawford, she's gotten far more media attention than she garnered as the star of a MoveOn ad. She's been profiled in dozens of papers and hailed in a New York Times editorial. Consequently, she's also been smeared by the right. Pundits have pointed out Sheehan's apparent inconsistencies -- in the past, she said that she believed Bush cares about the troops who've died, and she spoke warmly of a brief visit with the president after Casey's death that she now recalls as insincere and impersonal. All this week Matt Drudge has hammered on Sheehan, publicizing criticism by some of her family members, who say they support Bush and the war. On the Tuesday edition of his show, Fox host Bill O'Reilly said Sheehan's behavior "borders on treasonous."

Conservatives have assailed Sheehan for her association with Michael Moore (she has been blogging on Moore's Web site) and the antiwar group Code Pink. Some depict her as the left's dupe, but Sheehan insists she came up with the idea for the Crawford visit on her own. In a telephone conversation with Salon on Friday afternoon, Sheehan explained her inconsistencies and defended her association with Moore and others on the left. Just before the call, Bush's motorcade sped by "Camp Casey," which is what Sheehan calls the protest stand she's erected in her son's memory. The cars didn't even slow down.

So the president just drove by you a few minutes ago?

Well, I think he did, but I didn't see him. A bunch of trucks drove by really fast and there were people in them. I didn't see if any of them was the president, though. Chances are he was in the motorcade.

But needless to say he didn't make any signal, meet with you or anything like that?

No. They sped by really fast. And I don't want him to get out and shake my hand and just say, you know, whatever whatever. That's not the kind of meeting I want.

What kind of meeting do you want?

I want the kind of meeting that holds him accountable for the words he's actually said.

Well, do you want to debate with him? What do you mean by that?

What I want to ask is, "What noble cause did my son die for?" And if he says that it was to get rid of Saddam or liberate the Iraqi people, I'm not going to buy it. I want him to know that 62 million Americans oppose the war in Iraq. [During the interview, Sheehan used the number 62 million as well as 62 percent to refer to the strength of the opposition to the war. Recent polls show that majorities of Americans -- in some surveys more than 60 percent -- disapprove of the way the president is handling the situation in Iraq.]

Yesterday at a press conference the president acknowledged that many people want us to pull the troops from Iraq, and he specifically referred to you. What's your response to what he said?

Why didn't he say what Casey died for? And I've also asked them to quit using my son's name in vain, to stop saying that we have to continue the mission in Iraq to honor the sacrifice of the fallen heroes.

So as far as you're concerned he didn't address your concerns yesterday, and you're still looking for a meeting with him? Will you stay out there until he meets with you?

Yes. I'm going to be out here for the whole month of August unless he meets with me. I think I've said that a billion times.

But, realistically, do you think he's going to meet with you?

Well, I'd say that nothing is impossible. But, you know, probably not.

Tell me what it's like out there.

It's really, really hot, but there's so many people here and our spirits are so high. We know we're doing a good thing. We have four Methodist ministers, and Bob Edgar [the general secretary of the National Council of Churches]. They came out and did a prayer service after the president drove by. And there's people with bright yellow hair, and there's people from all walks of life. It's really cool.

One of the things that your critics have said -- critics on the right -- is that you're making this into a media spectacle. And I've even heard people say that by being out there you're dishonoring the memory of your son and other people who died in the war. How do you respond to that?

Well, I believe I'm honoring my son and people who died in the war by using their sacrifices for peace and love, not for war and hatred. I can't speak for the other people whose children have died, but I can speak for my family and the other members of Gold Star Families for Peace. We believe we're honoring our children by working for peace.

And it has turned into a media circus. But that's not my fault. You know, I just came out here to confront the president and stop this war.

The media attention -- obviously, though, that's been helpful to your cause.

I believe it's very helpful to the cause. You know what, the war has gone off the front pages. It's gone off the mainstream media, and this has put it back on where it belongs, even if there has to be a grieving mother sitting outside Crawford, you know? I'm only really doing the media's job for them.

What do you think your efforts are doing for the larger antiwar movement?

I believe it's galvanizing the peace movement -- I like to call it "peace movement" because that has more of a positive connotation than "antiwar." I know that 62 percent of the American public believe the war was a mistake and we should bring our troops home. I think it's giving those people a voice. People are dropping everything and coming from everywhere around the country to be here in Crawford, Texas.

It's getting them off the fence to do something. Someone said that the opposite of good is not evil but apathy. This has really given people something to do.

You've always been against the war in Iraq, is that right?

Yes.

And I also want to ask about your son, his feelings about the war.

Casey disagreed with the war. He didn't feel George Bush was using the troops in an effective way. Or in a good way. And I begged him not to go because he knew it was wrong. But he said, "You know what, Mom, I have to go. It's my duty. And my buddies are going."

Last year you met with the president. Tell me how that came about, and tell me what happened during that meeting.

We were invited by the protocol office at Ft. Lewis, Wash. They said the president wanted to have a sit-down with us. And we decided we wouldn't use that time to debate the war with him. We wanted him to look at Casey, we wanted him to know about Casey, we wanted him to know what an indispensable part of humanity he was.

Tell me what the president was like during that meeting.

Well, he walked in and he said, "So who are we honorin' here?" He didn't know our name. He totally was disrespectful. He called me "Mom" the whole time. And he said some disrespectful things to us.

There's been an account of you saying that you did think he was respectful during that meeting. [In June 2004, Sheehan told the Reporter, a newspaper in her home of Vacaville, Calif., that she believed Bush was "sorry" and felt "some pain for our loss."]

Because at the end of the meeting, I said, "What are we doing here, Mr. President? We didn't vote for you in 2000, we're not going to vote for you this time. We're lifelong Democrats."

And he said, "It's not about politics." So we said, OK, we wouldn't use it about politics and we tried to put a positive spin on it. But if you read the whole article you'll see we already had misgivings about what was going on. A lot has been taken out of context.

Well, you said, "I now know he's sincere about wanting freedom for the Iraqis ... I know he's sorry and feels some pain for our loss." Do you still think he feels some pain for your loss?

No, no, I don't think he does at all. Because it was all about politics. When he talks about how he meets with the families and they say, "Mr. President, we pray for you" -- you know what, that's not true. He used it for politics, because he doesn't go to funerals and stuff like that. That's what it was all about.

I'm just trying to get a sense, though, when you said that he feels some pain for your loss -- you didn't really mean that then, or at least you don't think that now?

I don't even know what I meant back in June of 2004. I was in shock, I was in grief. I'm still in a deep state of grief but I'm not in shock anymore. When he said it was not about politics I believed him. But he made it all about politics and that's when I stopped believing him.

Yesterday there was a report -- I'm not sure how accurate it is -- but it was apparently a statement from other members of your family that said they disagree with what you're doing.

I think it's accurate. I think my husband's family did write that. But I don't really give -- I don't care what they wrote. Because, No. 1, it's their opinion and they're entitled to it. But No. 2, they called him something like "our dear Casey." You know they're hypocrites. They didn't even know Casey. They didn't spend any time with him in his life, and now they're using his death for political reasons, I think.

Casey's my hero because of the way he lived, not because of the way he died. For these people who never ever went out of their way to spend any time with him to actually dare speak for him, I think it's hypocritical. Casey lived a great life and he was an honorable man and he died in a dishonorable war.

What about other members of your family -- are there people in your family who do agree with you?

My immediate family, Casey's dad and my three children and my sister, we're all on the same page. And I really think that some of my husband's siblings are with us too.

And I want to say something else, too. They said they support the troops. You know what? I support the troops. How's anything I'm doing showing that I don't support the troops?

What about parents of other soldiers who've been killed?

I would say the majority would agree with what I'm doing, because the majority of Americans think that this war is based on lies and deceptions and they think it was a mistake and they want the troops to come home.

Do you hear from many others?

I hear from them all the time, I do. We had a lot of military families speak out here. We have a lot here whose kids are still in harm's way, and whose kids have died.

One thing I want to ask you is about the other groups that are supporting you. Some people on the right have been saying that you're being "used" -- that's the quote I've heard. You're being used by extreme left-wing groups. How do you respond to that?

I respond that this was my idea. This was my mission. This was my vision. And what we're all doing is we're working for peace. And all these groups together are working for peace. And they're helping me with my vision. You know they're not using me, and maybe I'm using them because they're helping me out tremendously in this action.

But what about the pragmatics of it -- if you associate with someone like Michael Moore do you risk losing the mainstream?

I think Michael Moore is an amazing man, an amazing, brave man. And I think people are probably going to start saying don't associate with Cindy Sheehan. People who speak truth to power somehow are marginalized in this country.

I know you're going to be out there for the month of August. How long do you think the media's going to pay attention to you? Do you worry about that?

I don't really care. I didn't come out here to do this for the media. I came out here to do this to end the war. If the mainstream media's not here we've got blogs, we've got the Internet. It'll still keep going. Smart America will know what's going on. They're the ones who are going to put pressure on the elected officials to effect any change.


Salon article

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 8/14/05 at 1:03pm

Randi Rhodes called Sheehan "The first Rosa Parks of the 21st Century."

Here are some things that I love. Right wing pundits LEAP on what they perceive to be Sheehan's inconsistency between what she said immediately after meeting with Bush and what she's saying now, after that meeting had time to gestate in her consciousness. Yet, they had no problem with the ever changing reasons BushCo, Inc., a subsidiary of Halliburton, gave for going into Iraq.

Right wing pundits from ALL media use the exact same Republican talking points in their well-oiled Murdochian Blab Machines and yet, somehow, the fact that there are a couple of lefties associated with Sheehan somehow discredits her?

Don't know if anybody heard the other mother who lost a son in Iraq on The O'Liely Factor with Bill O'Liely on Faux News the other night, but she went on when Sheehan declined to after Bill O'Loofah refused to apologize for calling her a traitor. The other woman said that when SHE met Bush she wanted to give him a letter explaining who her son was and why she disagreed with the President and the war.

Apparently, visitors are sequestered in small curtained booths to wait for the Prez. Bush walked in, and according to this mom, went toe-to-toe with her and said, "I'm George Bush, President of the United States and I understand you have a message for me?"

I mean. Then she gave him the letter and he went on, "Do you understand that we were attacked on September 11?"

I mean again. I think, like OJ Simpson and his tales of innocence, George Bush, President of the United States, has told the same lies about the non-existent connection between Iraq and 9.11, that he actually believes them now. Because when you're George Bush, President of the United States, "because I said so, that's why" is a perfectly acceptable answer.

Updated On: 8/14/05 at 01:03 PM

[PalJoey]

Posted: 8/14/05 at 1:44pm

There are posters on BWW who use those same mindless Republican talking points. You can see them on all the right-wing websites and blogs. It basically boils down the Politics of Personal Destruction.

The way the Rove Noise Machine is "swiftboating" this woman is nothing short of disgusting.

And ultimately, it will be a mother who delivers the deathstroke to the president and his vicious tactics: Attacking a mom--a mom who lost her son--will not play well with soccer moms.

[iflitifloat]

Posted: 8/14/05 at 1:46pm

Hell. It doesn't play well with ANY mom. What an insensitive ignoramous he is. I say, lets send Jenna and Barb off to war and see the response.

[Calvin]

Posted: 8/14/05 at 2:01pm

"And ultimately, it will be a mother who delivers the deathstroke to the president and his vicious tactics"

I, for one, hope they follow through with their intention to arrest her as a "threat." It might be just the galvanizing moment we need to realize how dangerous and anti-liberty this administration really is. Perhaps the pendulum really needs to swing back into the era of the alien and sedition acts before people realize what the neocons are capable of when they're given absolute power.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/14/05 at 10:40pm

and come september bush will move back to dc, and cindy sheehan will become a memory. granted, one revered in some circles whose name is spoken with reverence, but the "rosa parks of the 21st century"? ok. come december at the latest, do a poll and you'll be lucky to find one in 10 americans who know her who she is.

"wasn't she on survivor, dude?"

[brdlwyr]

Posted: 8/14/05 at 10:47pm

Her son was not on "survivor, dude?"
Updated On: 8/14/05 at 10:47 PM

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/14/05 at 10:57pm

lwyr, i'm not dismissing her grief nore her son's sacrifice nor hers, but c'mon, rosa parks? the woman who delivers the deathstroke? she's got a few weeks at best before we're back to all aruba all the time.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 8/14/05 at 11:36pm

The quote, papa, was "The FIRST Rosa Parks of the 21st Century."

And, let's face it, I know you think of politics as a football game and you admire the way the two "teams" "play" "the game," and even the way a certain "coach" "cheats" and how you don't really feel a need to take a moral stand on the kind of Machiavellian moves of that coach because Karl plays the game best, dirty, but best.

But really. Forget the teams. Forget effective if amoral strategic victories. On a human level, things have really deteriorated beyond what can be considered acceptable to people with consciences, hasn't it?

[brdlwyr]

Posted: 8/14/05 at 11:41pm

And I will repeat:

Her son was not on "survivor, dude?"

[PalJoey]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 12:13am

So said Bette Davis in All About Eve. Margo might have said, "Everybody has a heart...except some Republicans."

It's sad--pathetic really--when predictably doctrinaire Republicans can't even get out goosestep with the president on an issue like a mother's grief. Is it so hard to say "My guy is wrong--dead wrong"?

But it's nice to know that the numbers of such people are dwindling. I look forward to each new poll that demonstrates that decent Americans will eventually see through a tyrant.

[Cruel_Sandwich]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 12:34am

Yet what about the 2008 election? Could the Bush years be setting a tone for what is to come?

If so, then that would mean that the democratic party would eventually die and the Republican party will divide into two. But that's pretty much how it is now. Party divisions are fuzzier than Paul Giammatti's skull.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 1:26am

Nope.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 10:22am

on a human level, things have really deteriorated beyond what can be considered acceptable to people with consciences, hasn't it?

well, namo, i've kinda felt that way since i started seeing nazi comparisons flying with wild abandon being used by people of supposedly good conscience.

as far as bush meeting with one woman whose son has died and or attending a token funeral here or there i will defend the policy as it relates to the rest since it would lead inevitably to, "if her, why not me? if that funeral why not my child's? why has the president chosen to honor one fallen soldier or group of soldiers above all others?" the president meets regularly with injured soldiers at walter reed. he meets with parents of fallen soldiers almost as often. while it might seem like an important symbolic gesture for him to attend a funeral, logistically speaking it would be a nightmare for the family. while it might look cold to those who wish to see it that way, i see it as him respecting their right to honor their loved one without being forced to jump through the flaming hoops of the media circus any such visit would bring. it also would send the message that one soldier or group of soldiers (whoever's funeral or memorial he chose to attend) was more important to the president than those whose he didn't.

why not have the president spend the next several months meeting with parents and attending funerals and just put the rest of the business of running the country on hold? well, of course, most here will argue that he does nothing about anything anyway so why not spend his time doing that, which is a patheticallly misguided partisan opinion that doesn't even merit discussion among anyone with more than three working synapses (which for the record i claim includes dubya, those with more than three, that is).

[PalJoey]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 10:28am

Lame, rote response. As if 1,799 grieving mothers would be unable to understand that a President's attendance at ONE funeral was a symbol of his concern for all 1,800 families. Do Republicans really believe that blather or do they just parrot talking points mindlessly?

Think Giuliani after 9/11. He attended not just one but many memorials. Not ALL, but as many as he could. If Bush cared, he would show up.

Updated On: 8/15/05 at 10:28 AM

[PalJoey]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 10:29am

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 10:30am

Oh, I'm not just talking about the actual meeting with Sheehan, I'm talking holistically. I'm talking the endless Rovian smear campaigns up to and INCLUDING Sheehan. I'm talking about the relentlessness of the administration STILL linking Iraq to 9.11. I'm talking the We Support You Walk. I'm talking Karl Rove in Treasongate. I'm talking the whole "1984" of the thing; the On Terror Formerly Known as War dba The Global Struggle Against Extremism.

It's just descended to depths unimaginable to me. The Obligatory and Ridiculous Comparisons to Nazism are like teeny tiny red bliss potatoes compared to what's happening to REAL people with REAL lives as a result of George's follies.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 10:32am

Exactly. Comparisons to Orwell are much more apt.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 10:48am

Even Harry Smith, whom I recall shaking his head and clucking his tongue at the very idea of protesters during Gulf War I, is tired of the Orwellian crap.


'War on Terror' remake?

[SallyBrown]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 10:53am

"She has every right in the world to say what she believes. This is America."

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 11:29am

namo, rove has conducted the only smears? the republicans are completely responsible for the tone in american politics? please, don't act like this is something that the gop invented. it's ugly and it's awful but it's reality in the beltway. and both sides do it.

as far as the w.o.t. being retired in favor of a more fan friendly term, that was a rummy idea and will probably be one of his last as i see him sliding kicking and screaming and rhetorically questioning off into oblivion since dubya put an end to that change of linguistic nuance the other day (i just like using the words dubya and linguistic nuance in the same sentence, it's like rubbing your stomach and patting your head at the same time).

as far as 9/11, i do link it to the war in iraq, not in that there is direct evidence that saddam was connected (there's not), but rather as the clarion call that said, "the status quo is not working, time to try something a bit more drastic." afghanistan was the expected response. iraq is that something more drastic.

rovey's treasongate is a tempest in a teapot that will turn on reporters, not on the deputy chief of staff. this is part of the dichotomy of the administration as seen from some camps: they are at the same time the most incompetent bunch of yahoos ever to set foot in the white house while at the same time being the most ruthlessly effective practitioners of omnipotence ever to win a national election.

the we support you walk? first time i heard of it was in that thread. sorry, i'm nursing a nearly busted ankle and it's tough getting down the steps to the tv and the computer. sounds like a red, white and blue circle jerk. personally i can't imagine you'd have any problem with any aspect of that save possibly for the computer chip enhanced condoms that play "proud to be an american" (i wanted the ones that played toby keith's "angry american" but i always cry when i hear that song).

real people with real lives? as opposed to those imaginary ones leading fanciful lives of peaceful bliss and contented disconnect romping through poppy fields with butterfly nets? i realize that life does not happen in a vacuum. i have a personal stake in this war too.

i don't begrudge this woman her grief (i know that's not the right word here and i may change it later if i can find a better one), nor have i disparaged her motives. i merely pointed out the reality that after a few news cycles the world will move on and leave her with her grief. will she feel better or worse for having done this? i hope that she will look back on it positively as having done her best to honor her son in the best way she knew how.

wonder if the right would have held her up as a poster mama for the war had she chosen to make the trek to crawford to show her support for the president?

[PalJoey]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 11:50am

Whatever.

Updated On: 8/15/05 at 11:50 AM

[My Fair Lady]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 11:54am

Can Bush just disappear?

I asw this on the news and honestly, every time I listen to that man speak I want to chop his head off.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 12:07pm

whatever

now there's a thoughtful response.

[etoile]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 12:38pm

Know this won't be a popular opinion...but

Not to diminish or disrepect this mother's loss but I don't want my President's itinerary dictated by anyone camping out on his doorstep for any reason. It amounts to nothing short of emotional and politial and tabloid blackmail.