Who Hijacked Our Country

Saturday, August 13, 2005

Cindy Sheehan

As we all know by now, a woman whose son was killed in the Iraqi war is staging a vigil outside of The King’s Palace President Bush’s ranch. She wants to meet with Bush in person and ask some questions about the Iraqi war. Real questions, not the gentle softball questions lobbed by the White House Press Corps. Uh oh.

All of a sudden, a president who’s fended off every opponent using the most sophisticated propaganda techniques available, is squirming in the limelight. This is making his handlers and puppetmasters very uneasy.

What’s a wartime president to do? Hmmm…a dilemma. Don’t laugh — put yourself in his position. You’ve pulled off an invasion, using a sophisticated combination of fake “intelligence” reports, suppression of real news reports, and the Big Lie technique. And it’s going fine. The deaths in Iraq, the sinking poll numbers? Just blame that “liberal media” for not reporting any of the good news coming out of Iraq.

The Big Spin is working.

And then, some two-bit woman (she doesn’t even belong to a country club for God’s sake) starts whimpering about her son who was killed in the war that you masterminded.

Uh, Karl — Help! I already met with this woman once, gave her one of my stock one-liners — I think it was “well, who am I honoring today?” And now she wants to meet with me again, and she’s gonna ask some real tough questions. This is awkward. Karl, what should I do? I’ve already cleared all the brush and re-read My Pet Goat. I’m running out of things to do. Can I just keep hiding here? This damn woman is ruining my vacation.

Hmmm…What will our Commander-in-Chief do? Well, if you’re a trust-funded safety-netted blueblood and you've been nurtured and coddled all your life, the answer is clear. Unleash the hounds. Bring in the character assassins.

Some unsophisticated types might wonder what possible spin/assassination method anyone could use against a woman whose son was killed in the Iraqi war, and now wants to talk to the president. Not to worry — small potatoes for Karl Joseph Goebbels Rove and his puppet.

“Get Over It” seems to be what this wingnut is saying.

And you can predict what Michelle Malkin is saying about her.

Falafel "Bill" O'Reilly also jumped on the bandwagon.

Sending the Character Assassination Squad after a bereaved mother who just wants to talk with President Bush — what a brave administration we have. How proud they must be.


Blogger Unadulterated Underdog said...

I've been trying for awhile to get the true story on Sheehan's seeming change of heart on Bush and the War. I finally got in touch with a friend of hers this week and the stuff she told me has me on the warpath. The so-called "liberal media" isn't telling anything like it is. I almost think they are ignoring Sheehan's side all together in fact. Are they bought-and-paid-for by the right or are they merely caving under pressure? I can't say but I do intend to write a post about the truth of Sheehan's story, maybe even on Tuesday.

August 13, 2005 at 8:54 PM  
Blogger pack of 2 said...

The whole thing is just so sick. I wonder how much more people will be willing to put up with.
This man is clearly warped.


August 13, 2005 at 10:53 PM  
Anonymous Tom Harper said...

OK Liberal: I think the “liberal media” is definitely leaving out the whole story. I don’t know if it’s out of fear, or just that there’s more profit when they stay away from controversy. And now there’s a pro-Bush counter-demonstration right near where Cindy Sheehan is camped. I wonder how “spontaneous” this counterdemonstration is.

Pack of 2: Yup, it’s sick all right. But every time I think the public is about to rebel against Bush, or that all Bush’s lies will start to unravel, somehow he comes out of it unscathed. Either a new “crisis” is manufactured (i.e. we might be invading Iran now) or Rove comes up with another phony hot-button issue to distract everyone. So far these gimmicks have always worked.

August 13, 2005 at 11:27 PM  
Blogger Jake Porter said...

I have been trying to investigate Cindy Sheehan's story for a while but I can't get a clear picture from the media.

I think we will invade Iran. I think right after we begin to pull out of Iraq next year something will happen and some huge emergancy will occur and the bombs will begin dropping, I hope I am wrong. Or they may create a crisis with gay marriage or something else but there will become another problem for them to solve and look like the heros.

August 14, 2005 at 5:57 AM  
Blogger Nariel said...

I've been posting on Cindy Sheehan as well, from the strict perspective of: she is a mother. Though her son is dead, she is still a mother.

We as mothers (and fathers) are from the moment we realize about to become such, charged with the duty of protecting them, seeing to them and loving them. She wants answers to why is her son gone? What did it prove? Did anyone know how wonderful, caring, shining this man really was? I think, that I can understand that and I think, that like her... if faced with saying goodbye far too soon to one I had loved from their very first heartbeat, I would want some damn answers too! I would also want to look the man in the face, that sent him to his death and say.. "do you see what pain is really all about? its real. its breathing. it makes my days living walking nightmares."

August 14, 2005 at 8:55 AM  
Anonymous Tom Harper said...

Jake: I’m afraid you’re right about invading Iran. I don’t know how this jibes with the military’s stated goal of being able to fight two wars at once. Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran add up to three. But I’m sure that won’t stop them.

Nariel: That’s very true. Nobody who hasn’t been there can possibly know the pain of having lost a child. And the huge gap between the people who planned this war and the families who sacrifice and die for it — it’s totally inexcusable. In WWII everybody fought. There was a clear danger and everybody agreed that war was the only choice. That was also true to a lesser extent in the Gulf War of 1991 — regardless of whether it was justified, a huge majority of Americans favored that war. But in this current Iraqi quagmire, nobody from the Halliburton administration is fighting or dying.

If someone’s son died in a polo accident or in an accident at the yacht club, Bush would be full of empathy and sympathy because these are the “right” people that he can relate to. But a soldier killed in action — Bush is probably thinking “hmmm, some bluecollar working person lost her son in Iraq. This is so awkward… what should I say?”

August 14, 2005 at 10:55 AM  
Blogger Snave said...

Cindy Sheehan's detractors must not like the fact that she is exercising her rights to speak out as a concerned American. These days if you disagree publicly with Bush, as Sheehan has, you get attacked by the kookballs like O'Reilly and Malkin, and the rest of the media cowers away from the story. Pretty sad...

August 14, 2005 at 11:52 AM  
Blogger Kitchen Window Woman said...

Wonderful post, Tom!

If indeed Cindy Sheehan changed her mind (flip-flop) it is admirable for it indicates that she looked reality in the face, asked questions, and is now demanding answers. Changing one's mind is how one becomes "enlightened". Bush only repeats endlessly the lines that were written for him.

It is up to the "Mothers" to stop following those who demand the sacrifice of their children or husbands. The conservatives protesting Cindy Sheehan should not be there....they should suit up and fight the war they allowed to happen and support. Make them do it and they will sing a different tune. Are they enlisting by the thousands? No!

My entire family and I stood for hours on a street corner in the rain the for a soggy candle-light vigil the night that America bombed Baghdad and invaded Iraq. We knew that many would die...Iraqis and Americans.

It all breaks my heart and makes me angry. Cindy is a courageous woman who is expressing love for her son. I would do the same. WAR is evil especially a WAR of choice!

August 14, 2005 at 12:20 PM  
Blogger Brother Kenya said...

This all becomes more poignant with today's Washington Post story revealing that the administration intends to lower expectations about the eventual outcome in Iraq. Seems that instead of a blossoming democracy we're now going to "settle for some kind of Islamic republic." How do you think the dead soldiers and Marines would take this news?

August 14, 2005 at 12:26 PM  
Anonymous Tom Harper said...

Snave: Yeah, it’s a pretty sad state of affairs. The wingnut “journalists” are ready to strike at any dissenters, and the mainstream “media” just looks the other way.

Kitchen Window Woman: You’re right about these people demonstrating in favor of Bush and the war. I’ve never understood the idea of demonstrating in favor of a war. If you’re in favor of it, put on a uniform and go over there and fight. It’s too bad an army recruiter didn’t drive up to the pro-war demonstrators and ask them to enlist, and watch them squirm.

This was indeed a war of choice. Every reason Bush has given for how urgently we needed to defend ourselves against Iraq, has been discredited. Weapons of Mass Destruction, connections between Iraq and al Qaeda, Iraq playing a role in 9/11 — all false.

Brother Kenya: That sounds about right. I’m all for getting out of there, but Bush will need to declare it a victory no matter what. We need to get our troops out of Iraq and into Iran.

August 14, 2005 at 2:40 PM  
Blogger Cranky Liberal said...

Hey Tommy, your missing what is even a more salient point about the dogs of war - THEY JUST MAKE SH** UP. That whole flip flop issue - crap! Drudge took the whole quote thing out of context. Read the real article (go to Mediamatters.com) and see how pathetic these guys are to just lie about a grieving mother and how Fox News is an order of magnitude worse than CBS because they didn't even bother to fact check MATT DRUDGE!!!! Bastards! More on this on BIO tomorrow.

August 14, 2005 at 4:51 PM  
Anonymous Tom Harper said...

Cranky: I wouldn't doubt they're just making all this up. There's nothing these scumbags won't stoop to; nothing could be surprising at this point. I'll check out your BIO post tomorrow.

August 14, 2005 at 6:10 PM  
Anonymous agi t. prop said...

Drudge manipulated Cindy Sheehan's quotes to make it sound like she flip-flopped. She never did. Simply more Goebbels techniques from the right.

Jake, I share your sentiments regarding Iran. I have a post up at my blog with a bunch of links related to the upcoming war against Iran.

August 15, 2005 at 10:59 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cindy Sheehan's son signed up to go to Iraq VOLUNTARILY, and I can tell you right now that if he were atill alive he would tell her to go home. She is fighting against what he fought for and died for, what he believed in. She is making her own sons sacrifice for his country meaningless. I dont understand why people cannot see that.

August 27, 2005 at 7:44 PM  
Anonymous Tom Harper said...

Anonymous: OK, let me guess: you're Edgar Cayce, Jane Roberts, uh, I'm all out of names of famous channelers of the dead. Since you're able to channel the voices of the dead, please enlighten us with your wisdom. There are certainly larger issues than the Iraqi war. Come on -- Psst: What's it like on the other side? Inquiring minds want to know.

August 27, 2005 at 11:37 PM  

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home