Family Of Fallen Soldier Pleads, Please Stop, Cindy!
D. Spencer Hines
11 August 2005
Drudge Report
"The family of American soldier Casey Sheehan, who was killed in Iraq on
April 4, 2004, has broken its silence and spoken out against his mother
Cindy Sheehan's anti-war vigil against George Bush held outside the
president's Crawford, Texas ranch.
The following email was received by the DRUDGE REPORT from Cherie
Quarterolo, Casey's aunt and godmother:
----------------------------
"Our family has been so distressed by the recent activities of Cindy we
are breaking our silence and we have collectively written a statement
for release. Feel free to distribute it as you wish. Thanks, Cherie
In response to questions regarding the Cindy Sheehan/Crawford Texas
issue: Sheehan Family Statement:
The Sheehan Family lost our beloved Casey in the Iraq War and we have
been silently, respectfully grieving. We do not agree with the
political motivations and publicity tactics of Cindy Sheehan. She now
appears to be promoting her own personal agenda and notoriety at the
expense of her son's good name and reputation. The rest of the Sheehan
Family supports the troops, our country, and our President, silently,
with prayer and respect.
Sincerely,
Casey Sheehan's grandparents, aunts, uncles and numerous cousins."
------------------------------
DSH
tiglath
D. Spencer Hines wrote:
> FAMILY OF FALLEN SOLDIER PLEADS: PLEASE STOP, CINDY!
>
Don't Stop Cindy!
Our boys are dying in Iraq in a war with no strategy and the president
is on an extended vacation.
Enough said.
Bryn
<pogue...@hotmail.com> writes
They say you can choose your friends..
In my world Mother comes first, the opinion of others in the extended
family count for little...
Sound like a bunch of arseholes to me...
Limp wristed wimps to the man and woman..
Useful cannon fodder though.. Ready to take one for the Pres...
>
--
Bryn
To email remove GREMILNS
Michilín
<pogue...@hotmail.com> wrote:
<snipped>
>
>DSH
>
This would be more appropriately posted in an American group.
Měcheil
S' an tir na deňir 's e 'n eug ar dualchas
In the land of tears death is our heritage
James Clavell - Shogun
Michilín
Bush was on television today boasting that re-enlistment targets are
being met. Given how far behind they were three months ago, I think we
can assume that this is a lie. Either that, or a whole new source of
braindead young Americans have been discovered.
Rick B
"Bryn" <br...@GREMILNSfinhall.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:53mAIiCs...@finhall.demon.co.uk...
Obviously this is a Republican "dirty trick." Rove/Bush/Cheney do not know
how to govern, but they sure know how to protect their asses when called to
account for their failures.
The clearest giveaway is that the smear comes through that on-line
Republican smear specialist, the Drudge Report.
Since Cindy Sheehan has the moral high-ground here, and the Bush
administration cannot even reliable spell morality, let along practice it,
the White House is in trouble.
Had they invited Cindy in a had Bush speak to her on the first or even
second day, it would have been a one-day phenomenon and over. But they
couldn't do that. Bush no more has the courage to speak to the mother of one
of the soldiers he has caused to be unnecessarily killed than he has to fly
an Air National Guard aircraft. So they tried to ignore her.
It has now blown up in their face. There is no reasonable action, like
talking to Cindy, that is left for them to take. Anything they actively do
now will be seen as a failure of the vaunted "Bush stubbornness." Yet doing
nothing is also a failure for the White House, probably a larger one than
giving up on the childish stubborn refusal to act as others expect a
reasonable person to act.
This is the largest political failure that Rove/Bush/Cheney have ever faced,
and they have no way to deal with it except to try to pull a typical
Drudge-presented Republican smear.
It is interesting that there is a major anti-war sentiment building in
America. Not an organized anti-war movement, but a general anti-war
sentiment. This Rove/Bush/Cheney failure is feeding right into it.
It is going to be a long, long time for the Republicans until the next
elections in November 2006. Can anyone say "Chinese Water Torture?" Watch
for some Congressional Republicans to abandon ship between now and then so
that they can perhaps avoid going down with the wreck of the Bush
administration.
Jack Linthicum
If you saw Countdown last night (August 11) you would know this is her
sister-in-law with whom she has always had political disagreements.
Husband, children behind her, in-laws are looking for a 15 minute fame
break.
Rick B
"Michilín" <mic...@shaw.ca> wrote in message news:42fbe93b.36781779@news...
potential enlistees, they simply lower the monthly goals and claim they are
meeting the new, easier to meet goals.
The fact is, the Army is going to come up 7,000 short of the annual goal of
80,000 this year.
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2005-08-10T205100Z_01_N10516228_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-IRAQ-USA-RECRUITING-DC.XML
"The Army, aiming to get 80,000 recruits this year, stood 11 percent behind
its year-to-date goal at the end of July, with just two months left to
overcome a shortfall of more than 7,000. It has not missed an annual
recruiting goal since 1999.
The Army provides the bulk of ground troops in the Iraq war, in which about
1,840 U.S. troops have been killed and another nearly 14,000 wounded.
It achieved its second-straight monthly goal -- sending 8,085 new soldiers
into boot camp in July, topping its goal by 9 percent -- after falling short
in the previous four months, according to figures released by the Pentagon
on Wednesday.
The situation was bleaker in the part-time Guard and Reserve, used heavily
in Iraq as the Pentagon seeks to maintain troop levels.
"I know our recruiters are going to do what they can to close the gap, but
right now it looks like we will miss both active and reserve (goals) at the
end of the year," said Army Recruiting Command spokesman Douglas Smith.
The Reserve missed its July recruiting target by 18 percent, getting 2,131
recruits with a goal of 2,585, and stood 20 percent behind its year-to-date
target. It had a shortfall of about 4,700 recruits toward its 2005 goal of
28,485.
The Army National Guard has missed every monthly goal in fiscal 2005 after
falling short in 2004 and 2003, the Pentagon said. It missed its July goal
by 20 percent -- getting 4,712 recruits with a quota of 2,585 -- and was 23
percent behind its year-to-date target. With two months left, it had a
shortfall of more than 11,600 toward an annual goal of 63,002."
Larry Swain
AMEN. I not only honor the memory of her son, but I honor her too. At
least Nixon met on occasion with grieving families and protestors, Shrub
doesn't even acknowledge their existance.
Sheila J
>>Měcheil
>>S' an tir na deňir 's e 'n eug ar dualchas
>>In the land of tears death is our heritage
>> James Clavell - Shogun
>
>
>
She's the mother. She has every right to be anti-war and anti-Bush.
La N
"Sheila J" <mydo...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:Zw1Le.198348$%K2.133517@pd7tw1no...
Hi Sheila. Welcome back! And yes, she has a right to feel whatever she
wants. I just hope she finds peace in herself when she is no longer in the
media spotlight.
Michilín
wrote:
Thank you for your explanation.
Murchadh
Fred J. McCall
news:%D1Le.216528$on1.57919@clgrps13:
> "Sheila J" <mydo...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
> news:Zw1Le.198348$%K2.133517@pd7tw1no...
>>
>> She's the mother. She has every right to be anti-war and
>> anti-Bush.
>
> Hi Sheila. Welcome back! And yes, she has a right to feel
> whatever she wants. I just hope she finds peace in herself when
> she is no longer in the media spotlight.
I just have to wonder what she really thinks she's doing and if she
thinks her son, the soldier, would actually approve. If she thinks he
would, just why does SHE think he voluntarily put on a uniform?
--
This space for let.
Fred J. McCall
> She's the mother. She has every right to be anti-war and
> anti-Bush.
The fact that "She's the mother" has nothing to do with her right to an
opinion. Everyone has that right with none particularly more special
than the other.
One does, however, have to wonder just what the hell she thinks she's
doing and if it is what her son would REALLY want to be remembered for.
La N
"Fred J. McCall" <fmc...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:Xns96B04F922C722f...@207.217.125.201...
I think that is where the mother ultimately has to find her peace and her
healing - knowing that her son died in a war that he voluntarily signed up
for and that he knew the risks. Knowing what little I know about the after
life, I don't think he'd want her feeling so hurt and angry. This war is
not going to end just because she's camped out at Crawford. And her
supporters will long be gone while she's still dealing with unresolved
grief. Meanwhile, I have been fortunate enough to be invited into the
lives of other U.S.military families who are very hurt and angered by her
actions and feel that she is doing disservice to them and to the losses they
have suffered and who are honouring their loved ones in a more "dignified"
manner. Of course, these are people who continue to believe in their
mission, as do the majority of U.S. military people and their families.
This is a tough one. And, more importantly, I think she personally is going
to have a long hard struggle ...
Fred J. McCall
news:3x_Ke.935$bp5...@newssvr24.news.prodigy.net:
> Had they invited Cindy in a had Bush speak to her on the first or
> even second day, it would have been a one-day phenomenon and over.
> But they couldn't do that. Bush no more has the courage to speak
> to the mother of one of the soldiers he has caused to be
> unnecessarily killed than he has to fly an Air National Guard
> aircraft. So they tried to ignore her.
This is an incredibly ignorant (not to mention stupid) series of
remarks, since Bush had already met with this woman prior to all this
springing up.
> It has now blown up in their face. There is no reasonable action,
> like talking to Cindy, that is left for them to take.
You think that it is 'reasonable' that the President should meet with
just anyone who wants to meet with him? Add 'insane' to that
'ignorant' and 'stupid' list.
> This is the largest political failure that Rove/Bush/Cheney have
> ever faced, and they have no way to deal with it except to try to
> pull a typical Drudge-presented Republican smear.
How is it a 'smear' to say that the rest of the family opposes what
she's doing? Presumably free speech is only to be exercised by folks
who agree with you?
> It is going to be a long, long time for the Republicans until the
> next elections in November 2006.
The Democrats managed to LOSE seats in the last off-year election
cycle. While it's unreasonable to expect that they can be that
stupid twice in succession, they're playing with nitro if they try to
capitalize on this 'anti-war groundswell' you think is going on.
> Can anyone say "Chinese Water
> Torture?" Watch for some Congressional Republicans to abandon ship
> between now and then so that they can perhaps avoid going down
> with the wreck of the Bush administration.
I guess we can also add 'delusional' to that list of 'ignorant',
'stupid', and 'insane'. How does 'abandoning ship' help them? I
expect that if the Democrats try to make a hard swing to an 'anti-
war' position, they'll get massacred and the FIRST thing that will be
pointed out is the voting record, where most of them voted the
President a blank check.
Bryn
<Janos...@zoroastrian.net> writes
>her grief.
>
>
>This woman met with the president. She was there in private with him.
>It's not anyones fault but her own that she didn't say then what she
>wanted to.
When and where did this meeting occur ?
For the record ...
La N
>
> I guess we can also add 'delusional' to that list of 'ignorant',
> 'stupid', and 'insane'. How does 'abandoning ship' help them? I
> expect that if the Democrats try to make a hard swing to an 'anti-
> war' position, they'll get massacred and the FIRST thing that will be
> pointed out is the voting record, where most of them voted the
> President a blank check.
>
Even Bill Clinton in an interview on CNN yesterday said he supported
continuing this war until the Iraqi people can manage the country on their
own. Otherwise, the U.S. would be doing a disservice to the memory of the
thousands of Americans and Iraqis who have died.
Howard C. Berkowitz
<mydo...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
>
> She's the mother. She has every right to be anti-war and anti-Bush.
>
She has every right to her feelings. Her feelings, however, are not a
reasonable input into the making of national policy -- and I generally
believe Bush 43 to be a bad president.
"anti-war" is an awfully broad term.
redc1c4
(snipage occurs)
> Even Bill Clinton in an interview on CNN yesterday said he supported
> continuing this war until the Iraqi people can manage the country on their
> own. Otherwise, the U.S. would be doing a disservice to the memory of the
> thousands of Americans and Iraqis who have died.
thus proving the adage about blind pigs and acorns.
redc1c4,
(remember how he "handled" the Somalia situation? %-)
--
"Enlisted men are stupid, but extremely cunning and sly, and bear
considerable watching."
Army Officer's Guide
La N
"Janos Kaldy" <Janos...@zoroastrian.net> wrote in message
news:cghpf1lpj6lsniq96...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 11:09:51 -0400, Janos Kaldy
> <Janos...@zoroastrian.net> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 15:54:39 +0100, Bryn
>
> And this one from someone who was there with Ms Sheehan
>
> http://www.thereporter.com/news/ci_2936045
>
>
> Jim Krause, 53, of Fairfield, lost his younger brother, Sgt. Elmer C.
> Krause, in April 2004, when his vehicle was ambushed by Iraqi
> insurgents. Sheehan's son, Casey, was killed in combat in Iraq, also
> in 2004.
>
> Elmer Krause was born and raised in Vallejo before moving out of
> state. Jim Krause, soft-spoken, said he was praying for Sheehan to
> drop her anger and worried that she will become a poster person for
> the far left.
>
> "I know she's a grieving mom and she has a lot of issues with anger,"
> Krause said. "I'm in the same company as her, as far as grief. I deal
> with it my way, but anger is not coming out."
>
> Sheehan, 48, has camped out along a road near Bush's Crawford, Texas,
> ranch since Saturday, vowing to stay until his Texas vacation ends
> later this month. Sheehan wants to meet face-to-face with the
> president.
>
> Krause said Sheehan already had that opportunity, as did he. Krause
> and other family members traveled to Fort Lewis, Wash., to visit with
> President Bush in June 2004. Sheehan was there, along with other
> grieving families.
>
> Sheehan has said her feelings have shifted since from shock to anger.
> She has said she was offended when Bush didn't know her son's name.
>
> "I wouldn't expect him to have all the soldiers' names on the top of
> his head," Krause said. "He didn't know Elmer's name."
Everybody deals with their grief differently. I think it is clear that
there will be nothing that Bush could say or do at this juncture to make her
feel better. She thought she felt better after her first meeting with him.
I don't think that is likely to change even if he *did* meet with her again.
I could be wrong but I doubt it. I think she would like to have her son
back and nothing short of that is going to help much.
Scismgenie
what can happen in the Military, you MIGHT get killed for your
Country's political position. All wars are POLITICAL to some degree.
She has stated that her son loved what he was doing, HE knew the
risks.
Despite what others have said that the Mother's feelings over-ride
those of "distant " family- I say take it ONE step from the source, HE
wanted to be in the Military, and did his duty with HONOR. His wishes
should be the GUIDE, he wanted to be there.
That his mother wishes to dishonor his death with Micheal Moore based
politics, is a dishonor to his legacy, and a dishonor to those who
still serve, have served and will serve.
Her son was an ADULT, and in the military adults are treated like
adults. They KNOW that the risks are there, and they TRAIN to deal with
and minimize the risks. Even then SOME will be killed, that is WAR.
In addition we have to recognize her pain, but her lack of dignity,
and honor for her own son's choice of life, career, and sense of duty
make her LOOK ridiculous.
All of the other "moms" out there in similar situation, and those from
OTHER wars, are looking at her in sympathy, but most are living with
the
fact that this is a NORMAL thing in world society. People die for their
country.
Her son died for his. Over a year ago, she NEEDS to adjust and deal
with the loss, she needs counselling.
Sure she can believe that the war is an unjust one, after all she lost
her son. Would she be there if her son had survived and come home a
decorated hero? maybe, but probably NOT.
She is grieving, and she is not considering how many OTHERS grief she
is amplifying. She is centering the death of her son on the President.
She is demanding a second meeting with him so she can hit him with her
anger. She needs to accept that her son has died and mve on with Life,
and not be a political puppet of others.
If I were President Bush I wouldn't meet her again either. She should
seek grief
counselling, and not from her far left controllers. She is being
abused
by them for THEIR agenda.
And THAT is LOW.
Jack Linthicum
"Sheehan's son, Casey Sheehan, 24, a former Eagle Scout and altar boy,
was killed in Baghdad on April 4, 2004, within a week of arriving in
Iraq. Sheehan met Bush two months later, as part of a group of grieving
military family members. She has alleged that Bush treated her
callously during their private conversation, and she has demanded a
second meeting to air her grievances about the war and to tell Bush
about the devastation she has felt since losing her son."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/11/AR2005081101753.html
Bush expresses sympathy for Sheehan: "It breaks my heart to think about
a family weeping over the loss of a loved one. I understand the anguish
that some feel about the death that takes place." White House does not
publicly dispute Sheehan's characterization of her original meeting
with Bush. [WP, NYT]
A Bush administration official told reporters that the president had
already met with Sheehan back in 2004, in an effort to explain why he
would not come out.
During an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer Sunday afternoon, Sheehan
admitted that she had met with the president shortly after her son
died.
Sheehan was among about 15 other families of soldiers killed in Iraq
who were invited to meet with Bush in June 2004 near Seattle,
Washington.
According to Sheehan, Bush bounced into the private meeting in a jovial
mood, as though he was attending a party and said: "Now, who are we
honoring today...?" as he entered the room, signifying that he didn't
even know who he was about to meet.
The meeting with Bush occurred two months after her son Casey was
killed in Sadr City on April 4, 2004.
"I was still in shock then," Sheehan said. "Now, I'm angry. I want the
troops home.
dapra
La N wrote:
[snip]
> Meanwhile, I have been fortunate enough to be invited into the
> lives of other U.S.military families who are very hurt and angered by her
> actions and feel that she is doing disservice to them and to the losses they
> have suffered and who are honouring their loved ones in a more "dignified"
> manner.
..hurt and angered by her actions..? What the "other U.S.military
families" expect her to do? Sock it up, and shut up? If anyone, the
military families should understand her frustration. You can't expect
the chicken hawks, the neocons or the testosterone driver armchair
warriors to understand it, can you?
La N
"dapra" <dap...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:42FCF0B4...@comcast.net...
>
>
> La N wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> Meanwhile, I have been fortunate enough to be invited into the lives of
>> other U.S.military families who are very hurt and angered by her actions
>> and feel that she is doing disservice to them and to the losses they have
>> suffered and who are honouring their loved ones in a more "dignified"
>> manner.
>
> ..hurt and angered by her actions..? What the "other U.S.military
> families" expect her to do? Sock it up, and shut up? If anyone, the
> military families should understand her frustration. You can't expect the
> chicken hawks, the neocons or the testosterone driver armchair warriors to
> understand it, can you?
>
Why are you participating on UMA, dapra?
Bryn
<Janos...@zoroastrian.net> writes
>On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 15:54:39 +0100, Bryn
Thank you for that... This seems to have been overlooked in overseas
reporting.
My comments about the wider family remain unchanged..
Howard C. Berkowitz
<nilita20...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I'm almost tempted to take Dapra out of my killfile if he can give a
rational answer. As far as I can tell, it's to vent anger about civilian
policy against the executors of policy.
At some level, I sense Dapra wants troops to mutiny, a cure that may be
worse than the disease.
dapra
To buffer the echo chamber. That's not completely fair. Some of you have
differing opinions.
It's your turn to answer my question.
La N
To answer your question, everybody has a right to express their feelings,
including the military families who support the war. If they feel angry
with Cindy, then they are just as entitled to their feelings as she is to
theirs. I think they don't want it to appear that she is representing all
military families. Nobody is expecting *anybody* to "shut up". However, it
sounds as though you are among those who think that the feelings of those in
the military and their families who support the war are unwarranted and
wrong.
La N
"Howard C. Berkowitz" <h...@gettcomm.com> wrote in message
news:hcb-32A81E.1...@newsgroups.comcast.net...
It will never happen. I get that he loathes military people, and so the
more he hangs out in UMA and is ignored, the more frustrated he is likely to
become. There is a more appropriate group for him with like-minded people.
It's called alt.impeach.bush where they like to spit and swear and take on
cutesy pie names like "Chimpanzilla", call Bush's daughters "whores" and the
like.
I prefer to hang out with more dignified rational people myself, but I think
that group may be just the place for dapra ...
Jack Linthicum
One might ask why anyone from any of Hines favorite crosspostings is
participating on any but their 'home' newsgroup. Erase the ones that
aren't of interest to you, take charge, run this Windward Windbag back
into the sea.
Seawolf
"Larry Swain" <thes...@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:d4ydnfwpFMi...@rcn.net...
>
>
> tiglath wrote:
>> D. Spencer Hines wrote:
>>
>>>FAMILY OF FALLEN SOLDIER PLEADS: PLEASE STOP, CINDY!
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Our boys are dying in Iraq in a war with no strategy and the president
>> is on an extended vacation. Enough said.
>>
> AMEN. I not only honor the memory of her son, but I honor her too.
Why do you honor her? What has she done? If this war was so wrong, why did
she let her son join the military?
At
> least Nixon met on occasion with grieving families and protestors, Shrub
"Shrub".....there ya go with the name calling....guess you have no argument
at all, just a chance to call someone names....go figure.
> doesn't even acknowledge their existance.
The President has met with family members who have lost people in combat
operations.....guess that blows your argument out of the water.....but then
again, you had no argument, did you? You just hoped no one would call you
on your ignorant rant......right?
>
Jack Linthicum
D. Spencer Hines
groups on the Angry Left.
DSH
"Colin Campbell" <colin.c...@us.army.mil> wrote in message
news:1123862920.8...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
| La N:
| >This is a tough one. And, more importantly, I think she personally
| >is going to have a long hard struggle ...
|
| She gets no sympathy from me. She is the one doing this to herself.
|
| Anybody want to take bets that she will blame the President when she
| winds up with these unresolved issues?
Seawolf
"Jack Linthicum" <jackli...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1123870047....@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Then why did she wait till now?
>
Deirdre
Seawolf wrote:
>
> "Larry Swain" <thes...@operamail.com> wrote in message
> news:d4ydnfwpFMi...@rcn.net...
> > AMEN. I not only honor the memory of her son, but I honor her too.
>
> Why do you honor her? What has she done? If this war was so wrong, why did
> she let her son join the military?
"Let"? "Let"?! Do you not have adult children?
Are you unaware that after a certain age the
term "let" has no significance whatsoever? If
my son wants to join the military there's not a
damned thing I can to to stop him, he's a legal
adult...and no matter how I may argue against
it, the final decision is going to be his...you make
it sound as though her son were thirteen.
Deirdre
Bryn
<nilita20...@yahoo.com> writes
"Chimpanzilla"?
<smirk>
D. Spencer Hines
| she blames him because she is unemployed. It's already a pattern.
Classic Left-Wing Democrat -- "I Am A Victim" Syndrome.
DSH
"Janos Kaldy" <Janos...@zoroastrian.net> wrote in message
news:2tipf1p05mjal8gk8...@4ax.com...
| On 12 Aug 2005 09:08:40 -0700, "Colin Campbell"
| <colin.c...@us.army.mil> wrote:
|
| >La N:
| >>This is a tough one. And, more importantly, I think she personally
| >> is going to have a long hard struggle ...
| >
| >She gets no sympathy from me. She is the one doing this to herself.
| >
| >Anybody want to take bets that she will blame the President when she
| >winds up with these unresolved issues?
|
| Well she already blames the president for her marriage breaking up and
| she blames him because she is unemployed. It's already a pattern.
dapra
Of course the military families have the right to express their
feelings. But the attack is not coming from them. It's from the
Limbaugh's and O'Riely's.
La N
Well, I have no use for either Limbaugh or O'Reilly, and I sure as hell
don't listen to them. I don't care for the angry hateful left *or* the
angry hateful right.
Jack Linthicum
Maybe she didn't wait and kept getting put off by Bush's handlers, or
like some people the loss of someone as close as a son was hard to get
over. Bush didn't seem to mind when he called her "Mom" at the Fort
Lewis meeting and said he couldn't imagine losing an aunt, or a cousin.
Cindy corrected him that it was her son, whose name Bush didn't know,
that had been killed.
It would seem to me that if Bush is spending 30 days cutting brush and
posing with his 'security' team maybe this would be a good time to
catch an hour with him. Several have pointed out that Bush is basically
a bully, and therefore a coward, and is afraid he will be unable to
stand up to this woman toe to toe. Maybe she can go out and plant some
brush for George to cut the next day, it seems to be all he cares to
do.
little bit of extra for the fans:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20050811/cm_huffpost/005472
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/columns/pressingissues_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001013854
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/08/politics/08crawford.html?incamp=article_popular_5
D. Spencer Hines
quite contradictory to what she says now.
She has been "turned" by the Angry Left.
She wants full-scale, long-term, media attention and a book deal.
She's being "used" by some very unsavory groups on the Left.
DSH
"Janos Kaldy" <Janos...@zoroastrian.net> wrote in message
news:vnbpf1lul1oltpnsr...@4ax.com...
| This woman met with the president. She was there in private with him.
| It's not anyone's fault but her own that she didn't say then what she
| wanted to.
Howard C. Berkowitz
<finch.e...@rcn.com> wrote:
Not to disagree with you, Deirdre, but at some level of reduction ad
absurdum, it was her son's choices that led, unfortunately, to his
death. Even in peacetime, soldiering can be dangerous.
--
I don't know anyone named Shrub or Chimpanzella. I do think George W.
Bush is a poor president.
Grey Satterfield
<nilita20...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> "Howard C. Berkowitz" <h...@gettcomm.com> wrote in message
> news:hcb-32A81E.1...@newsgroups.comcast.net...
>> At some level, I sense Dapra wants troops to mutiny, a cure that may be
>> worse than the disease.
>
> It will never happen. I get that he loathes military people, and so the
> more he hangs out in UMA and is ignored, the more frustrated he is likely to
> become. There is a more appropriate group for him with like-minded people.
> It's called alt.impeach.bush where they like to spit and swear and take on
> cutesy pie names like "Chimpanzilla", call Bush's daughters "whores" and the
> like.
>
> I prefer to hang out with more dignified rational people myself, but I think
> that group may be just the place for dapra ...
We must be effective in fighting Radical Islam and our risky incursion into
Iraq well help us immeasurably in this regard, but only if it results in a
stable and free society. That's going to take a long time -- as fair minded
people understand.
Bush's goal is to improve everybody's safety and security. If he succeeds
we will all be the beneficiaries of his policies. If he fails, Bush won't
be the only loser, we will all be losers. But many of Bush's enemies, like
Dapra, are so blinded by hatred that they can't see it.
Grey Satterfield
La N
"Grey Satterfield" <grey.sat...@oscn.net> wrote in message
news:BF225E0F.1AC4F%grey.sat...@oscn.net...
OTOH, I want to see Bush succeed. If the U.S. and the Coalition and the new
Iraqi government fail, I fear for the whole world.
D. Spencer Hines
been conveniently "overlooked" -- in the overseas reporting.
She has also met with the National Security Advisor to the President of
the United States and the Deputy Chief of Staff to the President of the
United States.
Has the "overseas reporting" reported on THAT?
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"The trip had one benefit that none of the Sheehans expected. "
"For a moment, life returned to the way it was before Casey died. They
laughed, joked and bickered playfully as they briefly toured Seattle. "
"For the first time in 11 weeks, they felt whole again."
""That was the gift the president gave us, the gift of happiness, of
being together," Cindy said. "
http://www.thereporter.com/republished
DSH
"Bryn" <br...@GREMILNSfinhall.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:HnAPsPByYM$CF...@finhall.demon.co.uk...
| >>>This woman met with the president. She was there in private with
| >>> him. It's not anyone's fault but her own that she didn't say then
Jack Linthicum
Know anyone with these nicknames?
Pootie-Poot, Landslide , Dino (short for Dinosaur), Boy Genius
(positive), Turd Blossom (negative), The World's Greatest Hero
(positive and negative), * Big O (current), Pablo (former),High
Prophet, Hurricane Karen, The Blade, Pablo, The Cobra,
Stretch/Little Stretch, Major League Asshole
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nicknames_used_by_George_W._Bush
Soren Larsen
> On 8/12/05 12:45 PM, in article De5Le.217265$on1.196211@clgrps13, "La
> N" <nilita20...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>
> We must be effective in fighting Radical Islam and our risky
> incursion into Iraq well help us immeasurably in this regard,
Why are you so certain that a risky action will help you?
God is on your side?
BTW How is toppling a secular dictatorship helping you
in your crusade against 'Radical Islam'.
> but
> only if it results in a stable and free society. That's going to
> take a long time -- as fair minded people understand.
Everybody knows this - Sane people however recognises
that the current carnage in Iraq is giving democracy a bad
name in the region, and that Iraq probably are further away
from a stable democracy than before the invasion.
Pro democracy leaders and dissidents alike in the region are
listening in stunned silence when circus Rice is holding up Iraq as a
shining beacon for democracy and an example to follow.
Dictators and terrorists must be laughing their asses off.
>
> Bush's goal is to improve everybody's safety and security.
An awfull lot of innocent people has to die for this goal.
>If he
> succeeds we will all be the beneficiaries of his policies.
How many are you going to kill?
> If he
> fails, Bush won't be the only loser, we will all be losers.
You got that right.
The problem is that a snowball in hell has better chances than Bush.
Which is why so many of your allies are in damage control mode,
and why so many are so very pissed with him.
Soren Larsen
Bryn
<pogue...@hotmail.com> writes
It is surprising as most of our information is filtered though News Corp
outlets.
Looks as if Rupert has a new agenda...
What could it be ?
--
tiglath
> She said complimentary things about President Bush after that meeting --
> quite contradictory to what she says now.
>
> She has been "turned" by the Angry Left.
>
How idiotic. How short-sighted.
Most Mums and most men would get jelly knees upon having to meet the
president face to face with a smile, never mind considering excoriating
him.
The pressure of the occasion and the power and prestige of the
presidency loom large on a mind not used to such encounters.
It's only upon reflexion and steading herself for sometime that a
simple woman must have found some balance in the torrent of emotions of
losing a son and meeting the U.S. president who is largely to blame for
his death. It must not have been an easy task to reconcile weighty
thoughts in great tension while enduring the pain of ultimate personal
loss.
Not that Mr. Hines can understand any of that.
The woman has now found a direction and she is sticking to it so that
fewer men might perish in the misadventures of our politicians, maybe.
Howard C. Berkowitz
<grey.sat...@oscn.net> wrote:
I don't hate GWB. I'd probably enjoy having dinner with him, much more
than with his last opponeent -- for whom I voted. I know I was immensely
impressed with Barbara the Elder when I was on a flight from Houston to
DC with her, back when GHWB was VP, and we chatted a bit.
Nevertheless, I consider GWB a poor president, starting with the issue
of acting as inclusive as he did as Governor of Texas. As I have posted,
with considerable research in open sources, I cannot articulate the GWOT
strategy other than PNAC ideology. In general, I am far more appalled
with his domestic than foreign leadership.
No, Grey. I have no personal animus to GWB, but I have yet to see that
the invasion of Iraq was a wise strategy. Admittedly, it's hard to prove
a negative. Could the "honey pot" of Iraq have attracted terrorists that
otherwise might be operating in the US? That is a possibility, but hard
to call.
I thoroughly supported the invasion of Afghanistan. There are other
parts in the world where I'd like to see a more visible US presence in
dealing with the causes of Islamist extremism.
Howard C. Berkowitz
<nilita20...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I really don't want to see him fail, and I honestly would be delighted
to be wrong. Nevertheless, I am not comfortable with the directions I
see.
La N
Well, Bill Clinton expressed my very sentiments quite well yesterday.
"[whether the invasion was the right thing to do or not]It is what it is.
And we can't afford to lose."
btw, Howard, out of interest which "directions" are you not comfortable
with? What part of the scenario are you looking at? I know that a lot of
people prefer to focus on the progress, whilst others focus on the
(increasing) insurgency, others on the fact that Iraqis came out in big
numbers to vote democratically, whilst others focus on the historical
perspective of centuries of inter-tribal warfare in Iraq.
What situation needs to be *tweaked* to your thinking for it to feel more
comfortable with you?
dapra
Fear no more! Embrace the new renaissance!
Though the US seems to fall into a new dark ages (crusades, purging of
science from the schools), the reactionary convulsion has run it's
course. I think?! :-)
Bush is only a minor counterrevolutionary figure. Even the Republicans
will discover how disastrous his leadership was.
Howard C. Berkowitz
<nilita20...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I'm not sure there is anything that I can propose, other than be
pleasantly surprised by the emergence of a viable Iraqi government, with
the factions playing nicely. At a very start, I'd want to see the
curves in the Cordesman report, showing much slower preparation
(admittedly training-based) of Iraqi than Coalition forces. If we are to
be partners with these people, never again should a mixed patrol consist
of at least lightly armored US vehicles, with the police in busses and
pickups.
I'd want to see serious participation by troops and infrastructure
people from countries with substantial Muslim populations. I'd like to
see significant US visibility, if even at the commercial or cultural
level, in such countries. A very active role, perhaps of yet a new
coalition, is needed in Central Asia.
There should be strong domestic incentives for people to study Arabic
and appropriate regional and cultural studies. Mind you, there are lots
of areas where stronger US incentives are needed -- the technological
base, both from offshoring and unwillingness of US students to go into
the hard sciences and engineering, is hemorrhaging.
I'd like to see a national leadership that visibly works on inclusion
rather than divisiveness. I'd like to see "zero-based" reexamination of
support to Israel -- not to cut it off, but that they become less of a
special case -- and the world knows it.
Colin referred to the unwillingness and irresponsibility of some Iraqis
to pick up trash -- or even to dump it at random. In US cities, low
tolerance to blight has shown rather good returns. I see a need for both
education and enforcement.
La N
I take it that you promote immediate pull-out of the U.S. troops and let the
chips fall where they may? I believe with the immediate pull-out things
will get *worse* in the Middle East.
Grey Satterfield
<nilita20...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> La N wrote:
>> Of course the military families have the right to express their feelings.
>> But the attack is not coming from them. It's from the
>> Limbaugh's and O'Riely's.
>>
>>
>
> Well, I have no use for either Limbaugh or O'Reilly, and I sure as hell
> don't listen to them. I don't care for the angry hateful left *or* the
> angry hateful right.
I detest Bill O'Reilly because he takes himself so seriously -- a grievous
error for one who is really in the entertainment business. I confess that
Rush Limbaugh makes me laugh, that's because (1) he has often confessed that
he is just an entertainer and (2) he drives partisan Leftists NUTS.
Grey Satterfield
La N
O'Reilly is persona non grata in Canada because he has in the past called
for boycott of Canadian goods, and he contributes to the ill feeling that
Canadians have towards Conservative USAians.
For political comedy, I like Bill Maher, especially some of the astute
observations he make about modern society. This week he said, "It's funny
to see Americans whining about $2.00 a gallon gas while they're sipping on
their $3.00 cup of latte."
La N
>
>
>>I believe with the immediate pull-out things will get *worse* in the
>>Middle East.
>
> You fill in the name.....
>
I doubt it ....
dapra
Well, immediate pull-out would be very unfortunate. It would only serve
the short interest of the Republicans. On the long run it would
encourage further aggressive adventures of Bush or the following
administrations.
>I believe with the immediate pull-out things
> will get *worse* in the Middle East.
>
I don't believe that. It would be a green light to attack Venezuela,
Bryn
<pogue...@hotmail.com> writes
>| Well she already blames the president for her marriage breaking up and
>| she blames him because she is unemployed. It's already a pattern.
>
>Classic Left-Wing Democrat -- "I Am A Victim" Syndrome.
There is something valuable to be learned from this.
Obviously to members of the GOP the role of POTUS is considered to
superior to the role of the family.
I guess the Democrats place the role the family before the role of
president.
Useful information for the Observer...
Very telling..
>
>DSH
>
>"Janos Kaldy" <Janos...@zoroastrian.net> wrote in message
>news:2tipf1p05mjal8gk8...@4ax.com...
>
>| On 12 Aug 2005 09:08:40 -0700, "Colin Campbell"
>| <colin.c...@us.army.mil> wrote:
>|
>| >La N:
>
>| >>This is a tough one. And, more importantly, I think she personally
>| >> is going to have a long hard struggle ...
>| >
>| >She gets no sympathy from me. She is the one doing this to herself.
>| >
>| >Anybody want to take bets that she will blame the President when she
>| >winds up with these unresolved issues?
>|
>| Well she already blames the president for her marriage breaking up and
>| she blames him because she is unemployed. It's already a pattern.
>
--
dapra
I think nothing would happen in Iraq, if we pulled out. Of course the
puppet government would be over thrown, and they would work out their
problems. The government would not be friendly at first to the US, but
it could be later.
The reason I don't advocate an early withdrawal is that our aggressive
leaders need a 'Vietnam' experience, other way they get us into an even
bigger disaster. Megalomania has no upper limits.
Grey Satterfield
<nilita20...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Well, I'm Canadian, not American, and I'm no fan of Bush and this war.
> OTOH, I want to see Bush succeed. If the U.S. and the Coalition and the new
> Iraqi government fail, I fear for the whole world.
I am no fan of Bush's social of fiscal policies, either. Nevertheless, I
think that he has been spot on where the War on Terror is concerned,
including the Patriot Ace and Iraq. But then Harry Truman is remembered,
properly I think, as a nearly great president because of foreign policy
despite his domestic policies, most of which were pretty bad.
Grey Satterfield
Grey Satterfield
hcb-59661F.1...@newsgroups.comcast.net, "Howard C. Berkowitz"
<h...@gettcomm.com> wrote:
> I don't hate GWB. I'd probably enjoy having dinner with him, much more
> than with his last opponeent -- for whom I voted. I know I was immensely
> impressed with Barbara the Elder when I was on a flight from Houston to
> DC with her, back when GHWB was VP, and we chatted a bit.
>
> Nevertheless, I consider GWB a poor president, starting with the issue
> of acting as inclusive as he did as Governor of Texas. As I have posted,
> with considerable research in open sources, I cannot articulate the GWOT
> strategy other than PNAC ideology. In general, I am far more appalled
> with his domestic than foreign leadership.
With the exception of his tax cuts, which I think were very smart, most of
Bush's domestic policies, particularly his refusal or inability to restrain
an out-of-control Republican Congress's spending and his pandering to the
Religious Right, have been benighted. I do, though, agree whole heartedly
with what he has done and is doing in fighting the War on Terror, including
as previously noted, the Patriot Act and Iraq.
Grey Satterfield
Grey Satterfield
<nilita20...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Well, Bill Clinton expressed my very sentiments quite well yesterday.
> "[whether the invasion was the right thing to do or not]It is what it is.
> And we can't afford to lose."
>
> btw, Howard, out of interest which "directions" are you not comfortable
> with? What part of the scenario are you looking at? I know that a lot of
> people prefer to focus on the progress, whilst others focus on the
> (increasing) insurgency, others on the fact that Iraqis came out in big
> numbers to vote democratically, whilst others focus on the historical
> perspective of centuries of inter-tribal warfare in Iraq.
>
> What situation needs to be *tweaked* to your thinking for it to feel more
> comfortable with you?
This is a nearly unanimous point of view among responsible Democrats. That
is what makes the subversive nastiness being promulgated by the likes of
moveon.org, Michael Moore, and the rest of the Angry Left so disgusting.
Grey Satterfield
Grey Satterfield
<nilita20...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> O'Reilly is persona non grata in Canada because he has in the past called
> for boycott of Canadian goods, and he contributes to the ill feeling that
> Canadians have towards Conservative USAians.
>
> For political comedy, I like Bill Maher, especially some of the astute
> observations he make about modern society. This week he said, "It's funny
> to see Americans whining about $2.00 a gallon gas while they're sipping on
> their $3.00 cup of latte."
The comparison between Bill Maher, a leftist entertainer, and Rush Limbaugh,
a conservative entertainer, is apt, I think. On the left, I might add Jon
Stewart, who is also a funny guy.
I do have one caveat on Stewart, though. Last October, when he appeared on
the old Crossfire show on CNN he made the dreaded mistake of getting
serious, which was a HUGE mistake. His appearance was not only not funny,
it was painful to watch. He went off on a self righteous shtick lecturing
the hosts, Paul Begala and Tucker Carlson, about talk shows like Crossfire,
where the hosts hold political views that are the polar opposite of each
other.
Since his Crossfire gaffe Stewart seems to have regained his footing and is
mostly very funny. I suspect that is because he, unlike many Democrats, has
accepted that the election is over.
For those who are interested here is a transcript of Stewart's Crossfire
disaster (NOT recommended):
http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/bljonstewartcrossfire.htm
Grey Satterfield
Colin Campbell
<grey.sat...@oscn.net> wrote:
>Bush's goal is to improve everybody's safety and security. If he succeeds
>we will all be the beneficiaries of his policies. If he fails, Bush won't
>be the only loser, we will all be losers. But many of Bush's enemies, like
>Dapra, are so blinded by hatred that they can't see it.
Unless darpa feels that this counts as a loss for him.
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
Colin Campbell
wrote:
>> I don't believe that. It would be a green light to attack Venezuela, Cuba?
>> You fill in the name.....
>>
>
>I doubt it ....
Of course there is the question of why should we attack either of
those countries.
Colin Campbell
wrote:
>Everybody knows this - Sane people however recognises
I am aware that English is not your primary language so please do not
take this as a spelling flame. It is not spelled 'sane' - the proper
spelling is: 'stupid.'
>that the current carnage in Iraq is giving democracy a bad
>name in the region, and that Iraq probably are further away
>from a stable democracy than before the invasion.
>
--
Colin Campbell
<br...@GREMILNSfinhall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>http://www.thereporter.com/republished
>
>Thank you for that... This seems to have been overlooked in overseas
>reporting.
Overlooked - or ignored? (Or even 'covered up?')
Fred J. McCall
news:42FD33CB...@comcast.net:
> I think nothing would happen in Iraq, if we pulled out.
And I think you're an idiot. My opinion is much closer to our current
reality than yours.
> Of course
> the puppet government would be over thrown,
You mean the 'puppet government' that was ELECTED by the Iraqi people?
Don't have much use for democracy, do you?
> The reason I don't advocate an early withdrawal is that our
> aggressive leaders need a 'Vietnam' experience, other way they get
> us into an even bigger disaster. Megalomania has no upper limits.
And we'd all like to thank you for providing this fine example. Now
shut up. If we want any shit from you, we'll squeeze your head.
--
This space for let.
Fred J. McCall
news:42FCF0B4...@comcast.net:
>
>
> La N wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> Meanwhile, I have been fortunate enough to be invited into the
>> lives of other U.S.military families who are very hurt and
>> angered by her actions and feel that she is doing disservice to
>> them and to the losses they have suffered and who are honouring
>> their loved ones in a more "dignified" manner.
>
> ..hurt and angered by her actions..? What the "other U.S.military
> families" expect her to do? Sock it up, and shut up? If anyone,
> the military families should understand her frustration.
Never associated much with military families, have you? Did she
think he was just going off the camp with uniforms, or what?
What do you expect THEM to do, simply "don't be hurt"?
> You can't
> expect the chicken hawks, the neocons or the testosterone driver
> armchair warriors to understand it, can you?
No, I don't expect you to understand. Oh, you didn't mention the
pure chickens, the testosteroneless armchair protesters, did you?
Fred J. McCall
news:hcb-32A81E.1...@newsgroups.comcast.net:
> I'm almost tempted to take Dapra out of my killfile if he can give
> a rational answer.
Well, I suspect you don't need to worry there....
La N
> On 8/12/05 4:04 PM, in article x98Le.175395$9A2.59284@edtnps89, "La N"
> <nilita20...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I do have one caveat on Stewart, though. Last October, when he appeared
on
> the old Crossfire show on CNN he made the dreaded mistake of getting
> serious, which was a HUGE mistake. His appearance was not only not funny,
> it was painful to watch. He went off on a self righteous shtick lecturing
> the hosts, Paul Begala and Tucker Carlson, about talk shows like
> Crossfire,
> where the hosts hold political views that are the polar opposite of each
> other.
>
>
I saw that show! It was painful to watch. I thought, man, you are losing
it. I quite enjoyed Tucker Carlson btw while he was on that show. I've
always liked James Carville, find Bob Novak iffy, Paul Begala very
personable. Unfortunately, I think Stewart's stunt contributed to the
demise of that show somehow.
Howard C. Berkowitz
<nilita20...@yahoo.com> wrote:
We can never forget that wonderful interview, in which an admittedly
provoked, less urbane than usual, William F. Buckley Jr. tried to attack
(physically) Gore Vidal, calling him...not one of his usual polysyllabic
and baroque replies...a "pinko faggot."
Michilín
<fmc...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Sheila J <mydo...@shaw.ca> wrote in
>news:Zw1Le.198348$%K2.133517@pd7tw1no:
>
>> She's the mother. She has every right to be anti-war and
>> anti-Bush.
>
>The fact that "She's the mother" has nothing to do with her right to an
>opinion. Everyone has that right with none particularly more special
>than the other.
>
>One does, however, have to wonder just what the hell she thinks she's
>doing and if it is what her son would REALLY want to be remembered for.
I guess she's saying she doesn't want her son to be remembered for
indiscriminately murdering Iraqi civilians and as just another
mindless Marine Corps thug like you, Fred.
An honour thing. Nothing to do with the American reality.
>--
>This space for let.
Murchadh
Michilín
<fmc...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>"La N" <nilita20...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>news:%D1Le.216528$on1.57919@clgrps13:
>
>> "Sheila J" <mydo...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
>> news:Zw1Le.198348$%K2.133517@pd7tw1no...
>>>
>>> She's the mother. She has every right to be anti-war and
>>> anti-Bush.
>>
>> Hi Sheila. Welcome back! And yes, she has a right to feel
>> whatever she wants. I just hope she finds peace in herself when
>> she is no longer in the media spotlight.
>
>I just have to wonder what she really thinks she's doing and if she
>thinks her son, the soldier, would actually approve. If she thinks he
>would, just why does SHE think he voluntarily put on a uniform?
Because people like you lied to him.
Murchadh
La N
"Howard C. Berkowitz" <h...@gettcomm.com> wrote in message
news:hcb-72CBE8.2...@newsgroups.comcast.net...
I think a lot of people were turned off by the supposed ire between the two
debating combatants which often sounded like shouting matches. OTOH, I
found the show quite entertaining.
Speaking of former politico debating duos turning into romantic lovemates -
it is rumoured that left wing James Carville and right wing Mary Matalin
have one of the best happiest political marriages going.
- nilo
Howard C. Berkowitz
<nilita20...@yahoo.com> wrote:
It has been said that if the networks ever win the right to televise
legal executions, Fox will demand the right to have the condemned be
naked.
Really, it would probably be a good strategy for the Republicans to
propose gladiatorial advertising. Ah-nold for RNC Chair!
Michilín
<pogue...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>She said complimentary things about President Bush after that meeting --
>quite contradictory to what she says now.
>
>She has been "turned" by the Angry Left.
>
>She wants full-scale, long-term, media attention and a book deal.
>
>She's being "used" by some very unsavory groups on the Left.
>
>DSH
Well, keep your eyes peeled and maybe you'll be able to muscle in on
the next mother if it looks like a trend and make a few bucks out of
her misery! After all, that's the American Way!
It's like a story on CNN this morning by Dr. Gupta about the
guaranteed cure for a rare form of cancer which is no longer
manufactured because there arern't enough cases to make the cure
profitable and so the shareholders turned their thumbs down on
continuing production.
Out of the blue there was some bitter awkwardness when the female host
anniounced angrily that her brother had died of that rare cancer and
her family was never made aware that a cure existed.
As Iraq and Halliburton et. al. have demonstrated, apparently no
American life is worth diddlysquat compared to the bottom line.
Obviously American investor values aren't shared by all Americans.
I never bought into that bullshit and that's why when I had the
choice, I chose Canada. When my wife got cancer and took two and a
half years to die, the state paid for everything except a token $8 per
day when she had to have a hospital bed for an operation.
Not only were all drugs and other requirements paid for, but as her
diagnosis was terminal, the system even brought her old age pension
forward so there would be extra money on top of the money provided by
the state insurance scheme.
For the rest of my life, remarried or single, the state has paid and
will continue to pay me a survivor's pension, fully indexed, until I
die, based on her pension contributions. At the moment it's over $700
per month.
I should pay $50 per month for complete medical coverage, but even
that is covered because of other State pension arrangements. extras
include items like free bus passes, etc.
The US can't come close to offering any of its citizens a deal like
that. Even if I can't get to a specialist in Canada because of patoent
nukbers and am running out of time, the state will pay for me to be
flown to another less busy province, OR the US and treated there at
government expense.
The sad thing is that the US could have done the same.
Even the kids were offered money to get them through university and
when they declined, saying they didn't want to profit from their
mother's death, a government official, a nice lady asked me to bring
them all into her office wher she explained that their mother had
worked for and earned the money and persuaded them to accept it.
I owe Canada a huge debt of honour for what it did for my family.
Murchadh
Fred J. McCall
> Speaking of former politico debating duos turning into romantic
> lovemates - it is rumoured that left wing James Carville and right
> wing Mary Matalin have one of the best happiest political
> marriages going.
Have you ever seen the two of them on the same show? It's funny to
watch. Mary Matalin is pretty much like she's always been. James
Carville, on the other hand, sounds much more, uh, RESTRAINED than he
does when she's not the one he's arguing with.
Looks like it didn't take her long at all to get him trained....
La N
"Fred J. McCall" <fmc...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:Xns96B0CC4A95DF7f...@207.217.125.201...
Trained? I think he's so in love with her that he's not gonna treat her
like one of the boys .. .heh .... He's *seriously* in love with her,
although he doesn't totally buy into her politics and vice versa. They
agree to disagree on certain subjects. I like RL (love) stories like this.
James Toupin
seems to have grasped the IRONY of the fact that it was posted by the same
person who, earlier in the day also posted:
"Liberals" Today Just Can't Stand Free Speech & The Free Market Of Ideas
This post told us how "Liberals" were against free speech, because they
object to the government ignoring the separation of church and state by
allowing the Christian dogma called "Intelligent Design" to be taught in
public schools and supported by tax-payer's dollars.
Later, that same day, he posted this; which now argues against this grieving
mother's right to free speech, simply because she doesn't agree with his
point of view.
My advice, as it is with all posts, is simply that you consider the source.
These individual posts do not occur in a vacuum. Check out previous postings
by the individual and then you will begin to get an idea of the hypocrisy
that some ideologues, right and left, display in their daily lives.
Thanks;
James
"D. Spencer Hines" <pogue...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f4NKe.72$kb4....@eagle.america.net...
> FAMILY OF FALLEN SOLDIER PLEADS: PLEASE STOP, CINDY!
>
> 11 August 2005
>
> Drudge Report
>
> "The family of American soldier Casey Sheehan, who was killed in Iraq on
> April 4, 2004, has broken its silence and spoken out against his mother
> Cindy Sheehan's anti-war vigil against George Bush held outside the
> president's Crawford, Texas ranch.
>
> The following email was received by the DRUDGE REPORT from Cherie
> Quarterolo, Casey's aunt and godmother:
> ----------------------------
>
> "Our family has been so distressed by the recent activities of Cindy we
> are breaking our silence and we have collectively written a statement
> for release. Feel free to distribute it as you wish. Thanks, Cherie
>
> In response to questions regarding the Cindy Sheehan/Crawford Texas
> issue: Sheehan Family Statement:
>
> The Sheehan Family lost our beloved Casey in the Iraq War and we have
> been silently, respectfully grieving. We do not agree with the
> political motivations and publicity tactics of Cindy Sheehan. She now
> appears to be promoting her own personal agenda and notoriety at the
> expense of her son's good name and reputation. The rest of the Sheehan
> Family supports the troops, our country, and our President, silently,
> with prayer and respect.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Casey Sheehan's grandparents, aunts, uncles and numerous cousins."
> ------------------------------
>
> DSH
>
D. Spencer Hines
United States.
I have never opposed that and believe she has a perfect God-given right
to make a fool of herself -- as she has already done -- and I hope she
keeps it up -- because it will only serve further to discredit the Loony
Angry-Left and to Democrats losing more Elections.
Cindy Sheehan has a PERFECT right to HER Free Speech -- God Bless Her,
Keep Her and Give Her Strength for the Fight.
By the same measure, I have the same right to MY Free Speech which
includes the right to criticize, ridicule, find fault with, make fun of
and excoriate Cindy Sheehan.
That's the way Free Speech works in America.
Sauce For The Goose & Sauce For The Gander.
Egualmente!
Deus Vult.
Veni, Vidi, Calcitravi Asinum.
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
Vires et Honor
Soren Larsen
> On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 21:42:30 +0200, "Soren Larsen" <soh...@tiscali.dk>
> wrote:
>
>
>> Everybody knows this - Sane people however recognises
>
> I am aware that English is not your primary language so please do not
> take this as a spelling flame. It is not spelled 'sane' - the proper
> spelling is: 'stupid.'
>
Nope I checked the dictionary.
S-t-u-p-i-d does not spell 'sane.'
I'm afraid your Mom made a little white lie when she explained
the child psychiatrist diagnosis for you.
Soren Larsen
James Toupin
><Snip>
> By the same measure, I have the same right to MY Free Speech which
> includes the right to criticize, ridicule, find fault with, make fun of
> and excoriate Cindy Sheehan.
>
> That's the way Free Speech works in America.
>
> Sauce For The Goose & Sauce For The Gander.
Absolutely! I agree 100%. And I would never say otherwise. I would add, that
it's the way free speech should work anywhere or else it isn't fee speech at
all.
I was simply cautioning everyone to take a more through look at all of the
posts an individual makes. It is only by examining all of what someone says
or posts that you can even begin to hope to understand them. Also, when you
look at those posts as a whole that is when you may find similarities or
contradictions between them.
Now, I may very well have been mistaken, but when you posted a plea for
Cindy Sheehan to "Please Stop" without comment I assumed that you agreed
with the article. It would be odd for someone to post an article that they
don't agree with.
Thanks;
James
Grey Satterfield
<nilita20...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Tucker Carlson is a very nice young man. He spoke at a meeting of a dinner
club to which I belong last year and I had a nice conversation with him. He
is an unapologetic conservative but he wears well (as does Begala much of
the time). That was why the cancellation of Crossfire surprised me a
little. Begala and Carlson both wore well.
The problem that guys like Jon Stewart have when they get serious is that
few care what they have to say if it isn't funny.
Grey Satterfield
Grey Satterfield
hcb-72CBE8.2...@newsgroups.comcast.net, "Howard C. Berkowitz"
<h...@gettcomm.com> wrote:
If there has ever been a public figure who could move me to violence it
would be Gore Vidal. "Pinko faggot" just about sums it up. He is a smarmy
gut fighter, who appears not to have a fair minded bone in his body.
Grey Satterfield
Grey Satterfield
<nilita20...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Matalin and Carver are a hoot. Both are serious, practicing Catholics who
obviously take their marriage seriously. Good for them. That they are also
charismatic and funny can't hurt, either.
Grey Satterfield
Grey Satterfield
Xns96B0CC4A95DF7f...@207.217.125.201, "Fred J. McCall"
<fmc...@earthlink.net> wrote:
I agree that Carville keeps his razor mouth in sharp check when he appears
with Matalin. When he gets a political enemy in his rhetorical sights he
says some pretty mean things, albeit funny things, which he wouldn't want to
visit on his loved ones.
If Matalin and Carville could ever find a presidential candidate both could
support, the guy should be elected by acclimation.
Grey Satterfield
Jack Linthicum
I scrubbed all the crossposts. Do you think that Crossfire and the
other phoney 'shout your beliefs' programming contributes or detracts
from democracy?
The first was probably "McLaughlin and Friends" which was group of
conservatives trying to offset the liberal bias of the Sunday morning
talk shows. It used to be on PBS in Washington.
Each program afterwards searched for the magic formula which seemed to
consist of louder and less to the point. I mean Jerry Springer and his
phoney 'confrontantions' are scripted, just as the reality shows are
scripted, it would appear the shout shows are also scripted, but Novak
didn't like the way the 'ad-lib' part was going.
And MSNBC was probably trying to find a reason to cancel a shout show
that aired at 4pm, hardly the hour for that sort of thing. (See Jerry
Springer above)
Jack Linthicum
Please accept an advance apology, Grey, the word you use suggests what
will happen when this we-they division is finished.
"acclimation
Acclimation is a change occurring in an individual as a result to
prolonged exposure of a particular environmental condition, such as a
horse shedding its winter coat to produce a lighter summer coat. In
general acclimation is a tool in maintaining a being's natural
homeostasis.
Tropical fish purchased at a pet store are often kept in acclimation
bags in order to allow them to adapt themselves to changes in
temperature and water quality."
Fred J. McCall
Yeah, trained. His behaviour changes dramatically and noticeably in
discussions with her. Hers changes not one whit in discussions with
him.
James Carville is a wussy-boy! :-)
Howard C. Berkowitz
<grey.sat...@oscn.net> wrote:
Given that description, I wonder if he's related to Ann Coulter...or if
there has been dramatically successful gender and wing reassignment
surgery. Have the two of them ever been seen together?
Still, regardless of viewpoint, there was a certain glee in watching
Bill Buckley totally lose his image, which does include a sense of
humor. As you'll remember, he was a guest on the TV show "Laugh-In". He
had declined repeatedly, until, as reported by several in his office, he
dissolved in howls of laughter when they offered to fly him to the Left
Coast in a plane with two right wings.
Howard C. Berkowitz
<grey.sat...@oscn.net> wrote:
One could not find a better example that partisan politics can be
hardball without demonizing one's opponent.