Cindy Sheehan visits the Great White North

[KarlGauss]

From here (http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1146741320385&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154&t=TS_Home): "I am just here begging the people of Canada to force your government . . . to allow our soldiers to have refuge up here"Um, no thanks Cindy.

And while we're at it, I'm so glad you shared this gem with us"I said (to her son): `Casey I’ll do anything. I’ll take you to Canada. Please let’s go to Canada. Or if you don’t want to go to Canada I’ll run you over with a car and break your legs" I see, you'd cripple your son so he wouldn't have to go and fight "Bush's war". You know, that sounds an awful lot like, "we had to destroy the village in order to save it". And you know who said that!

You are one weird lady.

[alice_in_wonderland]

Good lord, this woman is a crack pot. And I'm speaking as someone who thinks thought war in Iraq is a Really Bad Idea. (Obviously, the US can't leave now - a rather large mess has been created.)

However, if you sign up for the military, reap all of the benefits (ie training, school, etc) and then desert when things get tough, Canada doesn't want you either.

[FisherQueen]

Was Sheehan always crazy? Or is it the media spotlight and the loss of her son that has driven her Over The Edge?

At the beginning, when she was waiting outside the Bush ranch, I felt sorry for her. Now, I just wish she'd go home, mourn, and stay away from cameras.

[Lemur866]

Canada doesn't need to provide a refuge for American soldiers because, get this, all of them are volunteers.

If we had a draft, Canada would refuse to extradite draft evaders. However, we have a volunteer military. Desertion is a crime in Canada, just as it is in the US.

And if a currently serving soldier decides they don't want to go to Iraq, they don't have to go. Just tell your commanding officer that you're now a conscientious objector, and you want out of the army as soon as possible, and you're not gonna follow any orders to kill anyone anymore. Or if you don't mind lying, just tell him you're gay. They'll kick you out eventually. Now, they might be a bit rude to you, and maybe make some financial trouble for you, and maybe at most give you a little time in the stockade. But you'll be out, and you won't have to go to Canada and fight Chimpy McHitlerburton's war.

There's no need to desert if you don't believe in the war. Just refuse to follow orders anymore. Take your lumps, and you'll eventually be let go.

[John Mace]

I think it speaks well of "the left" that "they" have largely dropped her as a spokesperson. Now, if we can only get "the right" to dump Ann Coulter, we'll have made progress towards reasoned discussion of political issues.

[Menocchio]

The Peace Movement didn't choose Sheehan, remember that people, the media did. She's just a woman with an "unimpeachable" background that came up with a publicity stunt at the same time that the public dissatisfaction of the war was growing. The media tagged her to symbolize the nation's turn against the war, and we've been stuck with her ever since.

Frankly, I've never liked her. I'm strongly opposed to this war, but I even thought the original campout was a cheap stunt.

[SteveG1]

But we US folks can still come up as tourists, can't we? Please? Pretty please? :D

[Mindfield]

Did she already come here or is she on her way? Because there was this weird prevailing odor recently...

She's a nutcase. She could run for parliament. But if I saw her walking down Yonge, I'd still punch her in the balls.

[ElvisL1ves]

I think it speaks well of "the left" that "they" have largely dropped her as a spokesperson.I wish somebody would tell me when there's a meeting where these things get decided.

When did "the left" adopt her as a spokesperson? :rolleyes: Or was that identification made only by RW yammerers such as yourself, looking for ways to trivialize or demonize views not held by yourselves?

When did "the right" drop Ann Coulter as a spokesperson, and does that "speak well" for you? Shee-it, man, you never used to be this comical. What happened?

[Hamlet]

When did "the left" adopt her as a spokesperson? :rolleyes: Or was that identification made only by RW yammerers such as yourself, looking for ways to trivialize or demonize views not held by yourselves?

When did "the right" drop Ann Coulter as a spokesperson, and does that "speak well" for you? Shee-it, man, you never used to be this comical. What happened?I took John Mace's comment to be that there are screwballs on both sides of the fence, and that both Sheehan and Coulter get way more press than they should. A valid, intelligent post; one that was an attempt to disparage the extremes in both parties and return to intelligent discussion of the issues.

Good thing you shat on it, with your usual aplomb. You continue to do a great disservice to those who agree with you and aren't complete assholes.

[ElvisL1ves]

Your frustration over your inability to support your own previous slanders on this board, and your own inability to acknowledge having done so, is obviously still present. It's high time you got over yourself, m'kay?

Second, if you'll actually read what he said, the persons he is backhandedly complimenting are "the left", not Sheehan. He is not discussing what she said, but is raising some foolish partisan strawman. This has indeed become his new style, and I'm hardly the first to comment upon it.

You would both do well to read before replying.

[Hamlet]

Your frustration over your inability to support your own previous slanders on this board, and your own inability to acknowledge having done so, is obviously still present. It's high time you got over yourself, m'kay?You can rewrite history all you want, you can portray yourself however you want, because I've learned that I cannot fight your delusions for you.

Second, if you'll actually read what he said, the persons he is backhandedly complimenting are "the left", not Sheehan. He is not discussing what she said, but is raising some foolish partisan strawman. This has indeed become his new style, and I'm hardly the first to comment upon it.

You would both do well to read before replying.People can read his post and decide for themselves what they think he meant, or he can come back and further define his point for you. Luckily, not everyone has the stupid-color glasses that taint everything you see.

[Hamlet]

The second statement I quoted was from Elvis and not John Mace. Sorry for the accidental misattribution.

[ElvisL1ves]

Said just like someone who knows he's full of shit and knows he's been called on it, but still can't make himself admit it. :rolleyes:

Oh, well, I suppose that counts as a retraction nevertheless.

[Hamlet]

Said just like someone who knows he's full of shit and knows he's been called on it, but still can't make himself admit it. :rolleyes:

Oh, well, I suppose that counts as a retraction nevertheless.Here, let me requote myself, this time in bold: I cannot fight your delusions for you. I'm sure that counts as a retraction in your little world, where you are never wrong, always intelligent and well-spoken, and polite. Here, in reality, you're a braindead jerk who makes it so much easier for the right to make all "liberals" seem like nutjobs.

[AHunter3]

I think it speaks well of "the left" that "they" have largely dropped her as a spokesperson. Now, if we can only get "the right" to dump Ann Coulter, we'll have made progress towards reasoned discussion of political issues.

Is anyone else visualizing a political version of "Trading Spaces"?

[ElvisL1ves]

Here, let me requote myself, this time in bold.If you choose to continue to be an irresponsible slanderer, that's your choice. But do not be under any delusion that it will have any beneficial effect.

Credibility is earned. Some day you might come to understand that. But first you need to understand what you're commenting upon:

I think it speaks well of "the left" that "they" have largely dropped her {Sheehan} as a spokesperson. Now, if we can only get "the right" to dump Ann Coulter, we'll have made progress towards reasoned discussion of political issues.

Now, do you have any actual contribution to the substance of this discussion, or would you rather continue to be a lower-vocabulary-level Shodan?

[SteveG1]

Is anyone else visualizing a political version of "Trading Spaces"?
Yes. Does that make me a bad person? :eek:

[scr4]

Canada doesn't need to provide a refuge for American soldiers because, get this, all of them are volunteers.
I think she's talking about those who volunteered to protect the country, not realizing that they'd be sent to invade and occupy a harmless foreign country for political power.

[Queuing]

However, if you sign up for the military, reap all of the benefits (ie training, school, etc) and then desert when things get tough, Canada doesn't want you either.

Well said. Don't see why Sheehan would think Canadians, who for the most part are against the war IMO, would want a bunch of scammers who get going when it gets tough.

I think it speaks well of "the left" that "they" have largely dropped her as a spokesperson. Now, if we can only get "the right" to dump Ann Coulter, we'll have made progress towards reasoned discussion of political issues.

What do I have to do to make this happen? Who do I donate to? Even as a Canadian who has limited exposure to this crackpot I am more then willing to do my part to better the political scene down south.

[Lemur866]

I think she's talking about those who volunteered to protect the country, not realizing that they'd be sent to invade and occupy a harmless foreign country for political power.
:rolleyes:

So you didn't realize you might be called to shoot up some foreigners that never did nothing to you, whenever the President gets a bee in his bonnet?

And if a soldier wakes up and realizes that the war is bullshit, and they're not gonna fight anymore, what should they do? Run away to Canada like a scared little boy? Get your mommy to hide you? Or grow a pair, walk into your CO's office and tell him the war is bullshit and you're not gonna fight anymore, and you quit, do whatever you gotta do but you're done.

If you're too chickenshit to quit, the worst consequence of which is having to pay back some student loans and get a dishonorable discharge and face the disdain of your buddies, then fuck you. If you're too scared to quit like a man, then get the fuck over to Iraq and do your job. You don't wanna fight those innocent Iraqis, but not if you have to face some personal consequences?

[KarlGauss]

:rolleyes:
And if a soldier wakes up and realizes that the war is bullshit, and they're not gonna fight anymore, what should they do? Get your mommy to hide you?
How about get mommy to run you over with her car? - hey, don't laugh, that's an option according to Cindy.

[scr4]

Or grow a pair, walk into your CO's office and tell him the war is bullshit and you're not gonna fight anymore, and you quit, do whatever you gotta do but you're done.
Is that an option in the US Army? What would the consequences be?

[carnivorousplant]

What would the consequences be?

They probably don't do this (http://info.detnews.com/history/story/index.cfm?id=103&category=people) anymore.

[Merijeek]

Is anyone else visualizing a political version of "Trading Spaces"?

Coulter in a frumpy sweatshirt and Sheehan in a red miniskirt?

(shudder)

-Joe

[Lemur866]

Slovik was executed for desertion under fire. That means he ran away during combat.

You think they're gonna put you in front of a firing squad for refusing to go over to Iraq and demanding to be discharged?

The worst consequence is a dishonorable discharge. If you can convince them you're now a conscientious objector (as opposed to someone who just doesn't want to fight this particular war, or someone who just doesn't want to get shot at), not even that.

[Throatwarbler Mangrove]

Jack Layton would be happy (http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1146779411922&call_pageid=968332188774&col=968350116467)

It would be inappropriate to send them back in my view ... We're glad they've chosen our country


You know, I say Cindy Sheehan on Bill Maher's Politically Incorrect, and she struck me as a genuinely concerned, good natured, down-to-earth and nice lady with a sense of humour to boot. I strained every ounce of my SDMB sophistry training to defend her against conservative attacks on other boards, but it looks like she has fallen beyond help. What a pity.

[Throatwarbler Mangrove]

Strangely enough, I think she may have been on the exact same EPISODE as Ann Coulter.

[Menocchio]

You know, I say Cindy Sheehan on Bill Maher's Politically Incorrect, and she struck me as a genuinely concerned, good natured, down-to-earth and nice lady with a sense of humour to boot. I strained every ounce of my SDMB sophistry training to defend her against conservative attacks on other boards, but it looks like she has fallen beyond help. What a pity.

Her basic point, that the war sucks, is sound enough, but I don't think she knows what to do or say beyond that. Camp Casey was a cheap stunt, but perhaps an effective one, and that's all she's got. She seems to think that she needs to be doing or saying something more (or less flatteringly, that she has nothing left to say but won't leave the spotlight), but she hasn't a clue what it is. So she pulls stupid shit liek this and her trip to Venezuela.

[NurseCarmen]

Her 15 minutes are all but used up down here, but she has 15 in Canada! Next is Mexico! Don't forget Poland!

[Giraffe]

I think it speaks well of "the left" that "they" have largely dropped her {Sheehan} as a spokesperson. Now, if we can only get "the right" to dump Ann Coulter, we'll have made progress towards reasoned discussion of political issues.
Now, do you have any actual contribution to the substance of this discussion, or would you rather continue to be a lower-vocabulary-level Shodan?ElvisL1ves, we'd prefer people not modify people's usernames in attributed quote tags. So, you know, don't.

[ElvisL1ves]

Okay, my apologies.

FTR, I was referring to a recent post by a different user in which that nickname was not in quotes. This seemed like a shortcut that made a useful point.

[carnivorousplant]

Slovik was executed for desertion under fire. That means he ran away during combat.
Actually, he told them all the way from the draft board to Europe that he wouldn't fight. He just walked away; I don't think he was being shot at, although it may very well meet the definition of "desertion under fire"

You think they're gonna put you in front of a firing squad for refusing to go over to Iraq and demanding to be discharged?

I posted, " they probably don't do this anymore."

Thanks for your time.
:)

[Merijeek]

Okay, my apologies.

FTR, I was referring to a recent post by a different user in which that nickname was not in quotes. This seemed like a shortcut that made a useful point.

You could at least call me by name!

<sniff>

-Joe

[ElvisL1ves]

Aw, there there, little Joey, you know Daddy loves you, even if he sometimes forgets the names of all of his kiddies.

[Weirddave]

When did "the right" drop Ann Coulter as a spokesperson, and does that "speak well" for you? Shee-it, man, you never used to be this comical. What happened?
I don't wish to intrude on the hissy fit you have going with Hamlet, but did you even actually read what John Mace wrote?

if we can only get "the right" to dump Ann Coulter, we'll have made progress towards reasoned discussion of political issues.

To break it down, John said "IF", as in, something that hasen't happened yet, "THEN" progress would be made towards reasoned political discussions. I would think this would be something you could agree with, why are you deriding it? Do you not want reasoned political discussion?

[RandMcnally]

Actually, he told them all the way from the draft board to Europe that he wouldn't fight. He just walked away; I don't think he was being shot at, although it may very well meet the definition of "desertion under fire"



The first time he deserted his unit was under fire.


"Sent to the front lines in France after the June 1944 invasion, Slovik first deserted the night of Aug. 25 when his rifle company came under heavy shelling."

[John Mace]

Sorry I missed all the fun. FTR, I don't equate CS and AC in terms of influence. CS was always a 15 minutes of fame type person while AC tends to hang around like the proverbial fart in a phone booth. However, CS was indeed the toast of the anti-war left (to be more specific than I was earlier) for much of last fall/winter. She was a headliner at the anti-war rallies, and made the rounds of the talk shows. She did have the good sense to realize that a Senate campaign against Feinstein would be ludicrous, so I'll give her that. I think Menocchio got it right, though-- she was largely a creation of the media last summer. Bored to tears in Crawford, she was the only game in town for them.

[carnivorousplant]

The first time he deserted his unit was under fire.

I stand corrected.

[Excalibre]

I took John Mace's comment to be that there are screwballs on both sides of the fence, and that both Sheehan and Coulter get way more press than they should. A valid, intelligent post; one that was an attempt to disparage the extremes in both parties and return to intelligent discussion of the issues.

Good thing you shat on it, with your usual aplomb. You continue to do a great disservice to those who agree with you and aren't complete assholes.
Pssst! He's a retard! There's no point in trying to reason with him.

I must admire your tenacity in trying, though.

[ElvisL1ves]

I would think this would be something you could agree with, why are you deriding it? Do you not want reasoned political discussion?One good way to start would be to drop the pretense that "the left" adopted Cindy Sheehan as a spokesman, or that "the right" adopted Ann Coulter, or that there is such a thing as a monolithic "left" or "right" hive mind at all. Reasoned political discussion does not involve the use of false equivalences at all. Therefore John's claim to desire it is somewhere between a partisan delusion and a lie.

But then I'm telling that to someone whose idea of reasoned political discussion is along the line of "Is Bush merely the greatest President ever or is he an actual saint?"

[Weirddave]

One good way to start would be to drop the pretense that "the left" adopted Cindy Sheehan as a spokesman, or that "the right" adopted Ann Coulter, or that there is such a thing as a monolithic "left" or "right" hive mind at all. Reasoned political discussion does not involve the use of false equivalences at all. Therefore John's claim to desire it is somewhere between a partisan delusion and a lie.

You really need to read Funk and Wagnels to discover the different things that putting something in quotes can mean. John used quotes around both the left and right to indicate precisely what you are saying in your post here.

[John Mace]

You really need to read Funk and Wagnels to discover the different things that putting something in quotes can mean. John used quotes around both the left and right to indicate precisely what you are saying in your post here.
Yep. "They" don't really exist, but it's a lot easier than listing a bunch of individual names and individual organizations. Since "they" often have common political beliefs and goals, it often looks like "they" coordinate things, even if "they" don't.

No one bats any eye around here if someone posts something about the religious right, even though "they" don't actually exist as a clearly defined group either.

[rjung]

Yeah, you hear about that nut James Dobson? Spends all his time writing religious newsletters that only he ever reads.

[ElvisL1ves]

:rolleyes: Yep. "They" don't really exist, but it's a lot easier than listing a bunch of individual names and individual organizations.Who nonetheless somehow get together to select and reject their spokesperson.

Remember the First Rule of Holes, fool.

[John Mace]

I wish somebody would tell me when there's a meeting where these things get decided.

:rolleyes: Who nonetheless somehow get together to select and reject their spokesperson.

Remember the First Rule of Holes, fool.
Actually, Elvis, I wasn't supposed to tell you this, but there are meetings. Ask one of your fellow lefties on this board why you're not invited to them. :)

[Hamlet]

Actually, Elvis, I wasn't supposed to tell you this, but there are meetings. Ask one of your fellow lefties on this board why you're not invited to them. :)We have a minimum IQ required to attend the meetings, so he's immediately rejected.

We gotta keep the Republicans out somehow, and IQ test works surprisingly well at that too. :p

[ElvisL1ves]

Maybe someday you'll both realize what it means to be responsible for your own statements.

But maybe not.

[wring]

I've not seen where either Hamlet or John Mace falls prey to that particular charge.

ironic, isn't it?