They ought to get on it. I think the procedure should involve at least five Senators or eight Representatives running up and down the aisle of their respective chambers pantsless, screaming “Clusterfuck! Clusterfuck!” The clusterfuck is officially declared after the Speaker or President Pro Tem slams the gavel down on his hand.
Oh, for crying out loud! What are the authorities supposed to do, just let everyone loot to their heart’s content?
Anarchy is always bad. I can’t recall a time in my life when it has been given free rein anywhere in this country…or anywhere in the world, for that matter, if the authorites had the power to stop it. To say that the attempt by the military to quell it and bring order to the area is an effort just an attempt to blame the poor for what happened is nothing but evidence of your own prejudice and its concomitant negative effect on your critical thinking skills (such as they may be to begin with).
That’s pretty much what I said.
Well, even though I think I’m being whoosed to a certain degree here, an apology may be in order. Are you saying then that you don’t agree with the point of view you mentioned and that you were just saying what was on some people’s minds? The way your post was worded, it sounded like their’s was a point of view you agreed with. If I was wrong in my interpretation of your point, I do apologize.
Actually, hadn’t thought about Ms. Sheehan for quite some time, until you brought her up. To advance your political advantage, seems to me.
Of course, possibility exists that you have no intention of furthering your political agenda by demeaning and ridiculing your opposition. I could be wrong.
But I’m a pessimist, and seldom wrong.
I figured you just misunderstood what I said. “According to a certain kind of thinking” isn’t something I’d say if I was explaining my own viewpoint. I guess we haven’t run across each other in any Katrina threads, but none of the above approaches what I think. I said a couple of times in the early days that saving people was the priority over looting, but that’s as close as it came (if that’s even close). The idea that New Orleans has been wrongly ‘invaded’ is just nuts.
She does seem to be becoming somewhat incoherent. It’s great that she is pitching in to help, but she’s not exactly the best spokeswoman for the problems there. And I certainly don’t agree with her about the troops.
Are you talking about politicians or just the other citizens who simply believe as she does and have seen her stand against the war as a way of also making their own opinions known?
Also, are troops being used to clean up New Orleans?
:yawn:
Who cares? This woman has no power. Some lady doesn’t want military troops in New Orleans? Who gives a fuck? Who’s getting hurt by it? How does it make Bush less of a chimp?
This OP is teh lame. This is like a Reeder thread in reverse. At least Reeder was bashing someone who had power.
Oh please. Michael Moore and Arianna Huffington are certainly not helping Mrs. Sheehan by giving her a place to expound on her delusions. I also doubt that they have somehow suddenly become neutral, so I think they are using her.
And I’m the one who is demeaning? No, they are demeaning her, and it’s frankly disgusting.
Well, there’s the disconnect right there. What does Katrina have to do with her stand on the war?
Exactly.
Well, while in general, it wouldn’t be relevant, her choice of words, and the person she’s applying it to, seem to be relevant, since it’s Bush. I mean, since she’s been hyped for her anti-war sentiment, the fact that she believes that Bush is “occupying” New Orleans could be used to cast doubt on the strength and source of her anti-war viewpoint.
So why is she bringing it up? As in “bring the troops home from occupied Iraq and New Orleans”? Iraq is occupied, New Orleans is not.
From your location tag, I gather you live in Minnesota. I’m pretty sure there is at least one military base there, maybe Air Force? Do you refer to your location as “occupied MN”?
In other words, what the heck is she talking about?
I have nothing to say about Cindy Sheehan, since she’s gone through shit I can’t possibly judge. Her anger and disgust towards the government is surely not a surprise, considering her loss.
Honestly I don’t know exactly what’s going on down in New Orleans. I do tend to listen to the people who are actually in the thick of things, though:
So which out-of-the-mainstream crackpot liberal wrote this? Michael Moore? Howard Zinn? Randi Rhodes? None of the above. It’s actually Brian Williams, of NBC. (Whom no one outside FreeRepublic would consider a lefty.)
Katrina has made some strange bedfellows.
I don’t think many people rested their anti-war sentiments on the authority of this one woman anyway. I certainly didn’t. I incidentally agreed with her on the war, but not because of anything she said or because I though losing a son gave her moral authority. I don’t really know where she’s coming from on New Orleans but since I never looked to her for guidance or leadership in the first place, I don’t see that her views on New Orleans have any relevance to people who oppose the war. The OP strikes me as an attempt to invalidate the opinions of those who oppose the Iraq war by painting one of them as a nutcase. Even if she IS a nutcase, so what? That proves nothing about the war.
I have no idea. Probably something similar to what’s described in choie’s cite.
My only point is that her views on New Orleans are unimportant. She has no power and discrediting Sheehan would not prove anything about Bush or Iraq.
And so forth.
In my not remotely humble opinion, Ms. Sheehan is not equipped to function as a spokesperson for any cause. She lacks crucial qualifications. It also appears to me that the stress of notoriety is taking its toll.
I interpret your OP as a strawman…you bewail the exploitation of Ms Sheehan in a frenzy of Pharisee piety. Oh, how vile, how low are these lefties to exploit this poor, poor woman. (Unlike The Leader, who focuses the spotlight on mothers who agree with him in his public speeches…)
Did I miss that? Did I miss your froth of righteous indignation when he did that, exploiting a Soldier’s Mom for political advantage?
Or does it only apply to Gold Star Moms for Terror?
There is no question that she’s nuttier than a Snickers bar. Yet, MM and Arianna have no problem exploiting her for their own purposes. Nice, ain’t it?
Just like your prseident has no problem exploiting 9/11 victims and Gold Star moms who agree with him.
What? How has President Bush, your president, exploited people who agree with him?