Is this a crippling blow to the anti-war movement, or the overdue departure of distraction?
Neither?
Cindy Sheehan is a good person, who tried to do the right thing. But, she has never been appreciated and I think, for her sake, it is best she go home and be with her family. Hopefully she can find solace there. America has no real desire for peace, sadly, and the “peace movement” is mainly a joke. Anyone who really cares, like she did, will be chewed up and spit out. It’s sad, and I wish it wasn’t so. I wish her the best.
An indication that when it comes to admitting a cause is hopeless, George Bush is less willing to face reality than Cindy Sheehan?
I can’t say it any better than miss_elizabeth. Sheehan worked very hard, but she was out there alone, and really couldn’t get any traction. But I, at least, thought her lone voice worth hearing.
These days, I think most people are aware that this war was idiotic. I can’t credit Sheehan with this awareness, but I can credit her with being out of the gate early.
The dems’ cave-in over war funding broke her spirit, I guess. But it’s pretty obvious that there’s no getting through the Bush administration’s wall of intransigence, and that the only thing to do is wait the turkeys out and hope the next administration isn’t another gang of fuckwits.
There’s a lot more to being a “leader” that just believing in a cause whole-heartedly. Sheehan isn’t particularly articulate or bright. I supported her when all she wanted was to ask Pres. Bush “What did my son die for?” She should have stuck with that message, but she drifted off into a hundred other things and lost what little support she had.
I think it is a good thing, both for her and for the peace movement.
Except for the 70% or so of us who do?
I lean closer to the second answer, but she’s not even much of a distraction at this point. Whether she was good or bad for the anti-war movement, her popularity (even as a target for people who supported the war) waned some time ago. The war itself is less popular than ever, although there isn’t much of a movement per se, so I don’t think anybody is being crippled by her announcement.
70 percent of the public may be against the Iraq war, but miss elizabeth was using the term more broadly.
Since I was unaware that Sheehan was still active in some sense that the rest of us aren’t, I don’t think she’ll be missed.
It was a gutsy thing she did, two summers ago, standing out there to try to ask Bush what exactly her son died for. But after Katrina, people could see the clusterfuck right here at home, and Bush pretty much overnight lost the benefit of the doubt with most people on whether Iraq was one too. Sheehan could’ve folded her tent anytime after that, and it wouldn’t have made a difference.
My opinion exactly. Her own ego and self-importance took over and bled her dry. Had she remained in her own tent and continued her single protest, she would have remained strong and not lost credibility. That alone would have kept her in the news and decimated any game-playing by the Administration (and the media) to discredit her.
Pretty much my reaction. When I heard this on the news this morning, my first reaction was “Who?” followed by “Oh, yeah, her…” She never made much of an impression on me anyway.
Apparently, we’re the irrelevant 70%.
I find it funny, this reappraisal of Ms. Sheehan. A while back on these very boards she was hailed as the second coming of Rosa Parks.
Of course she was a distraction. Someone who supports Lynne Stewart and Hugo Chavez isn’t interested in building a broad-based antiwar effort. They’re interested in leftist activism, primarily, and her spectacular flameout was the proof of that.
I have never wished her ill. But I was also never under any illusions about what she actually wanted. Since I surely do not want the same things she does, I hope she finds solace in some other way, someday.
Nice.
At first Sheehan was a spokesperson for all the grieving families who’d lost sons and daughters in the war and she had my sympathy. As the months wore on, she became more strident and less sympathetic, in large part because she allowed herself to be used as a pawn by people who had their own agendas, none of which were to help her heal. The final straw was the recent “hunger strike” which just struck me as pathetic and ill advised.
Sheehan very publicly lived through the anger phase of grief. I hope her announcement is an indication that she’s begin to heal and can move into the acceptance phase, in private. Sadly, she is not the first mother to have ever lost a child in a senseless war. I hope she can find support group from people who will help her and not just use her personal tragedy as a springboard for their politics. I also hope her family can repair the damage that was wrought not only by their son’s death, but also from her actions the last few years, which alienated her from the family that remained.
Nicely done, nicely done!
I belive she fought a good fight.
But the blame does not rest solely on George W.
As the quote below points out.
:mad:
She was bankrolled for political purposes and after the election she was dumped because it was not a priority to continue her cause.
Who could have seen that coming.
Because why? Iraq is no longer a controversial political issue?
Is it?
The Democrats seem to be allowing the war to continue and aren’t really pulling out all, or even many of, the stops to prevent it from continuing. Ten more American soldiers dead yesterday, bringing the May total to 117, and Christ knows how many Iraqis dead, but from my side of the border I see very little active interest in the USA in stopping the war. There’s not a lot of protest going on, the opposition party isn’t working very hard to stop it, and no Presidential candidates have emerged who have said “I shall bring the troops home at once when I become President.” Where’s the controversy?
Because she bit that hand that fed her. When the party didn’t live up to her mission statement she renounced it.
It was sad to watch. She has nothing left because of it.