Should Bush meet with Cindy Sheehan?

mmarsh said:
5.56

We are probably going to disagree. But before we do I wanted to thank you for the tip concerning the Colt. I haven't picked it up yet but when I will I do as you suggested.

There is no doubt the left is using Sheehan to discredit Bush. We shouldnt be too scandalized too much. The far right would do exactly the samething given the opportunity.

The thing is public opinion is becoming pretty strong against the war and I think Bush is making a mistake by not dealing with this situation. Every day we see new causilities, Bush doesnt want to look heartless or his already low popularity may never recover. Even if that means taking a small sting of embarressment. My advice for Bush:

Swallow pride, Meet the lady, let them go home. Situation is forgotten about in a month.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm gald that the info I gave you will help you. And yes, we are going to disagree. But that's life. I'm a Evil Right wing consertive and you're a left wing liberial. We go together as much as a Chevy and a Ford does.

She's being played by the left and what she's doing is wrong. It's hurting our boys overseas. Everytime she and someone like her opens her mouth. The enemy gets more recuits to blow themselves up. SHE'S GOTTA STOP FOR THE SAKE OF OUR GIs! And so does the rest of these scumbag liberials. Support our troops and lets get this war over with.
 
By the way, hear that Cindy left Waco today? I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact I'm moving back down there tomorrow for the start of the school year. :p

By the way, Waco is pretty cool when bush is at his Crawford ranch. If you search the skies hard enough you can usually see a UAV circling around and the Marine 1/2 helos are pretty inspiring to see flying overhead against the backdrop of a clear blue sky.
 
mmarsh said:
Whispering Death

Here is the link. For the record I saw Robertson repeat the same allegation on Wolf Blitzer so I doubt its a misunderstanding...
The White House's denied it of course.

I disagree with Evangelist Christian views and Mr Robertson in particular. Robertson has said pretty awlful things in the past. (I much prefer Billy Graham). But I have never known Robertson to be a liar (at least not yet). Bush and Co on the other hand have the opposite problem. They have difficulty telling the truth...
Click to expand...

For the love of God, don't take anything that Pat Robertson says as the gospel truth (or even truth)! If you think that Bush has issues with the truth (which I don't agree with btw) you haven't seen anything yet compared to Robertson. I have seen a couple of articles that he is under and on-going investigation for tax fraud or somesuch. In any event - don't take his work for it - many evangelical Christians don't.

In regards to the topic of this thread - should Bush meet with this mother? Absolutely not. That would be pure foolishness and would dis-honor those others that have died.
 
This is going to be a lot of short replies to all, hope I remember everybody...

5.56

Thats the great about this country. You are conservative, I tend to be more liberal-moderate but we are all Americans. That counts above everything else.

I really dont think Sheehan is hurting our troops, I dont think they really care what she thinks. I know I wouldn't if I were over there. Its only 1 person and a small group of followers. Nor do I think her protest is aiding the enemy, many of those people cannot even read Arabic let alone English and even if they could do you think it would really make a difference? If Sheehan stopped tommorow, would that stop the war? Of course not. It wouldnt make the slightest differnence.

DTOP

Im not talking about free speech, nor im am I saying that nobody has the right to publically disagree with her. What I am saying is personal attacks, the airing of dirty laundry, commenting (falsely) on her married life, family life, etc is a pretty nasty way to silence someone. You never hear pundits on the right say 'well she wrong because ABC, its mostly been her family has disowned her, her husband is divorcing her, her story is inconsistent, she backed by the left, she was kicked out of the girl scouts for selling bad cookies, etc etc. Its always personal attacks meant to discredit her, not to proove her opinions incorrect. These are not comments made by individals either, these attacks are made by well organized, well funded groups whose business is muckraking. Those attacks maybe tolerated among politicans (but are prone to backfirings), but its another thing to do it to a person whose merely stating a popluar view. I find it disgusting, even if I disagreed with her cause. Even if the left did it to you my opinion wouldnt change.

Claymore

I take your point about Robertson. I have to admit after the 'liberals, gays, and pro-choicers were responisable for 9/11' comment, I just shut him out. Its a disgrace that such an odious person be a so called man of God. The man is a charleton.


For the record, because I forget who mentioned it.

I dont support an immediate pullout either, because all the would do would do is start a civil war or worse become another Afganistan or Iran. But we cannot be in another Vietnam scenario where the war drags on endless without an exit stategy. We need to tell the Iraqis that they have (somewhere between 12-24 months) to get their government set up and their Army divisions trained. After that, we are gone.
 
5.56X45mm said:
mmarsh said:
5.56

We are probably going to disagree. But before we do I wanted to thank you for the tip concerning the Colt. I haven't picked it up yet but when I will I do as you suggested.

There is no doubt the left is using Sheehan to discredit Bush. We shouldnt be too scandalized too much. The far right would do exactly the samething given the opportunity.

The thing is public opinion is becoming pretty strong against the war and I think Bush is making a mistake by not dealing with this situation. Every day we see new causilities, Bush doesnt want to look heartless or his already low popularity may never recover. Even if that means taking a small sting of embarressment. My advice for Bush:

Swallow pride, Meet the lady, let them go home. Situation is forgotten about in a month.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm gald that the info I gave you will help you. And yes, we are going to disagree. But that's life. I'm a Evil Right wing consertive and you're a left wing liberial. We go together as much as a Chevy and a Ford does.

She's being played by the left and what she's doing is wrong. It's hurting our boys overseas. Everytime she and someone like her opens her mouth. The enemy gets more recuits to blow themselves up. SHE'S GOTTA STOP FOR THE SAKE OF OUR GIs! And so does the rest of these scumbag liberials. Support our troops and lets get this war over with.
Click to expand...

Well we do live an a democracy old boy. That's what we are trying to create in Iraq.

Cindy Sheehan lost her son. She is not attacking the GI's just Bush.
 
Lord Londonderry is correct.

If Sheehan were protesting against the GI's like what happened in Vietnam (calling soldier babykiller, throwing blood on them, jeering them at the airport etc..) then I would agree with all you people.

But she isnt. She is protesting against Bush and only against Bush. The only part I disagee with Sheehan is that she want to bring the troops home now. Unfortunatly that would make the situation even worse than before Saddam was in power.
 
That's exactly the point mmarsh. The soldiers' wage war, she's protests what they're doing, she protests their commander in chief. How can anyone say they're supporting soldiers while doing that? It's illogical.
The left does not want the war to end, they don't want the war to go well because that would make their opponents look good. They want the war to continue so they can use it for their own purposes during subsequent election. They are hypocrites. It's utter nonsense and Sheehan is their poster child du jour.
Give it about a month and the media's talking heads will find other things to talk about. August is always a slow news month, right now they're talking out of their alternate orifices.
 
DTop said:
That's exactly the point mmarsh. The soldiers' wage war, she's protests what they're doing, she protests their commander in chief. How can anyone say they're supporting soldiers while doing that? It's illogical.
The left does not want the war to end, they don't want the war to go well because that would make their opponents look good. They want the war to continue so they can use it for their own purposes during subse quent election. They are hypocrites. It's utter nonsense and Sheehan is their poster child du jour.
Give it about a month and the media's talking heads will find other things to talk about. August is always a slow news month, right now they're talking out of their alternate orifices.
Click to expand...

Then by that logic ANY type of criticism against the president would be considered unpatroitic. For example, if you protest Bush's economic policies that would by your definition be showing support for a weak US economy. That sounds alot like a dictatorship. Nor is this the first time a US war has been protested from within the country. The American Revolution, Civil War, WWI, Vietnam these were all conflicts that at one point or another had vocal opposition or peace movments. Why is this one any different?

You forget that (aside from a few cowardly, self-serving, congressmen)
the left never wanted this war. Did you expect that they would be silent after being proven correct? Instead of being angry at the left for being correct about Iraq (which is what this is really about), You should be angry at the people who took us into this godawful situation. Is the Left using Iraq for there own devices? Of course they are. That's politics. The right tried doing the same thing to Clinton during the Kosovo war. And lets not try and pretend that the Right didnt use Iraq for its political advantage. You call the left hypocrites, but you need to take a look in the mirror. Every tactic that the Left has done the right as done exactly the same.
 
nope!

Bush shouldnt meet with any left wing waco whose agenda is to bash Bush and the troops and war on terror!
 
Sorry mmarsh, that's pretty feeble extrapolation :roll: So much rhetoric so little logic :)
 
when the troops want the war to end, and in face of riseing re-enlistment rates and recruting goals up by 200 percent. Thats not happening any time soon. If the people actaully fighting want to stay let'em stay.
 
DTop said:
Sorry mmarsh, that's pretty feeble extrapolation :roll: So much rhetoric so little logic :)
Click to expand...

If its so feeble-minded why don't you try disproving me instead of trying to dismiss me? Its not my extrapolation thats bothering you, its the fact that you really dont have an effective counter-arguement, because if you had you would have used it.

Responses like yours tells me one thing, you have no arguement.

Anyway,
Its late, I wish you all a good night...
 
hes pointing out that you turn what should be a one sentence answer into a page and a half.
 
mmarsh said:
DTop said:
Sorry mmarsh, that's pretty feeble extrapolation :roll: So much rhetoric so little logic :)
Click to expand...

If its so feeble-minded why don't you try disproving me instead of trying to dismiss me? Its not my extrapolation thats bothering you, its the fact that you really dont have an effective counter-arguement, because if you had you would have used it.

Responses like yours tells me one thing, you have no arguement.

Anyway,
Its late, I wish you all a good night...
Click to expand...

What it ought to tell you is that your left wing rhetoric is quite tiresome. It has no substance, ergo nothing to dispute. Sorry mmarsh, in my opinion it's utter nonsense.
 
DTop

Now your just repeating yourself...

Sorry, cowardly cheapshot responses like this do not impress me, nor will you get a flamewar by being rude to me either. As I said before, your're just upset that your arguement was so easily torpedoed.

You asked for substance but you never answered my simple question about why this war is different from all the others. Whose lacking substance now?

If the best you can do now is just to be rude, then that means you just forfeited the debate. Thank You, I win.

I enjoyed the discussion (up until you threw a tantrum) but I see that you have nothing else of value to add. So this discussion is now over.

Best regards
 
mmarsh, please don't be so pretentious as to try to tell me what I am thinking. I will not address any of "questions" that are off topic to this thread. Once again, the topic is Cyndi Sheehan and the President. If you wish to discuss anything else, start another thread. It's really quite simple. There was nothing rude about what I said to you. If you care to discuss this any furthur, PM me. Otherwise please just stay on topic, thank you.
 
Its a shame that her son got killed but that is the way in the Army. If he was unhappy with the idea of fighting for his country then why had recently signed on for another spell knowing full well that he would be going back to Iraq. I can understand a mother heart break at losing a son, but she should remember that he died doing what HE believed in.
 
Might I add that her son was old enough to decide for his life?

He chose what he wanted to do and her mom cant speak for him.

Btw, if Casey was a coward like these anti-war people, he wouldnt go to Iraq to fight. He could have escaped to Canada just like other cowards.

He was a real hero and his mom shouldnt do this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top