What I find contempable is that you and other people use the term "redneck" as someone to be looked down upon as being slow dull-witted, ignorant.

I did NOT use that term as someone to nbe looked down upon, OR as slow, dull-witted or ignorant. YOU just did EXACTLY what you're accusing me of, by stereotyping me based on a single use of the word.

IF you'll note...there is a limit to the amount of words one can use in one's title. The title must be concise, must capture the spirit of the article, and, in order to be READ, MUST draw in readers. This means it must be overly simplistic at times and must by necessity omit MUCH pertinent information. You KNOW this. You've been on JU long enough.

The reason MY hackles are raised was that first, you automatically lumped me in with the "they" that had already had this conversation in comment one of MY article, and second, and most importantly, because you HIJACKED a worthy article by splitting hairs over one SINGLE WORD in the title! I will say it again, drmiler, this was COMPLETELY beneath you!

I did NOT use that term as someone to nbe looked down upon, OR as slow, dull-witted or ignorant. YOU just did EXACTLY what you're accusing me of, by stereotyping me based on a single use of the word.

Now who's splitting hairs? Please try to tell me that you did not use the term in a disparging way. Go see dr guy's reply on your thread.

has anyone found out anything about the 'murderer' thing yet? There was a lot of back-and-forth about it, and I found a quote with her using the word. Are we disputing the quote, or was it not a 'swing and a miss'?

has anyone found out anything about the 'murderer' thing yet? There was a lot of back-and-forth about it, and I found a quote with her using the word. Are we disputing the quote, or was it not a 'swing and a miss'?

Depends on how you want to look at it. If you want an "actual" quote from her then it's most likely a swing and miss. If you believe the quote then it's dead on.

She knows what she is doing. She's smart, and she's strong. If anyone disagrees- they should think about how long she has kept this up and how much publicity she has gotten. I don't agree with what she is doing at all, but I can't belittle the effort she has put into this.

Good point Karma. I didn't belittle her at all until her "Mickey Mouse" comment. She is apparently loving the photo ops and media attention. I don't think she is a weak woman at all, I just think she wants to world to pity her... Sad that she mistakes that for respect.

Her right to protest will always be respected by me, he revelling in her new found celebrity will always earn my distain. The message she is trying to convey to the rest of the troops, their and their families will always disgust me. How she must be bolstering the terrorists in Iraq will always infuriate me.

I kinda doubt that the Quote supplied by baker was from a valid news source. (no offense Baker, i just doubt a lot of things that i hear from the far left, as much as i doubt things from the far right)

On my way home from dinner tonight i drove by City Hall, and smack dab through our local Cindy rally. I honked my support!

If we are still in search of the elusive valid source of Miss Cindy accusing Prs. Bush of murdering her son, here's one straight from Miss Cindy's words...

And it looks like my son's murder and the murder of almost 1,800 other Americans and tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis whose only crime is that they were born in Iraq at the wrong time, are dead -- are dead for the agenda of the neo-con war machine.http://sacramentofordemocracy.org/?q=node/view/3078

Of course it is on a Left Wing website, so take that for what you will, but the quote itelf is from her.

If we are still in search of the elusive valid source of Miss Cindy accusing Prs. Bush of murdering her son, here's one straight from Miss Cindy's words...

And it looks like my son's murder and the murder of almost 1,800 other Americans and tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis whose only crime is that they were born in Iraq at the wrong time, are dead -- are dead for the agenda of the neo-con war machine.http://sacramentofordemocracy.org/?q=node/view/3078

Of course it is on a Left Wing website, so take that for what you will, but the quote itelf is from her.

no. I think Dr. guy read it like I did, considering his comment of: "You just stepped into it BIGTIME."

karma, did you read comment#39 in its entirety? i really have a difficult time--considering the litany of quoted sentiments preceding my statement, not to mention my suggestion all she needed was a strong husband to get her some paxil--imagining anyone other than drguy being confused as to my true feelings about ms sheehan.

to be sure, i've been wrong before (as often as not for overestimating the public). but even if this is one of those occasions, my expasperation with all those who were providing excuses for ms sheehan's actions (which as you can see from the quotes i provided fall into three categories: weak, stupid, crazy) surely shoulda been obvious by the end of the next paragraph.

, I just think she wants to world to pity her

why is is so difficult for yall to consider she is motivated by her anger and grief to make the people of this country see the war through her eyes? have you never been so outraged by some issue you've felt yourself compelled to do something to correct it? isn't it possible she could care less how people see her or think of her as long as she causes them to think about the reasons her son and other american's sons, brothers, daughters, sisters, moms, dada, friends and loved ones are dying in iraq?

i guess it's easier for you to deal with her by simply dismissing her as misguided or making excuses for her in an attempt to demean her and devalue her message even as you nobly claim to support her right to deliver it.

No Kingbee, I wouldn't find it hard to accept her actions in the manner you suggest. In fact, I did at first. However, her own words tell a completely different story. She considers U.S. Servicemembers victims of Prs. Bush; nothing but brainwashed kids who can't think for ourselves.

You made a joke about how people see Cindy Sheehan as "Stupid, Weak or Crazy"... well, if she considers us nothing but brainwashed fools, does she see us any better?

"i guess it's easier for you to deal with her by simply dismissing her as misguided or making excuses for her in an attempt to demean her and devalue her message even as you nobly claim to support her right to deliver it."

No, king, with respect. It is hard to deal with because it is the same "blood for oil", we're Israeli puppet junk that we have been arguing about for years now. What if one of us at JU said this:

"Yes, he was killed for lies and for a PNAC Neo-Con agenda to benefit Israel."

Come on. I wouldn't expect you to sit by silently if pro-Bush parents said stuff you disagreed with. I can't imagine her grief, but that grief doesn't lend any more legitimacy to her conspiracy theories than the grief of pro-Bush parents. There are people who stand and oppose her that lost kids. Do Sheehan's reporters lend THEM any more credence?

I believe that she is sincere, and I can't imagine her grief. I don't think for a moment, though, that she is really any more schooled in politics or has any more "inside" information than the people who lost family and still support Bush.

I agree with baker on his last point. I think she is going on a gut instinct rather than any "inside" info.

You know...When i wrote this article, i had no idea that it would carry on this long. In fact It's the most commented article in my time on JU. I guess you never know which article will hit the hot button. Live and learn.

I would like to thank all of you for keeping it within the lines of civility.

She considers U.S. Servicemembers victims of Prs. Bush; nothing but brainwashed kids who can't think for ourselves.

i really should address this after i do bakerstreet's comments but you're first in line.

i just finished reading the letter that is fast becoming the issue or non-issue or whatever it's gonna be. the impression i took from it differs considerably from your take (assuming it's the basis for this claim).

from what i can tell, she feels--as do i--the administration was in such a rush to invade iraq it put a great many of our military personnel at risk. furthermore, it wasn't a screwup in just one area. generals who projected two or three times as many troops were needed found themselves being shoved out the door. troops were shipped into combat without armor or with insufficient armor. expert information was disregarded in favor of disinfomration from people like chalabi and 'curveball'.

you may not choose to see it that way (based on your experience and your perception of the administration). but to write her off as a tool of moveon.org (especially since, even as i type this, a swiftboatdeadsoldier'smoms group is producing attack commercials for chrissake) does her an injustice.

"Yes, he was killed for lies and for a PNAC Neo-Con agenda to benefit Israel."

there's two ways that can be read or understood.

let's face facts. the pnac was hardly shy as far as its advocacy of regime change for iraq. it's also true that pnac and bush himself both claimed the road to jerusalem ran through baghdad (irony of ironies, it may ultimately turn out they werent very good at reading maps and the exact opposite is the case). unfortunately i can't get to the wall st journal's archives for free (and i'm sorry but i'm not about to pay for the privilege). perhaps you can or know someone who can. in that case, a search for the friday march 14, 2003 edition will locate a frontpage (far left column) story in which a number of people close to bush (as well as bush himself) go on at great length about how regime change in iraq would benefit israel and therefore benefit the us.

the article--which was very bush-friendly--was clearly intended to reinforce the idea that once iraq was transfromed, it would provide the platform from which a new israel/american friendly middle east could be constructed.

there is also significant documentation of plan b teams, consisting of pnac-friendly civilians appointees operating semi-autonomously in the pentagon during the buildup to the war.

i don't see it as a zionist or jewish conspiracy. but i do believe that too many pnac members idealized israel to the point of losing their objectivity. that losss of objectivity very likely was an important factor in the way the invasion of iraq was planned and scheduled.