About Me

28-year-old author and blogger from Boston, MA.

Recent Posts

Search




Archives


« Ed Cox Interview | Home | What Is Support? »

What A Phony

By Matt Margolis | August 31, 2005

Cindy says she’s glad Bush never met with her:

Cindy Sheehan’s comments came as war protesters packed up their campsite near the ranch and prepared to leave Tuesday for a three-week bus tour.

“I look back on it, and I am very, very, very grateful he did not meet with me, because we have sparked and galvanized the peace movement,” Sheehan told The Associated Press. “If he’d met with me, then I would have gone home, and it would have ended there.”

No Cindy, you knew President Bush wasn’t going to meet with you. I knew that, everyone knew… You’re just another radical antiwar liberal who hates Bush and has aligned herself with the likes of Michael Moore, MoveOn.org and Code Pink. Once you teamed up with them you knew he wasn’t going to waste his time on you. You can stop pretending that your performance for the cameras in Crawford had anything to do with meeting Bush, or even about your son, Casey.

You’re a phony Cindy, that’s why you didn’t change people’s minds… Now, no one will remember Casey Sheehan for his sacrifice for his country… instead, he’ll be remembered as the son of a raging liberal who exploited his death, called his killers “freedom fighters” and managed to blame everything on George W. Bush and Israel. You put a stain on the legacy of your own son all for your own personal gain. You’ll have to live with that for the rest of your life.

UPDATE: More at Blogs For Bush from guest blogger Sister Toldjah.

del.icio.us Reddit Digg Facebook Technorati Google StumbleUpon Yahoo Mister Wong Newsvine

Topics: General |

Related Posts:

11 Responses to “What A Phony”

  1. qt Says:
    August 31st, 2005 at 2:32 pm

    I don’t think Cindy was trying to change people’s minds. She just wanted to get the people who are already against the war to start speaking up. And she’s been pretty successful with that…

    Most presidents would have met with her. It’s actually smarter. They just would’ve listened to her vent for 1/2 hr. or so, nod, smile and say, “I understand.” Then, Cindy would’ve been on her way, and all the bad publicity for the president wouldn’t have occurred. But once it became a news story, Bush had no choice. He had to ignore her or create more controversy for himself.

  2. Kahn Says:
    August 31st, 2005 at 5:00 pm

    I’m sure that Cindy and Casey disagreed over this BEFORE he re-enlisted AFTER Iraq had started. I’m guessing that since he was already in - he knew what he was re-joining into.

    The rest of her family is horrified at her and has all but alienated her. Her husband is divorcing her. I think she was already a wacko lefty and the death of her son put her over the edge.

  3. Kahn Says:
    August 31st, 2005 at 5:10 pm

    http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=17266_How_Phony_Can_They_Get&only

    excellent

  4. Matt Margolis Says:
    August 31st, 2005 at 10:02 pm

    Most presidents would not have met with her QT. it’s silly to even pretend that any others would.

  5. qt Says:
    August 31st, 2005 at 10:17 pm

    Why is it silly? Even Bush meets with “civilians” all the time. The difference is that he’s one of the only presidents ever to only meet with his supporters.

    I can guarantee you that this protest would’ve never happened under Clinton. He’s too much of a PR person. He would’ve met with her, given her a look of “I understand,” and that would’ve been that! I heard a political analyst person on the news say that it would’ve never happened under Reagan either. He would’ve charmed her with his understanding and sent her on her way. Bush is the only president who’s scared of opinions that differ from his.

    By the way, I’m not saying that I’m agreeing with Sheehan. I think it’s a mistake to bring the troops home now. But I also think it was a mistake for the president to ignore his constituents.

  6. Matt Margolis Says:
    August 31st, 2005 at 10:29 pm

    No… you see, no President would oblige any civilian that just demands to be heard. especially one who is aligned with groups set to destroy him. would Clinton have met with someone who was riding on a bus called the impeachment tour? no. i wouldn’t expect him to. Why woudl he want empower them with the gesture of saying “okay, you win, i’ll give you 10 minutes of my time.”

    the chances are it won’t happen. and still QT, when it comes down to it, clinton didn’t have anyone willing to waste their time to do that, and no other president has either, and to theorize what past presidents would do is useless.

  7. qt Says:
    August 31st, 2005 at 10:46 pm

    The trick is to meet with them before they organize such groups and tours.

  8. Matt Margolis Says:
    August 31st, 2005 at 11:18 pm

    qt, I think you know very well that it would be near impossible for any civilian to just knock on the door of the White House and say “excuse me, I’m a concerned citizen, can I have a few words with the President?”

  9. Kahn Says:
    August 31st, 2005 at 11:21 pm

    Clinton never met with the NRA.

    And President Bush DID meet Cindy S. At that time she responded to his genuine concern positively. Then - well - she went crazy.

  10. Almiranta Says:
    September 4th, 2005 at 6:59 pm

    First of all, we need to get over the impression that Casey Sheehan’s death drove his mother to her current state of mind. I think it’s clear that she was a nut before he enlisted, he was a nut while he was deployed, and she is a nut today. I have a mental image of a stack of U.S. military coffins, with Casey’s at the top, and above it a big microphone and some TV cameras, and Cindy climbing over the bodies of the honorably dead to reach her goal of personal fame.

    But what I want to know is, why are all these people getting on buses to do a three week bus tour? Why aren’t those buses taking them to Houston, where they could acutally do some good? Or to New Orleans, or to Gulfport? Or home to their communities, where they could utilize their organizational skills to sponsor homeless families and get them relocated and settled in those communities? Instead of paying caterers and motels and transportation companies to keep this farce going, why aren’t they directing those funds, and energies, where they are really needed?

    Gee, d’ya think hypocrisy might be an answer?

  11. Kahn Says:
    September 4th, 2005 at 7:20 pm

    Almiranta - Excellent post. Well said.