I
have a previous diary which included some comments from moderates on Cindy that I found interesting. I figured it might be a good idea to follow that up with a diary about the
good things they have to say.
First of all, as I mentioned in the other diary, a lot of those who questioned Cindy herself support the cause. They brought up the usual (her divorce, her first meeting with Bush, etc.) but would often follow it by saying that they were against the Iraq War also.
Again, I will let them speak for themselves.
(sarcastically):
He's on vacation...! He only goes on like, what? eight of these a year???
He should have his peace to remove stumps and bass fish without having to be burdened with some dead soldier's mother.
(The next one explains why politicians in D.C. seem so out of touch. They are apparently listening to poles. Heh.):
It might be interesting to see these statements in 6 months or a year from now. I protested against the Vietnam war and I know early on people didn't think anyone was listening. Of course they were liberals in office and they listen to poles after a while. But I heard on the news last night that some people in Washington think if this continues and builds into more protests in could have an effect on the people making desisions in DC. It is always far easier to determine what happened after the fact than while things are yet undecided. Once we killed 4 in Ohio it certainly increased protesting. Maybe that will happen again. Who knows?
i'd have to say that my ideology is pretty in line with ms. sheehan's
I do believe the president should meet with her, but as for whether or not he would listen to what she has to say, I don't think it's something we can hope for. There's a difference between listening / comprehending and taking words to heart. The Pres. may listen, maybe even sympathize, but since his view of things runs counter to her's and both of them seem stubbornly set in their views, I doubt the meeting would do much good.
I support the troops, as they are just doing what they are trained to do. I do not support many of our government's decisions regarding the war....
I am a fence sitter, I suppose. But I know I am not alone on that.
and later, the same person as directly above says:
for the record, I thought this war was a mistake from day one (a stand that was widely unpopular in the first days)...but to have the troops just pulled out immediately would be detrimental to the innocent people of Iraq, and nevermind the world opinion of the US...it would be a political suicide to immediately pull out of Iraq.
there is no perfect solution to the Iraq situation...all we can do is hope and pray someone figures out the best solution, and does something about it...and fast.
Cindy Sheehan is acting out of mourning as far as I can tell. Losing a loved one is a traumatic experience and losing them in a way that you feel is unjustified (not that most would ever feel death justified) is even worse. We all hear the media's views on this war. We hear each other's views as well (regardless as to whether we listen or not). Of course people are unhappy with this war, people are dying, people are scared, people are uncertain of the world. Of course we take it out on Bush, a president who came to his first term amidst controversy and who has been the bane of liberal's existence since he showed up. I don't think anyone likes war, and we naturally look for a scapegoat when things go wrong. Do I think Bush is right in not meeting with her? Actually yeah he probably is unfortunately how unfair would that be to other greiving mothers in the country?? Do I support Bush? NO! Do I support the war? No. But in this case I can at the very least see the rationale behind the action.
I simply, very simpy, see a mother (Cindy Sheehan) using grief as an impetus.
I will also mention that I have a son, aged 12. I will respect his decisions in life... but will allow no one, nothing, to negate the bond that occured upon conception.
I simply, very simply, see a mother (Cindy Sheehan) using grief as an impetus.
One of the people who doesn't seem to agree with Cindy even posted this (so maybe civil discourse isn't dead in this country):
The Cindy Sheehan Ad
August 24th, 2005 @ 5:00pm
In recent days many of you, our viewers and listeners, have phoned or emailed to voice your objection to an ad that aired on Channel Five over the weekend. The spot featured Cindy Sheehan, whose soldier son died in Iraq and who has been holding vigil outside President Bush's Texas ranch.
While KSL may disagree with the tactics used by Ms Sheehan, it is important to remember that we are stewards, not owners, of the airwaves we operate in the public interest. We have given substantial airtime to President Bush and others to express the reasons why our nation is at war. When someone holding an opposing opinion, although poorly expressed and deeply offensive, asks to purchase airtime to express that opinion, there seems to be no justification for saying, "no."
Our democracy, after all, is premised on debate over differing points of view.
Please remember KSL is licensed to use the public airwaves on the condition of service to our community - not the imposition of a particular political point-of-view or agenda.
In our view, the deaths of U.S. soldiers, including Ms Sheehan's son, have meaning only to the extent that the freedoms and responsibilities of our democratic society are extended to all - even to a woman who has chosen to publicly express her grief as anger towards the elected President of our country.
I think we have a lot more people who agree with us on the most basic level than we think.