Sorry, Patty Sheehan, but the press has no use for your anti-Iraq/Afghanistan war protesting any more. That's so 2005.

And I'm waiting for the ultimate irony of Fox News playing up this protest this time. You almost feel it has to happen, don't you? Nothing like having the shoe on the other foot.

While I don't necessarily agree with Sheehan, I think I have to admire her for her desire to stand for her convictions, no matter what. And she certainly has the right to publicly voice her grievances. I support anyone's right to protest peacefully, whether I agree or not.

Cindy, not Patty. But yes, between Sheehan and Gibson, at least Cindy is sticking to her convictions, Gibson...not so much. Bet there would be coverage if Cindy were picketing President McCain or VP Palin.

(08-22-2009 02:41 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Cindy, not Patty. But yes, between Sheehan and Gibson, at least Cindy is sticking to her convictions, Gibson...not so much.

I disagree. Gibson's convictions are perfectly clear -- to discredit Republicans and to bolster Democrats -- and he is sticking to them. Remember the proper vocabulary: opposing a Republic administration = "activism", "free speech" etc.; opposing a Democratic administration = "partisanship", "fear-mongering", "wanting the President to fail" and so on. You see, the key ideological point for the enlightened isn't about opposing the president on account of the war, but rather feigning opposition to the war on account of the president.

By the standards of ABC (and CBS and NBC and MSNBC and NYT), it is Sheehan who is the hypocrite. She somehow opposes the war even if that means opposing the Great One -- thus missing the whole point.

(08-22-2009 03:56 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(08-22-2009 02:41 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Cindy, not Patty. But yes, between Sheehan and Gibson, at least Cindy is sticking to her convictions, Gibson...not so much.

I disagree. Gibson's convictions are perfectly clear -- to discredit Republicans and to bolster Democrats -- and he is sticking to them. Remember the proper vocabulary: opposing a Republic administration = "activism", "free speech" etc.; opposing a Democratic administration = "partisanship", "fear-mongering", "wanting the President to fail" and so on. You see, the key ideological point for the enlightened isn't about opposing the president on account of the war, but rather feigning opposition to the war on account of the president.

By the standards of ABC (and CBS and NBC and MSNBC and NYT), it is Sheehan who is the hypocrite. She somehow opposes the war even if that means opposing the Great One -- thus missing the whole point.

Spot on.