A Message from Cindy Sheehan

[cardcounter0]

[ QUOTE ]
while waving the bloody shirt of their dead son

[/ QUOTE ]

Could you post evidence or a link of this bloody shirt being waved?

[slamdunkpro]

[ QUOTE ]
So, in other words: if you seek media attention......

[/ QUOTE ]

See, this is the whole point. She was invited to the White House with a group of families who lost members in Iraq.

If she really wanted to say something or to meet with the President again, I’m sure there would be a contact route from her prior meeting. The President might have met with her again privately if she had gone that route.

Instead she pulls this tin foil hat media stunt of camping out in front of his ranch and demanding a meeting through the media. When in modern history has this actually worked? It’s like whistling at women walking past a construction site hoping to get laid. It isn’t going to happen that way. Anyone over the age of 14 knows this. Any rational person knows that calling out a famous person thought the media forces that person to ignore you lest it encourage similar behavior.

So what was her real agenda? Meet with President Bush? Not if she was rational. Create a media circus, get a book deal and 15 minutes of fame? More likely.

BTW there are some very good support groups run by military families for people that have lost members. I’ll bet she hasn’t looked for support from any of them.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
See, this is the whole point.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, your only problem with her is that she sought media attention? Where are your posts condeming Paris Hilton? Or Bill Frist, when he has a press conference to announce he's departing from President Bush and supporting stem cell research? Or what about criticizing any guest on The Tonight Show to plug their movie/TV show/whatever. Are you really that up in arms about media whoring?

Something in my gut tells me you're not that outraged over media whoring. Maybe, just maybe, you don't like what she has to say?

In other words, the fact that she's seeking out the media isn't the 'whole point', as you say. I think the substance (or lack thereof) of what she's saying may also have a part to play in her critics' motivation to attack her personally.

[ QUOTE ]
So, your only problem with her is that she sought media attention? Where are your posts condeming Paris Hilton?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hahahahaha.

I'm sure those posts would come if Paris Hilton was quoted all over the media and taken seriously by left-wing organizations using her thoughts on international conflicts and governmental roles in disaster relief as anti-administration propaganda.

"Where's you condemnation of Paris Hilton?" Hahahahahahaha. Gets funnier each time.

[slamdunkpro]

[ QUOTE ]
So, your only problem with her is that she sought media attention?

[/ QUOTE ]

No read the whole post, but since you asked.......

Hilton is famous for being famous (infamous?) so seeking media attention is her “business” Frist and other politicians knowingly seek media attention for exactly what it is - facetime. Sheehan, on the other hand claims that “she only wanted to meet with the President” – Crap. She wanted media attention, fame and fortune. She’s as big of a media whore as Paris Hilton – She just won’t admit it.

As I said in my last post (paraphrased here) – Her fall from “grieving mother” to “tin foil hat queen” is of her own doing.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure those posts would come if Paris Hilton was quoted all over the media and taken seriously by left-wing organizations using her thoughts on international conflicts and governmental roles in disaster relief as anti-administration propaganda.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, in truth, I don't think anyone holds Paris Hilton at fault for media whoring. Mostly because she's not saying anything people care much about. So, perhaps we can agree, then, that what media whores are saying is important, and not merely that they're seeking out the media?

I've bolded (in your post) what I think is the right's real beef with Cindy Sheehan.

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
So, in other words: if you seek media attention, you deserve venomous, personal attacks?

[/ QUOTE ]
No. Seeking media attention is fine. HOW you seek it matters. Her selfishness is why I have no pity for her. If she truly believes that she deserves another meeting with the President, then she is telling everyone who has lost a son that hasn't yet met with the Prez "[censored] you all, I'm more important." That's the attitude she's conveying and THAT is why she deserves what she gets.

[ QUOTE ]

Perhaps there's something about what she's saying, and not merely that she's looking for a medium to say it, that you feel merit attacks on her?

[/ QUOTE ]
What she says is mostly dispicable, but that's not the reason I think most attack her. It's the way she's going about it.

[BCPVP]

It's a figure of speech, cardcounter. Perhaps you should look it up?

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So, your only problem with her is that she sought media attention?

[/ QUOTE ]

No

[/ QUOTE ]

So, like I said: the fact that she's a media whore isn't the only point, or the whole point - you have a problem with what she's saying, too. You said her seeking media attention is the 'whole point' - I don't think it is.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
No. Seeking media attention is fine. HOW you seek it matters. Her selfishness is why I have no pity for her. If she truly believes that she deserves another meeting with the President, then she is telling everyone who has lost a son that hasn't yet met with the Prez "[censored] you all, I'm more important." That's the attitude she's conveying and THAT is why she deserves what she gets.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? That's why she deserves all the criticism she gets?

Strange, then, that most of the right-wing criticisms of her involve how 'crazy' she is to believe what she believes. I have a hard time buying the right thinks the substance of what she's saying is irrelevant, given how critical they are of her ideas (like pulling the troops out of NO).

I seem to remember slamdunkpro saying she needed a CAT scan for demanding the troops be pulled out of New Orleans - and you chimed in she 'needed a straight-jacket' - perhaps you were only referring to her attitude, but I doubt it.

I think you're hard-pressed to claim that the right is critical of her only because of her attitude/her media whoring. It seems abundantly clear that the right seems rather critical of what she believes, too - and that's playing a (not so small) role in the attacks against her. Look in this thread for how many have called her 'crazy' (including you, BCPVP) - was it because of her attitude? Or because you think her beliefs are ludicrous?