|
« Random IM Conversation with Goldstein, Eleven | Main | Question: What's Wrong With Michelle Malkin's Post on RU-486? » August 16, 2005
Must Reads
Posted by Bill Hitchens on Sheehan. Catalano on Sheehan. A distracted reader might smell some conflict between those two messages, but he'd be mistaken. Posted by Bill at August 16, 2005 09:22 AM | TrackBack (0) CommentsI have to respectfully disagree with Michele to some extent, but I want to tread carefully, here. Sheehan's made some claims to the effect that her family -- other people touched by the loss of Casey -- supports what she's doing; that, in effect, she's doing what she's doing not just in her own name, not just in Casey's name, but also in theirs. To the extent that revelations about disagreements within the family demonstrate these claims to be false, they are relevant. But only to that extent. Gloating over the woman's divorce is just ghastly. Posted by: Brett at August 16, 2005 03:11 PM A fair distinction. Posted by: Bill from INDC at August 16, 2005 03:27 PM "Sinister Piffle" would be an excellent name for a rock band. Posted by: Evil Otto at August 16, 2005 05:06 PM Brett, I've made the point that the divorce was in the works before this all became an issue. Just because they are getting divorced and just because the family is not together does not mean they don't support her views on the war/Bush/Casey's death. You can divorce someone and still share their political beliefs. Posted by: michele at August 16, 2005 07:27 PM There was a message on Drudge, coming from Casey's aunts & uncles, that they distanced themselves from Cindy and supported Bush. Posted by: rbj at August 17, 2005 09:42 AM Staying away from the personal issues, I found her statement on Hardball interesting: MATTHEWS: All right. If your son had been killed in Afghanistan, would you have a different feeling? SHEEHAN: I don't think so, Chris, because I believe that Afghanistan is almost the same thing. We're fighting terrorism. Or terrorists, we're saying. But they're not contained in a country. This is an ideology and not an enemy. And we know that Iraq, Iraq had no terrorism. They were no threat to the United States of America. MATTHEWS: But Afghanistan was harboring, the Taliban was harboring al-Qaida which is the group that attacked us on 9/11. SHEEHAN: Well then we should have gone after al-Qaida and maybe not after the country of Afghanistan. Posted by: Hubris at August 17, 2005 09:49 AM rbj,it didn't get any media play because it turns out that the relatives in question aren't close to the Sheehan family at all, hadn't seen Cindy Sheehan in years and barely knew Casey.
Posted by: michele at August 17, 2005 10:19 AM |
Feed Me, Seymour
bill *at* indcjournal *dot* com
Support Our Advertisers
Search
Archives
June 2008May 2008 April 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004
Extras
PDARSD Atom RSS 2.0 RSS 1.0
Credits
Our Blogroll
|