Progressive on savaging Cindy Sheehan;
cites NY Sun as source for Sykes smear
Matt Rothschild, editor of The Progressive, writes on "The Savaging of Cindy Sheehan," and identifies the source Charlie Sykes apparently used to try to link the grieving mother to the Communist Party, as reported here on Friday. (My apologies to National Review online for linking them to the smear. The New York Sun gets the honors -- or dishonors, in this case.)
Rothschild:
The shameless savaging of Cindy Sheehan continues.
Bill O’Reilly says she’s a tool of “far left elements.”
The New York Sun echoes the charge, evidently reading the same rightwing talking points.
In an editorial on August 11, it says Sheehan “has put herself in league with some extreme groups and individuals.”
This is old-style McCarthyism, straight on down to the red-baiting.
The editorial quotes Sheehan about some of the groups she’s involved with, including Code Pink, Veterans for Peace, and Military Families Speak Out.
It then notes that these groups are on the steering committee of United for Peace and Justice, along with the Communist Party USA. (A person representing that party is one of the forty-one members who was voted onto the steering committee.)
This classic guilt-by-association trope just shows the reflexive response of the right: When your critic has credibility, and you can’t find anything else on her, destroy her with the old standby: You’re a communist dupe!
The Sun also points out that Sheehan is working with the Crawford Peace House, and it says that group’s website “includes a photo depicting the entire state of Israel as Palestine.” Actually, it depicts a protester holding a sign showing four maps of what is now Israel and the Occupied Territories, noting how Palestinians have been allowed less and less land over the past 60 years.
“Nobody is anti-Israel here,” says John Wolf, one of the founders of the Crawford Peace House. “We’re just asking for peace with justice and respect for international law.”
But for the New York Sun, the Crawford Peace House’s view of the Israel-Palestine conflict is convenient enough to tar Cindy Sheehan with.
Rightwing talk show host Phil Hendrie goes even lower, writing an article amazingly entitled “Anti-War Mom: Another Ignorant Cow,” Hendrie called Sheehan a “self-righteous ignoramus,” and then went into full mockery mode: “A mother grieving her loss. The inhumanity of war. Oh, the wickedness of it all.”
I’ve seen callousness before, but this piece may top them all. And catch Hendrie’s defense of the Iraq War: “This war was unavoidable, brought on by an historic clash of culture and ideal, powered by the American people themselves, rising to meet the future, pissing off the rag heads.” Rag heads?
By the way, Hendrie’s screed was posted on the website, freerepublic.com, which calls itself “the premier online gathering place for independent, grassroots conservatism on the web.”
Sheehan responds to her critics: “Nothing you can say can hurt me or make me stop what we are doing. We are working for peace with justice. We are using peaceful means and the truth to do it.”


4 Comments:
I must have misplaced the talking points. I keep checking my inbox and cannot find them. Nevertheless – using my own thoughts – she is a cook and a shill for leftists. Her need to blame and lecture the rest of us is an unhealthy way of dealing with her grief. It’s very sad.
McCarthyism – yeah sure.
Calling an assorted group of nuts (her associates) mixed nuts is not McCarthyism, it’s called a truism.
She is making a fool out of herself and you lefties are letting her do it. Where is the compassion in that?
Now I agree that the talk radio/Fox news response to Cindy Shaheen was too lock-step and lightning quick. They even started lying about her right off the bat, saying she 'changed her story' regarding her initial visit with the President. Yes, she once said something about him being polite and sincere, but she's never gone on record saying anything positive about the Iraq war. In fact, even after her initial visit with Bush (the one she was so happy about), she stated her opposition to the war when asked by a newspaper.
But then listen to Cindy Shaheen talking...in the grief of her son dying in a war she doesn't accept or understand, she's taken up anti-war activism. And if you've never noticed, activists of any stripe aren't particularly pleasant or clear-headed people. While we all need to respect her difficult experience, she's wasted her valuable public podium by talking like a naive college kid.
I think this is only making independent thinkers feel more alienated from both sides. Nobody is just talking out the issues, they're all spouting off from the two major political extremes. It's all "Do whatever the President says!" or "Do the opposite of what the President says!" Theres a terrorist attack, and we have to choose from a)"Kill anybody who looks like those fuckers!" or b)"Let's just sit back and examine our own problems here..."
Liberals need to realize that there is indeed a well-organized gang of, yes, "terrorists", who have no problem killing us infidels in their quest for a Muslim world. Not just because our presidents casually bomb their homelands, but even for petty things, like letting women do whatever they want or allowing gays to hold hands in public.
And of course, conservatives need to realize that the Republican party is mainly there to protect the status of a handful of greedy bastards, and is not all that competent when it comes to protecting the rest of us. Settled?
The Democratic Party exists to make everyone equally miserable and move us in the direction of the late Soviet Union where the state was God.
I thought the Cold War was over. Didn't we win?
Post a Comment
<< Home