MSM Silent About Cindy Sheehan’s Martha’s Vineyard Protest?
Remember the daily, almost hourly, updates we got back in 2005 when Cindy Sheehan protested the War in Iraq outside then-President George W. Bush’s Crawford, Texas ranch?
Well, according to Byron York:
She’s still protesting the war, and on Monday she announced plans to demonstrate at Martha’s Vineyard, where President Obama will be vacationing.
And it doesn’t seem the media are paying much attention. York sums it up:
But her days are over. The people who most fervently supported her have moved on.
Not too long ago, some observers worried that Barack Obama would come under increasing pressure from the Left to leave both Iraq and Afghanistan. Now, it seems those worries were unfounded. For many liberal activists, opposing the war was really about opposing George W. Bush. When Bush disappeared, so did their anti-war passion.
11 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
I wonder if Cindy will use language equivalent to “death panels” to describe the war. Ya think?
Comment by Ashpenaz — August 18, 2009 @ 2:12 pm - August 18, 2009
At least the woman is consistent.
Comment by CattusMagnus — August 18, 2009 @ 2:41 pm - August 18, 2009
Wow. The contortions that must be made to patch together a post – its amazing.
Lets see now. Will the dreaded biased MSM remain silent about a protest against Obama. Hmmm. (and yes, we will ignore for a moment that Fox News, the Wall St. Journal, NY Post, Mooonie Times and many other rightleaning media outlest are also the “MSM”). Seems that you quotes point out the she has been protesting nonstop since 2005. And when was the last time she was in the MSM center ring? Seems to me that the MSM has been paying little attention to her for several years as she continued to protest Bush.
“For many liberal activists, opposing the war was really about opposing George W. Bush. When Bush disappeared, so did their anti-war passion.”
My head is spinning. This quote was posted by a guy who just yesterday continued a well-worn complaint about leftists and their inability to acknowledge the sincerity and legitimacy of the concerns that their opponents have????
Are you purposely trying to play with peoples heads here? Or is it simply that so long as you have a good lefty-bashing rant going, none of your readers really cares about logic, principle or consistency?
Comment by Tano — August 18, 2009 @ 3:27 pm - August 18, 2009
Dan, what the hell is that waste of space above? Was there a hiccup somewhere?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — August 18, 2009 @ 4:19 pm - August 18, 2009
For Tano, history began yesterday.
Comment by DaveP. — August 18, 2009 @ 4:30 pm - August 18, 2009
I remember how the Left played Cindy.
Mother Cindy.
The media-made darling of their anti-war, anti-Bush movement.
They even had to crop photos to make it look like she had a crowd of followers when things were sparse.
She was slowly deserted.
Her own family left her.
She got a payout from her son’s insurance and spent it all on Camp Cindy (Freedom?).
Once the money was gone the movement began to leave her.
Seems she was much more devoted to her POV than to a particular agenda.
When she saw Nancy Pelosi on the wrong side she stood up to her.
That was the straw that broke the camel’s back.
The Left deserted her completely.
I wonder if anyone will march with her at Martha’s Vineyard.
Comment by Nan G — August 18, 2009 @ 5:15 pm - August 18, 2009
Yes, Tardo the contortions YOU go through to patch together a point are breathtaking.
Tardo would try to persuade us that protests outside the presidents vacation home are suddenly NOT newsworthy, because no president has been on vacation in a very long time.
And tardo once again illustrates that liberals cannot exist without l-i-e-s.
Comment by American Elephant — August 18, 2009 @ 8:36 pm - August 18, 2009
#3: “Are you purposely trying to play with peoples heads here? Or is it simply that so long as you have a good lefty-bashing rant going, none of your readers really cares about logic, principle or consistency?”
Tano, you have the logic skills of…well…a liberal. The only hypocrisy and inconsistency here is on the part of liberals and their representatives in the media. I’ll break it down for you since you are, afterall, an obtuse, jangly marionette of the Obama Administration.
1. Sheehan protesting outside Bush’s ranch in Crawford.
Conservative view: a mother to be sympathized with because she lost a son in battle and to be pitied because she is using her grief in a misguided way.
Liberal view: a mother who is speaking truth to power and deserves immunity from criticism because her son was murdered by the Bush war machine.
2. Sheehan protesting outside Obama’s vacation home in Martha’s Vineyard.
Conservative view: a mother to be sympathized with because she lost a son in battle and to be pitied because she is using her grief in a misguided way.
Liberal view: Cindy who? eh.
Still don’t understand the concept of liberal inconsistency and hypocrisy? Okay, let’s try something else:
Obama has made very clear – throughout the campaign and his presidency, that…[liberals opposed the War in Iraq because they hated George W. Bush, not the other way around.]
Now does it make sense to you?
Comment by Sean A — August 18, 2009 @ 11:12 pm - August 18, 2009
Conservative view: a mother to be sympathized with because she lost a son in battle and to be pitied because she is using her grief in a misguided way.
Nah. She burned through sympathy and pity long before her fellow douchebags threw her overboard.
BTW, didn’t she go nanners because everybody was paying attention to post-Katrina New Orleans instead of her?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — August 19, 2009 @ 2:15 am - August 19, 2009
So, Palin is exploiting her son, but Sheehan is honoring her son?
Comment by Ashpenaz — August 19, 2009 @ 10:01 am - August 19, 2009
For the definition of “useful idiot,” the dictionary has Sheehag’s picture in full color.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — August 19, 2009 @ 10:38 am - August 19, 2009