Mother of dead soldier really pissed at Bush

Kinda like we keep hearing 9/11, 3000 dead, rape rooms in Iraq, 140 villagers... etc, etc,etc...

Sorry if that's the real issue here you're losing buddy.

Maybe the real issue here is seeing the dogs of propaganda, unleashed on another person who disagrees with the policy of their handlers.

But that's not the real issue here either.

The real issue here is a grieving mother looking for closure, and a man on stilts afraid that showing some respect for her sacrifice will cut them out from underneath him.



Ry

Didn't he already meet with the family? He has given that family the same treatment that he had given every other family that has lost a soldier. Does she deserve more then any other family? No she doesn't. It isn't the job of the President to comfort the family of a fallen soldier. That is why the military provides help and there is other help available out there. The President isn't a paid counselor he is the President.

Surely, anti-war sentiment is twisted but pro-war sentiment is just jam-packed with mental health and American goodness. What could be more clear?

aaahh screw it. Bush is doing A great job. The war is going fine. Everything is honky dory down at the ranch.

Iraqi elite are deserting Baghdad
Iraqi elite are deserting Baghdad

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=57259&highlight=

Open Letter from Ralph Nader to Cindy Sheehan
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
AUGUST 10, 2005
3:33 PM
CONTACT: Ralph Nader

An Open Letter from Ralph Nader to Cindy Sheehan
WASHINGTON - August 10 -

Dear Ms. Sheehan,

From your grief over the loss of your son, Casey, in Iraq has come the courage to spotlight nationally the cowardly character trait of a President who refuses to meet with anyone or any group critical of his illegal, fabricated, deceptive war and occupation of that ravaged country. As a messianic militarist, Mr. Bush turned aside his own father's major advisers who warned him of the terroristic, political, and diplomatic perils to the United States from an invasion of Iraq. He refused to listen.

Thirteen organizations in early 2003 separately wrote their President requesting a meeting to have him hear them out as to why they opposed his drumbeating, on-the-road-to war policies. These groups represented millions of Americans. They included church leaders, veterans, business, labor, retired intelligence officials, students, women and others. They are among those Americans who are not allowed through the carefully screened public audiences that are bused to arenas around the country to hear his repetitive slogans for carrying on this draining, boomeranging war. They each wrote President Bush but he never bothered even to acknowledge their letters simply to say no to the requested meetings. Not even the courtesy of a reply came from their White House. Ever since then it has been the same-exclusion, denial, contempt and arrogance for views counter to that of Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney and the tight circle around them that composes the inner tin ear of this Administration. Why, they even refuse to listen to objections by their own government's military lawyers (JAG) over repeated violations of due process of law. When will he realize that he is supposed to be the President of all the people, not just those misled into supporting his Iraq maneuvers?

Perhaps the breakthrough will begin this hot August in Crawford, Texas, with the devastating loss of a beloved child transformed into a mission for the soul of our country. This rogue regime, led by two draft-dodgers and officially counseled by similar pro-war evaders during the Vietnam War, is not "our country." Millions of Americans, including military and public servants in his Administration, and many in the retired military, diplomatic and intelligence services, opposed this war, still oppose it and do not equate George W. Bush and Dick Cheney with the United States of America.

Our flag stands for "liberty and justice for all." Our flag must never be misused or defiled as a bandana for war crimes, as a gag against the people's freedom of speech and conscience or as a fig leaf to hide the shame of charlatans in high public office, who violate our Constitution, our laws and our founding fathers' framework for accountable, responsive government.

You will be goaded to cross the semantic line against a President who himself has crossed the much graver constitutional line that has cost so many lives on both sides and continues to cost and cost our country in so many ways domestically and before the world. Neglecting America for the Iraq war has become the widening downward path trod by the Bush government.

Authenticity, bereft of contrivances, is what must confront this White House Misleader. And authenticity is what you are and what drives you as you demand to see this resistant President. He is on an intermittent month long vacation, with spells for fundraisers and other insulated events. His schedule provides ample time for such a meeting. You reflect the hopes and prayers of millions of like-minded Americans. Should he relent and opens his doors, be sure to ask why he lowballs U.S. casualties in Iraq, deleting and disrespecting soldiers seriously hurt or sickened in the Iraq war theatre, but not in direct combat. Remind him of those soldiers back in military hospitals who, with their families, wonder why they are not being counted as they cope with their serious and permanent disabilities. (60 Minutes, CBS program). Ask him why, despite Pentagon audits and GAO investigations about corruption, waste and non-delivery of services in Iraq by profiteering large corporations totaling billions of dollars, this Commander of Chief accepted campaign contributions from their executives and proceeds to let this giant corporate robbery continue without the requisite law and order?

Consider bringing to him a copy of President Dwight Eisenhower's famous "Cross of Iron" speech, delivered in April 1953 before the nation's newspaper editors in Washington, D.C. And add statements by Marine General Anthony Zinni (ret.), a Middle East specialist who strongly criticized the Bush-Cheney war policy before and after March 2003. May you and your associates succeed in galvanizing the public debate in this country over why a growing majority of Americans now think it was a costly mistake to invade Iraq and want our soldiers back, with the U.S. out of that country. He knows that his support for how he is handling this war-occupation is falling close to one third of respondents in recent polls-the lowest yet. Even with the mass-media at his disposal everyday, he now represents a minority of public opinion, which should give him pause before closing his oil marinated doors on majority views in this nation.

May you prevail where others have failed to secure an audience with Mr. Bush.

Sincerely,

Ralph Nader

Tracking a lie through the conservative media
http://mediamatters.org/
Cindy Sheehan "changed her story on Bush"? Tracking a lie through the conservative media

Cindy Sheehan, mother of a soldier killed in Iraq, has drawn significant media attention for staging an anti-war protest outside President Bush's ranch in Crawford, Texas, where she is demanding to meet with the president. On August 8, Internet gossip Matt Drudge posted an item on his website, the Drudge Report, in which he falsely claimed that Sheehan "dramatically changed her account" of a meeting she had with Bush in June 2004; Drudge attempted to back up his false assertion by reproducing Sheehan quotes from a 2004 newspaper article without providing their context. After the story appeared on the Drudge Report, it gained momentum among conservative weblogs and eventually reached Fox News, where it was presented as hard news and in commentaries. Media Matters for America will examine how one false story on an Internet gossip site ended up the focus of prime-time cable news coverage.

Drudge's August 8 item claiming that Sheehan had changed her story used quotes from a June 24, 2004, article in The Reporter of Vacaville, California, where Sheehan lives. The Reporter article described a meeting that Sheehan and 16 other families of soldiers killed in Iraq had with Bush in Fort Lewis, Washington, earlier that month. Sheehan's son, Army Spc. Casey Sheehan, was killed in Iraq in April 2004.

Drudge quoted Sheehan seemingly speaking glowingly of Bush: "'I now know [Bush is] sincere about wanting freedom for the Iraqis,' Cindy said after their meeting. 'I know he's sorry and feels some pain for our loss. And I know he's a man of faith,' " and, "For the first time in 11 weeks, they felt whole again. 'That was the gift the president gave us, the gift of happiness, of being together,' Cindy said." Drudge contrasted these quotes to Sheehan's statements on the August 7 edition of CNN's Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer, in which she said, of the 2004 meeting with Bush: "We wanted to use the time for him to know that he killed an indispensable part of our family and humanity."

Drudge, however, took Sheehan's quotes from The Reporter out of context in falsely claiming a shift in her position. The June 24, 2004, Reporter article also quoted Sheehan expressing her misgivings about Bush and the Iraq war:

"We haven't been happy with the way the war has been handled," Cindy said. "The president has changed his reasons for being over there every time a reason is proven false or an objective reached."

The 10 minutes of face time with the president could have given the family a chance to vent their frustrations or ask Bush some of the difficult questions they have been asking themselves, such as whether Casey's sacrifice would make the world a safer place.

But in the end, the family decided against such talk, deferring to how they believed Casey would have wanted them to act. In addition, Pat noted that Bush wasn't stumping for votes or trying to gain a political edge for the upcoming election.

Moreover, Sheehan was not referring to her meeting with Bush as "the gift the president gave us." She was actually referring to the trip to Seattle, as Reporter staff writer Tom Hall noted in an August 9 article responding to Drudge: "Sheehan also said the trip to Seattle helped connect her family to others that had lost a son or daughter in Iraq. Sheehan said sharing their story with those families was rewarding, as was the time she got to spend with her own family. 'That was the gift the president gave us, the gift of happiness, of being together,' she said in the story. Drudge included that quote in his Monday morning report, but didn't explain that it referred to sharing time with her family, not the president."

Reporter editor Diane Barney also responded to Drudge in an August 9 column, in which she said that Sheehan's positions on Bush and the war have not changed since June 2004. "We don't think there has been a dramatic turnaround. Clearly, Cindy Sheehan's outrage was festering even then," Barney wrote. "In ensuing months, she has grown more focused, more determined, more aggressive. ... We invite readers to revisit the story -- in context -- on our Web site and decide for themselves." An August 8 Editor & Publisher article quoted Barney further clarifying the paper's position: "It's important that readers see the full context of the story, instead of just selected portions. We stand by the story as an accurate reflection of the Sheehan's take on the meeting at the time it was published."

Throughout the day on August 8, Drudge's false story needed little time to spread to conservative weblogs:

Drudge posted the Sheehan item on August 8 at 10:11 am ET.
Right-wing pundit Michelle Malkin posted the item on her weblog one hour later, at 11:22 am ET.
At 12:40 pm ET, the Drudge story appeared on C-Log, the weblog of the conservative news and commentary website Townhall.com.
At 2:33 pm ET, MooreWatch.com posted the story.
At 3:23 pm ET, William Quick of DailyPundit.com posted the story.
Fox News then picked up Drudge's distortion of Sheehan's quote. On the "Political Grapevine" segment of the August 8 edition of Special Report with Brit Hume, guest anchor and Fox News chief Washington correspondent Jim Angle highlighted Sheehan's supposed contradiction:

ANGLE: Cindy Sheehan, the mother of a soldier killed in Iraq last year, who's now camped outside President Bush's Crawford ranch demanding to see him, said yesterday on CNN that a private meeting with President Bush last year was offensive, insisting, quote, "He acted like it was a party. He came in very jovial, like we should be happy with that. Our son died for the president's misguided policies."

But just after that 2004 meeting, she gave a very different account, telling her local paper, the Vacaville Reporter, quote, "I now know the president is sincere about wanting freedom for the Iraqis. I know he's sorry and feels some pain for our loss. And I know he's a man of faith." She added that President Bush, quote, "gave us the gift of happiness of being together."

By August 9, various journalists and progressive bloggers revealed Drudge's distortion. On Salon.com, journalist Eric Boehlert noted on August 9: "Put in full context, Drudge's claim of a flip-flop is easily dismissed." RawStory.com, a progressive news website, noted that Drudge "grossly took Sheehan out of context."

Nevertheless, Drudge's distortion again popped up on Fox News -- this time on the August 9 edition of The O'Reilly Factor. Host Bill O'Reilly made Sheehan's nonexistent contradictions the focus of his "Talking Points Memo" segment:

O'REILLY: The fascinating saga of Cindy Sheehan. That is the subject of this evening's "Talking Points Memo." Mrs. Sheehan is protesting in Crawford, Texas, trying to convince Americans the Iraq war is wrong and the president should be impeached. She is doing so because her son Casey, an Army specialist, was killed last year in Iraq. No one has the right to intrude on Mrs. Sheehan's grief. That's number one. She's entitled to her opinion on a situation that has deeply affected her. And she's angry at the White House.

Well, here's something very strange. Two months after her son died, Cindy and her husband Patrick did meet with President Bush, as she said. After that meeting, Cindy was quoted by a California newspaper as saying, "I now know [President Bush] is sincere about wanting freedom for the Iraqis. I know he's sorry and feels some pain for our loss." So Mrs. Sheehan has apparently changed her mind about the president.

In an editorial today in The New York Times, it says, "Mr. Bush obviously failed to comfort Ms. Sheehan when he met with her and her family. More important, he has not helped the nation give fallen soldiers like Casey Sheehan the honor they deserve." Well, let's go back to the California article. Cindy Sheehan was quoted as saying, "That was the gift the president gave us, the gift of happiness, of being together." It sounds like comfort to me. What say you, New York Times?

O'Reilly then introduced his guest to comment on Sheehan -- Michelle Malkin, who proclaimed that Sheehan's "story hasn't checked out," to which O'Reilly readily agreed:

MALKIN: I mean, the New York Times editorial board is all too eager to prop her up as some sort of martyr and to buy her line when, clearly, her story hasn't checked out.

O'REILLY: Yes, her story hasn't [sic] changed.

MALKIN: And so I think -- and I think that angle you're emphasizing is absolutely right here, which is the mainstream media just lapping this up and perpetuating myths and inaccuracies when they know it's not the truth.

O'REILLY: Yup. They don't identify -- in the New York Times editorial today, it was obvious they did not say her story has been inconsistent. And they did not pinpoint that she is in bed with the radical left.

On the August 10 edition of his syndicated radio program, The Radio Factor, O'Reilly continued to assert that Sheehan had contradicted herself, stating, "In her first meeting with the president, she was happy with him, and we read you the article that the Vacaville paper -- where she's from in California -- printed."

?- S.S.M.

Posted to the web on Wednesday August 10, 2005 at 7:08 PM EST

Bush Is No Nixon
By: William Pitt Posted on: 8/10/2005
William Rivers Pitt is a New York Times and internationally bestselling author of two books: War on Iraq: What Team Bush Doesn't Want You to Know and The Greatest Sedition Is Silence.

Bush Is No Nixon
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Wednesday 10 August 2005

No mother who lost her son to this Iraq war should be made to stand in a ditch, and yet that is exactly where Cindy Sheehan stands today, by the side of the road in Crawford, Texas. She has been standing there since she heard about the 20 Marines who were killed in Iraq last week, since she heard George W. Bush describe from his vacation home the noble cause for which those Marines died.

Cindy's son, Casey, died in Iraq for that cause more than a year ago. She heard those words from Mr. Bush and went to Crawford. She wanted to talk to the president. The folks in the ranch sent out a couple of lackeys to speak with her. "They were very respectful," Sheehan said later to CNN. "They were nice men. I told them Iraq was not a threat to the United States and that now people are dead for nothing. I told them I wouldn't leave until I talked to George Bush. I want to ask the president, 'Why did you kill my son? What did my son die for?' Last week, he said my son died for a 'noble cause' and I want to ask him what that noble cause is."

Today, she is standing in a ditch by the side of the road in Crawford, waiting to speak to Mr. Bush. Many who hear this may have the obvious reaction: Who does this woman think she is? Who thinks they can just bop down the road and speak to the president? This is an important man, and there are security concerns, and anyway, who thinks they can just show up for a sit-down like this?

Well, Sheehan did get an invitation of sorts. A presidential spokesman described Bush's time in Crawford (approximately five weeks, or about as much vacation time as the average Frenchman gets) as a chance for him to "shed his coat and tie and meet with folks in the heartland and hear what's on their minds." Sure, this administration has raised secrecy and isolation to a zen-like art form, but it sounded pretty clearly like George goes to Texas to talk to the folks. Cindy Sheehan would like to talk.

It's interesting. In the last 50 years, few presidents have been more reviled, denounced and tarnished than Richard M. Nixon. The Vietnam war, Kent State, the attacks upon Cambodia, not to mention the Watergate scandal, left Nixon surrounded by demonstrators and investigators who eventually forced him into an unprecedented resignation.

The Nixon and Bush administrations share a number of fascinating similarities. Both inspired stunning vituperation from those who opposed them. Hunter S. Thompson, avowed life-long foe of Nixon, remembered him this way: "Let there be no mistake in the history books about that. Richard Nixon was an evil man - evil in a way that only those who believe in the physical reality of the Devil can understand it. He was utterly without ethics or morals or any bedrock sense of decency. Nobody trusted him - except maybe the Stalinist Chinese, and honest historians will remember him mainly as a rat who kept scrambling to get back on the ship."

It is easy to imagine, and easy to find via a simple Google search, similar sentiments aimed toward Mr. Bush.

Both were burdened by an unpopular war, the fighting of which appeared with each passing day to be more and more futile. Nixon's Vietnam came to him from Johnson, and Kennedy before him, and Eisenhower, whom Nixon served as vice president. Bush's Iraq came to him from his father, not only from that first Bush administration but from the senior's time as vice president to Reagan. One notable difference here, of course, is that Nixon inherited a catastrophic shooting war while Bush created one.

Nixon and his people were obsessed with secrecy and with dirty tricks. The boys in the Bush White House share the sentiment, and have managed to surpass the Nixonian standards. Nixon wanted to destroy his critics. Bush and his people have actually destroyed more than a few, including a deep-cover CIA operative married to a man who attacked Bush's Iraq policy in print.

Both were dogged by protesters wherever they went, yet here is the point at which the similarities diverge. Bush has the benefit of First Amendment Zones, which keep demonstrations far away, out of sight and out of mind. He would just as soon flush himself down a toilet as speak to someone critical of his actions. More than any other administration in recent memory, this Bush crew represents the triumph of the Yes-Men. Bush is in his bubble, managed and spun, and nothing gets through.

Nixon, on the other hand, went a different way one interesting and significant night. In May of 1970, right after the Kent State shootings, when civil unrest across the nation had reached a fever pitch and opposition to the war had roared again to the forefront, Nixon woke his personal valet in the middle of the night. He grabbed a few Secret Service agents and set off for the Lincoln Memorial. There, he spent an hour talking with a large gathering of war protesters encamped around the monument.

The Time Magazine article from May 18, 1970, recalls the scene this way: "When the conversation turned to the war, Nixon told the students: 'I know you think we are a bunch of so and so's.'" Before he left, Nixon said: 'I know you want to get the war over. Sure you came here to demonstrate and shout your slogans on the ellipse. That's all right. Just keep it peaceful. Have a good time in Washington, and don't go away bitter.' The singular odyssey went on. Nixon and his small contingent wandered through the capital, then drove to the Mayflower Hotel for a breakfast of corned beef hash and eggs - his first restaurant meal in Washington since he assumed power. Then he withdrew to his study in the Executive Office Building to sit out the day of protest."

There will be a large anti-war protest in Washington DC on September 24th. Is it even conceivable that George W. Bush might remove himself from the White House that day to speak with the people who disagree with his leadership? The idea is laughable on its face.

Cindy Sheehan is not in a large crowd in Washington DC. She is not camped on the Lincoln Memorial. She waits for Mr. Bush in a ditch by the side of the road in Crawford, arguably the safest and most comfortable spot in America for this self-styled cowboy. Yet he does not emerge to speak to this woman who lost her son to his war. Somehow, it seems a safe bet that not even Richard Nixon would keep this woman waiting.

There is an Iraqi sniper nicknamed Juba operating in southern Baghdad. He is very good, never firing more than one shot to keep his position concealed, and he almost always hits his mark. Juba is credited with shooting more than a dozen American soldiers. According to the UK Guardian, "He waits for soldiers to dismount, or stand up in a Humvee turret, and aims for gaps in their body armour, the lower spine, ribs or above the chest. He has killed from 200 metres away."

Juba is but one threat to US soldiers in Iraq, who are there because Bush sent them there on a mission based upon lies. How many more mothers will Juba put down in that ditch next to Cindy Sheehan? How long will they have to wait for an answer to their question?

http://www.truthout.org/

Peacejournalism.com

I have a question to all of you complaining about Bush being on "vacation" in Texas.
How is it a vacation?
He gets his daily national security briefings every day,he has all of the phones that go into the WH also go into his ranch,so he gets calls from world leaders and others,he signs legislation,he makes and keeps appointments,he is kept abreast of situations that may affect US interests,he does EVERYTHING in Crawford that he does in the WH.
The only difference is the location,not the daily activities.

How does that qualify as a "vacation"?

mysteryman, where do you think Bush should be, at the ranch or the white house? where would you be? If my party produced A president like this I wouldn't defend him i'd confront it for the sake of my party and my country.

I think the real reason he's not seeing her is because they suspect she's got one of them damned STOP THE LIES T-shirts on under her jacket.

Somehow I think Bush's actions would be much different had this family come to him praising his policies and offered 3 more childeren as cannon fodder....

The Shrub comments:

Reuters, 22 August, 2005, 20:22 GMT

By Steve Holland

CRAWFORD, Texas, Aug 11 (Reuters) - President George W. Bush on Thursday said he sympathized with a mother who lost a son in Iraq and who has been leading a protest vigil near his ranch but that he would not pull U.S. troops from Iraq prematurely.

"I grieve for every death," Bush said as Cindy Sheehan remained camped out about five miles (8 km) away. For six days she has been demanding Bush meet with her about her son, Casey Austin Sheehan, an Army specialist killed in combat in Baghdad in April 2004.

"It breaks my heart to think about a family weeping over the loss of a loved one. I understand the anguish that some feel about the death that takes place," Bush said.

But, he added, "Pulling the troops out would send a terrible signal to the enemy."

Bush also said he had made no final decision on increasing U.S. troop strength in Iraq to help improve security during October elections, but he noted pointedly that having more troops in place helped provide stability during the Iraq elections last January and during Afghanistan elections.

"It seemed to have helped create security, and I know the secretary of defense is analyzing that possibility," Bush told reporters.

The United States has roughly 138,000 troops in Iraq. Pentagon officials have said the number could go up this fall to bolster security for the Iraqi elections.

He also sought to not raise Americans' hopes about substantial troop reductions next year, although military officials have talked openly about the possibility.

CABINET MEETING

Bush answered questions at his Texas ranch after meeting with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Vice President Dick Cheney, Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and national security adviser Stephen Hadley.

While the security advisers were meeting, Sheehan, 48, was again calling for the session with Bush. Bush did meet with her in June 2004.

Sheehan has been leading what she and supporters hope will be a budding peace movement to demand U.S. troops leave Iraq. The White House sent Hadley and deputy White House chief of staff Joe Hagin to meet her last Sunday, but that was not enough for her to call off her vigil. The White House has said there are no plans for another meeting.

"All I want is for President Bush to take one hour out of his vacation and meet with me before another mother's son dies in Iraq," the Vacaville, California, resident said. "You don't use our country's precious sons and daughters unless it's absolutely necessary to defend America."

She added: "Mr. president, it is time to level with the American people: Why did we go to war? Why have so many died? And when are they coming home?"

With Americans increasingly questioning the U.S. involvement in Iraq, Bush tried to address Sheehan's concerns and bolster U.S. support for the troops.

"Listen, I sympathize with Mrs. Sheehan," Bush said. "She feels strongly about her position. And she has every right in the world to say what she believes. This is America."

He said he has thought "long and hard" about her demand to "get out of Iraq now" and strongly disagreed, saying a premature withdrawal would betray the Iraqis just as they are being trained to defend themselves and allow for a U.S. pullout.

"Oh, I know it's hard for some Americans to see that progress, but we are making progress ... Withdrawing before the mission is complete would send a signal to those who wonder about the United States' commitment to spreading freedom," he said. (Additional reporting by Patricia Wilson)

I'm sure there have been plenty of parents who have felt that way but he doesn't give them personal meetings. He doesn't have to answer to her for anything. It isn't his job. He gave her a meeting months ago, what else does she want? To tell him to leave Iraq? The people who have gotten into her head have convinced her that she can succeed where they have failed. To be used like that and realize it later I'm sure is going to make her feel worse.

It doesnt matter.
All of the communications equipment,all of thetelevision monitors,the "hot line",everything is duplicated at his Crawford ranch.
Its also all duplicated on AF1.
So,wherever he is,Bush has all the access to all the info he gets in the oval office.

Its not like 100 years ago,modern communications allows the pres to be kept totally informed,no matter where he is.

Assuming the dim bulb has any interest in being informed . . .

Where was bush when he got the memo about terrorist determined to attack in U.S . If someone wanted to talk to the presitdent face to face on some dire issue like say ummm......WAR. I guess they should just send a memo to him. While the memos stack up the country goes to hell. Bush frolics at the ranch. And The vice president cashes the checks.

Baldimo, no one's got into her head.

She hasn't changed her position.

She's "just" another pissed off American.

People are pissed about Iraq. The numbers who are pissed off are growing - perhaps because they're starting to pay attention to what's been going on, or perhaps for some other reason. People don't need anyone to get into their head to look around and realize that something doesn't/didn't make sense.

Because this woman does not share your perspective does not mean she is gullible. She may have the right of it - perhaps you do. Being condescending toward her ability to reason doesn't give your position any additional validity.

She's standing up for her beliefs - and that's what America was, in theory, all about. You should be proud of her.

That is absolutely not true.

And Bush just proves he is the arrogant, out of touch hypocrite we all know he is by refusing to meet with her.

Bullshit. It is 100% true. As a former Communications Officer for the U.S. Secret Service I worked closely enough with the White House Commincations Service to know.