Sheehan shirking taxes why again?

Chrissee wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
She is a political activist using her son to further her goals. Where she simply a grieving mother she would not have her face plastered on the news.

The day she decided to make her protest public, she made her life, her decisions and her rhetoric public.

Wrong. The mere fact that she has a "politcal agenda" doesn't give the scum of the earth the right to smear her. That you try to paint her as someone who is "using her son to further her goals" reveals much more about you than it does of her.

BS.

No one can criticize how a mother grieves for her son. However, she has brought the media into the "process" and is now politicizing her sons death. She has and most probably continue to make the "talk show" rounds while cashing in on her sons death.

I would like to know if anyone know HOW her son died. Enemy fire or accidenal death.

I lost my brother in Viet Nam to enemy fire while I was serving in the NAvy. I was not too happy about how his death occurred. I lost a nephew in Iraq in a training accident. I am comforted by the fact he tested "something" that will help defend our country. 2 different emotions at play.

0 Replies

Chrissee wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
She is a political activist using her son to further her goals. Where she simply a grieving mother she would not have her face plastered on the news.

The day she decided to make her protest public, she made her life, her decisions and her rhetoric public.

Wrong. The mere fact that she has a "politcal agenda" doesn't give the scum of the earth the right to smear her. That you try to paint her as someone who is "using her son to further her goals" reveals much more about you than it does of her.

BS.

No one can criticize how a mother grieves for her son. However, she has brought the media into the "process" and is now politicizing her sons death. She has and most probably continue to make the "talk show" rounds while cashing in on her sons death.

I would like to know if anyone know HOW her son died. Enemy fire or accidenal death.

I lost my brother in Viet Nam to enemy fire while I was serving in the NAvy. I was not too happy about how his death occurred. I lost a nephew in Iraq in a training accident. I am comforted by the fact he tested "something" that will help defend our country. 2 different emotions at play.

0 Replies

Chrissee wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
She is a political activist using her son to further her goals. Where she simply a grieving mother she would not have her face plastered on the news.

The day she decided to make her protest public, she made her life, her decisions and her rhetoric public.

Wrong. The mere fact that she has a "politcal agenda" doesn't give the scum of the earth the right to smear her. That you try to paint her as someone who is "using her son to further her goals" reveals much more about you than it does of her.

BS.

No one can criticize how a mother grieves for her son. However, she has brought the media into the "process" and is now politicizing her sons death. She has and most probably continue to make the "talk show" rounds while cashing in on her sons death.

I would like to know if anyone know HOW her son died. Enemy fire or accidenal death.

I lost my brother in Viet Nam to enemy fire while I was serving in the NAvy. I was not too happy about how his death occurred. I lost a nephew in Iraq in a training accident. I am comforted by the fact he tested "something" that will help defend our country. 2 different emotions at play.

0 Replies

I'd heard her son died on a mission to rescue some other soldiers. I'd assumed it was enemy fire, but I don't know with certainty.

0 Replies

She is being smeared. Taxes? Divorce? And the relevance of those issues to her position is.....?

Those issues have nothing to do with her policy situation. They do however reveal that if you dare to oppose Bush and his cabal that you will be smeared, any information held by government will be released to smear you. Are they they the new rules?

Invading and occupying Iraq as a policy is patently a failure. But aside from that obvious fact. Sheehan dares to speak up based on a personal experience and the government uses smear tactics. Smearing an individual. Are you really comfortable with that? Do you want so submit to government in that way? A fellow citizen being obviously smeared and attacked by the overwhelming power of government? And that's okay?

The comments are contemptible. The emotion is chilling.

0 Replies

GF, I think my question is reasonable, and one that you failed to answer. The "government" has had nothing to do with the divorce info coming out. And I agree that the divorce story has absolutely no relavence to her protest. But she is the one who opened up her tax situation by making the statement she did. I don't think it was the government that made her state that she would withhold paying her current tax liability.

You continuously state that she is being smeared. I only ask that you give me an example of how she is being smeared. Maybe I needed to say "a specific" example of how an individual has smeared her.

There is a difference between smearing someone and questioning their motivation for their actions. Some of her own statements and actions have opened her up to the questioning of her motivations. The government did not do that. Personally, I think the biggest culprit here is the media, which took a simple protest and has turned it into some type of cause celebre.

0 Replies

goodfielder wrote:

She is being smeared. Taxes? Divorce? And the relevance of those issues to her position is.....?

Taxes: Because she brought the issue of her payment of taxes into the discussion herself ... very clearly, and without question.

Divorce: Her husband has filed for divorce during the period of time Momma Sheehan is protesting down in Crawford. Is there anything relevant in the inquiry? I've no idea ... but I find the disgust of the liberals here to be entirely hypocritical in light of the Jack Ryan incident.

But that involved whips and chains, so that was okay ... right?

Quote:

Those issues have nothing to do with her policy situation. They do however reveal that if you dare to oppose Bush and his cabal that you will be smeared, any information held by government will be released to smear you. Are they they the new rules?

If these are the rules they apply across the political spectrum.

Quote:

Invading and occupying Iraq as a policy is patently a failure.

That is your opinion, and it is wrong.

Quote:

But aside from that obvious fact. Sheehan dares to speak up based on a personal experience and the government uses smear tactics. Smearing an individual. Are you really comfortable with that? Do you want so submit to government in that way? A fellow citizen being obviously smeared and attacked by the overwhelming power of government? And that's okay?

As CR asked earlier, what are these "smear tactics," and who is employing them? You say it's the government. I'm not aware that the government has done anything that anyone could consider a "smear" tactic. What are you talking about?

Please tell me this isn't another conspiracy theory which you've bought into.

Quote:

The comments are contemptible. The emotion is chilling.

Give me a break. This lady chose to go down to Crawford to grab the spotlight and promote her agenda. Did she not expect to be placed under a microscope when she did so. If she wanted to remain an anonymous person, she chose the wrong approach.

0 Replies

Wow! One would think that those who hang out all day on an internet forum, would at least know how to do a simple search.

1) Type in www.google.com

2) a search window pops up

3) type the words "Cindy Sheehan smear"

40 Voila! 59, 000 links. Just click on the links and start reading. Cheers!

0 Replies

She is politicizing her son's death because she has a political agenda--to stop the war in Iraq, or at minimum, to protest the war.
When has politicizing a tragedy been a negative? Seems to be the only way to get a point accross, or to have an ounce of legitimacy. She never would have gained this momentum had her son not perished.

The US never would have gottne away with security measures like the Patriot Act, or had a shred of evidence that an entire department dedicated to "Homeland Security" deserved funding without 9/11.
9/11 cave the neocons permission to attack Iraq based on completely false pretenses--you want to talk about politicizing death?

0 Replies

Chrissee wrote:

Wow! One would think that those who hang out all day on an internet forum, would at least know how to do a simple search.

1) Type in www.google.com

2) a search window pops up

3) type the words "Cindy Sheehan smear"

40 Voila! 59, 000 links. Just click on the links and start reading. Cheers!

I take it you are not able to answer this question succinctly? Instead, you require those of us asking the question to wade through a bunch of liberal blogs to find out what wild claims are being thrown around the left-blogosphere? Speaking for myself, no thanks.

You claim she's being smeared, but you aren't able to articulate how or by whom?

0 Replies

Would you ask the very same question if Bush was being smeared Tico?
Hmmm...who could possibly smear Bush?
The left?
The liklihood is very high that if there was dirt on Bush, it's the left looking for it.

If there is someone protesting Bush's policies, I can rest assured that you have a pretty good idea who is smearing the central figure without making us do it for you.

Am I correct?

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

Chrissee wrote:
Wow! One would think that those who hang out all day on an internet forum, would at least know how to do a simple search.

1) Type in www.google.com

2) a search window pops up

3) type the words "Cindy Sheehan smear"

40 Voila! 59, 000 links. Just click on the links and start reading. Cheers!

I take it you are not able to answer this question succinctly? Instead, you require those of us asking the question to wade through a bunch of liberal blogs to find out what wild claims are being thrown around the left-blogosphere?

Coming from the King of Right wing blogosphere cut and paste, this is one of the funniest things I've read all day.

0 Replies

kickycan wrote:

Ticomaya wrote:
Chrissee wrote:
Wow! One would think that those who hang out all day on an internet forum, would at least know how to do a simple search.

1) Type in www.google.com

2) a search window pops up

3) type the words "Cindy Sheehan smear"

40 Voila! 59, 000 links. Just click on the links and start reading. Cheers!

I take it you are not able to answer this question succinctly? Instead, you require those of us asking the question to wade through a bunch of liberal blogs to find out what wild claims are being thrown around the left-blogosphere?

Coming from the King of Right wing blogosphere cut and paste, this is one of the funniest things I've read all day.

After you stop laughing, perhaps you would be so kind as to point out ONE cut and past I've made from the "Right wing blogosphere."

Since you consider me the "King" in this regard, this should be easy for you.

0 Replies

candidone1 wrote:

Would you ask the very same question if Bush was being smeared Tico?
Hmmm...who could possibly smear Bush?
The left?
The liklihood is very high that if there was dirt on Bush, it's the left looking for it.

If there is someone protesting Bush's policies, I can rest assured that you have a pretty good idea who is smearing the central figure without making us do it for you.

Am I correct?

Which of your hypothetical questions are you asking me to answer?

Bush is smeared by the liberal press daily. He's smeared by the liberal anti-war pinko liberals on this forum every minute of the day. What's your point? If you ask me to point out what I consider the smears and who's doing the smearing, I could do so.

What has that to do with the claims by those in this thread that Momma Sheehan is being smeared, and the claims by certain Aussies that it's the government doing the smearing?

0 Replies

What? You want me to waste my time looking through your posts, post one of your right wing pieces of misinformation and opinion, just so you can then deny the right-leaning nature of it? Sorry, King, but no thanks. It ain't worth my time. Just take your crown and enjoy it, will ya?

0 Replies

kickycan wrote:

What? You want me to waste my time looking through your posts, post one of your right wing pieces of misinformation and opinion, just so you can then deny the right-leaning nature of it? Sorry, King, but no thanks. It ain't worth my time. Just take your crown and enjoy it, will ya?

Certainly. I don't deny posting conservative articles and opinions. But I don't normally post from blogs, and if I ever have it is a rarity. Perhaps you are confused as to what I meant by the term "blogosphere"?

But my point, which you obviously missed, was that I declined Chrissee's invitation to search through the liberal blogosphere to determine what she and her friends mean when they claim Sheehan is being "smeared."

The next time someone asks me to bolster an argument, I'm going to have to consider the Chrissee approach in formulating my response ("Why don't you just google for the answer?").

Sheehan shirking taxes why again?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know