Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

The Success of the 'Grieving Mom'

By Jeffrey Feldman, Frameshop. Posted August 16, 2005.


Cindy Sheehan has done much more than galvanize the anti-war movement; she signals a political tidal wave soon to crash down on the President's foreign policy.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Jeffrey Feldman

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

If Democrats want to build on Cindy Sheehan's success, we must accept that last week's media storm was less about Cindy's demand to meet or her accusation against the President, than about her image as a "grieving mother."

Of the 122,000 pages that result from a Google search of grieving mom, almost all of them are stories about Cindy Sheehan. Clearly, "grieving mom" was the magic phrase at the heart Cindy Sheehan's success.

In fact, while many Democrats believe that Cindy Sheehan's protest has focused the nation's attention on the lies of the Bush White House, the reality is exactly the opposite.

Prior to the Cindy Sheehan story, the media was dividing its time between the "Memogate" story and the nomination of John Roberts to the Supreme Court. Despite the staggering complexity of Memogate, the more the media focused on the sinister and criminal acts of the White House political team, the more Americans saw the President as dishonest.

When Memogate ruled the headlines, the country's attention was focused not just on the President's lies, but on the cloud of deception that surrounded the White House. Similarly, even though John Robert's seemed like a squeaky clean nomination to the Supreme Court, the more the media discussed him, the more Americans saw the President as untruthful. When John Roberts topped the headlines, America's attention was drawn, slowly but surely, to what the President was hiding (by refusing to release documents about Roberts' past to Congress).

Rather than extending America's focus on Presidential lies, the meteoric rise of Cindy Sheehan to the top of the headlines shifted our attention to a "grieving mother." Curiously, this shift seems to have happened despite the fact that Sheehan's personal writings and public statements tried to intensify the national focus on the President's lies and refusal to meet with her.

So what is the bottom line of the Sheehan protest? What did the Sheehan week achieve?

In broad terms, the success of the "grieving mom" phrase indicates that Americans are now thinking about the War in Iraq through the frame of the family, rather than thinking about Iraq through the frame of "terrorism" or "ideology."

The implications of this shift from "terrorism" to "family" in the country's thinking about Iraq are profound. Not only does this shift forewarn a political tidal wave soon to break on the President's foreign policy, but also of a much deeper, tectonic shift in the strategy beneath all the recent gains in the Republican party.

The great success of Cindy Sheehan's protest, therefore, is no less than the moral authority for the Democratic Party to speak for the American family.

In other words, there are now two very clear claims on the American family at the heart of politics, and the claim by the anti-war Democrats has so much momentum that it has already forced every single Republican candidate running for office to rethink their strategies for the next few years.


Digg!

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
US dead from USUK attack and occupation near 9,000
Posted by: verite on Aug 16, 2005 3:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Perhaps this will combine with the Cindy wave.

" current US war deaths of 1,827 "

This is the figure reported dead "in Iraq"
Once the plane of wounded takes off dead are not counted.

"War deaths" would also have to include suicides and those dead back home fro USUK DU etc.

eg. some info received...


Number Of Iraq Casualties Is Double Official Figures

Says Puerto Rican Government - Over 4,000 US Dead


Coastal Post Online Article - July, 2005


http://www.coastalpost.com/05/07/03a_.html

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/print.asp?ID=3328

July 10, 2005

Excerpts only...

Official US. government reports on soldiers under US command killed in Iraq are so fragmented that they account for less than half of the total number, according to information uncovered as part of an inquiry by the Government of Puerto Rico regarding the total number of Puerto Rican war casualties.


This analysis was confirmed by El Diario/La Prensa's review of multiple documents, including official reports issued by the US Department of Defense, the Iraqi Ministry of the Interior and more than 230 battlefront reports, which reveal that more than 4,076 troops under US command have been killed in 799 days of battle.


And...


9,000 Dead GIs In Iraq War?

US Military Report: The High Death Rates Exposed

By Brian Harring

Domestic Intelligence Reporter

http://tbrnews.org/Archives/a1654.htm

The claim is that those wounded, who died while on flights to Germany or while in German hospitals, have NOT been counted in the Iraq dead totals!


June 2005


Pentagon Figures Don't Add Up

By Jim

7-13-5

http://www.williambowles.info/iraq/2005/
us_casualty_figures.html


Despicable Deception - DOD Body Count Fraud

By Ted Lang

http://www.rense.com/general66/decep.htm

http://www.rense.com/general65/monstrousliesarecausing.htm
http://www.rense.com/general66/casualties.htm

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I thought Cindy wanted to be apolitical
Posted by: pwreid@hotmail.com on Aug 16, 2005 3:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You seem to be claiming Cindy for the Democratic party. I had hoped that her message would change America from its aggression, greed, arrogance, and isolation to perhaps join the other nations in a new humanitarian effort to make this a better world by showing respect for other races and religions, and stop killing and economic colonialism. The Democrats need to become the New Democrats, with a vision including "all men are created equal" and have rights - not just Americans. Treat others as you would yourselves. Stop trying to take advantage of others. Stop trying to impose yourselves on others. Negotiate in good faith. Keep your treaties. Accept that you have sqandered your resources, and shouldn't just grab what belongs to others. Stop being the bully, apologise to those you have hurt, and make restitution. Work to earn the respect of all the world not by force of arms but by acts of kindness - then you will have won.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Beware the Framemakers
Posted by: hagwind on Aug 16, 2005 4:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Too bad the Democrats didn't come up with the "grieving mom" (or "grieving dad," or "grieving kid") strategy during the heyday of Mergers & Acquisitions, when families -- not to mention communities, and the whole country -- were being destroyed by the wholesale layoffs that helped underwrite corporate shenanigans that benefited only shareholders.

If the Dems adopt the "grieving mom" strategy, what's the most likely outcome? Let me look in my crystal ball here. Aha! Millions upon millions of USians who think that the only thing wrong with the war on Iraq is that U.S. citizens died in it. Sound familiar? You bet -- that's what millions upon millions of USians think was the only thing wrong with the Vietnam War: U.S. citizens died in it, and _we lost._

Sorry, I think Jeffrey Feldman's "strategy" is short-sighted at best. (My crystal ball also shows dozens upon dozens of Democratic "leaders" latching on to it because it will enable them to weasel out of addressing the causes of the debacle, including their own gutlessness.) Mr. Feldman has framed his own little war: Cindy Sheehan, with Himself as her champion, vs. those bad out-of-touch consultants, with whom Himself has, need I say, _nothing_ in common. ("What, nothing?" "No, nothing!" "What, nothing?" "Well -- hardly anything!")

According to his byline, Jeffrey Feldman is affiliated with an outfit called Frameshop. I'm not familiar with Frameshop: publication? think tank? Maybe it's a sort of "spin hospital," where all the spin doctors go to practice their prestidigitory techniques. At a magic show, lighting, sound, and props are all devoted to making us see what the magician wants us to see. When we want to know what's really going on, we watch the shadows. With Mr. Feldman and his fellow framemakers, we'd do well to do likewise: Look outside the frame.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Beware the Framemakers Posted by: goldennugget
» RE: Beware the Framemakers Posted by: hagwind
Alternet and liberals
Posted by: blackavenger9 on Aug 16, 2005 4:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
i am a conservative. This doesnt make me a bad person. Im the guy that would help you if you are in need, stand up for you if you need help. I would give you a ride home or to work. Im a decent compassionate fellow. alternet doesnt seem to think that though. Ive been banned more than once for speaking whats on my mind. i never use profanity. people who argue with me use it liberally though. yet i seem to be the one to get kicked out. liberals and alternet do not believe in freedom of speech unless you agree with them. I am attacked constantly on this site just because i am a conservative. So dont tell me that you fight for peoples freedom or that you believe in freedom of speech, i know better. I know that liberals are all about some hatred. I experience your hatred everytime i post in here. Even though you people disagree with me i would never wish harm on any of you, but all you can do is hate. well here is my last post . you win. you can argue with each other and namecall amongst yourselves now. this message will probavly be deleted by the facists who run this site anyway because i admitted that im a conservative. You people see me and other conservatives as the enemy rather than people who want to kill you. well you can go right on hating. good day and good bye

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Alternet and liberals Posted by: xenacat
» RE: Alternet and liberals Posted by: Colin
» RE: Alternet and liberals Posted by: Colin
» RE: Alternet and liberals Posted by: cyclone
» RE: Cyclone's post Posted by: kww355
» RE: Cyclone's post Posted by: Newsguy
» RE: Cyclone's post Posted by: cyclone
» RE: Alternet and liberals Posted by: doctordee
» RE: Alternet and liberals Posted by: bettsoff
» RE: Alternet and liberals Posted by: nakis
» RE: Alternet and liberals Posted by: LMNOP
(DEDICATED TO CASEY SHEEHAN)
Posted by: qu on Aug 16, 2005 4:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The SOLDIER and The NEOCON-MAN’



I was a soldier.

I was your hero.

I protected You against terror,

from a never to be known enemy;

supposedly, trying to kill us.



I had to go to war,

while You stayed home.

I fought valiantly,

while You were afraid and relieved.

I got traumatized, then killed;

while You got peace of mind (or did You)?



You made money for those who own You.

You played big brother to an ancient evil, and protected them.

You supported oppressive regimes in the Middle East.

You tried to switch people’s souls,
by saving them from nothing.

You covered up the mistakes of Your father.

You lied all along the way, cause You had to have it Your way.

You found nothing You looked for.

You distracted, deceived, and tried to save face.

You were once born again,
while others will continue to die for Your sins.



You accomplished nothing!

You resolved nothing!

Nothing worth while will ever come out of Your mistakes!

You will be exposed, before this is over.
The truth will be heard.

You are nothing, Neocon-Man. Nothing.



Your gain. My pain.

The Haves, versus the Have-Nots.

One gets. One gives.

What a price I had to pay,

for Your ego and greed.



Copyright 2005 by Qcontent. All rights reserved.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Like "Friendly Fire"
Posted by: Joecheck on Aug 16, 2005 5:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Cindy Sheehan's marvelous non-violent direct action is part of a long history of momentous demonstrations of individual resistance. I am especially reminded of the brave mother during the Viet Nam War who persisted until she got an answer about the death of her son. Carol Burnett played her in a TV movie that grew out of a New Yorker piece. Both were called "Friendly Fire." Family values indeed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Enough Grieving Moms
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Aug 16, 2005 6:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The time is now to stop the 'Grieving Moms' from ever being made again. Mother's fight like hell to educate your children
about lying governments and corrupt people that would use them as bullet-catchers so they might make more money.
Fathers, when they come for your kids to feed to the machine,DON'T LET THEM GO. Be a real man,the trouble is HERE. That mill or chemical plant you're working at has been and will continue to poison ALL LIFE for hundreds of years.
It's time to stop killing,stop lying,stop the double dealing both abroad and at home, get the 380mpg carberator systems back into production.pay everyones healthcare,admit our faliures as a government,apologise to the wronged,pay the reperations due and quit acting like a drunken teen with a handgun.Stand up Mothers it's time for your voices to really be heard.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pearls from the Past
Posted by: treehuggingliberal on Aug 16, 2005 6:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"There's only one person who hugs the mothers and the widows, the wives and the kids upon the death of their loved one. Others hug but having committed the troops, I've got an additional responsibility to hug and that's me and I know what it's like."--George W. Bush, Washington, DC December 11, 2002.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Pearls from the Past Posted by: elmandingo
» RE: Pearls from the Past Posted by: nakis
Political hay
Posted by: redstarwraith on Aug 16, 2005 6:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree with most of the comments on this issue. It seems as thought the Democrats fail to remember that their own presidential candidate was essentially just an apologist for the war and, at the end of the day merely maintained that he could run a more effective war than Bush. Would it assuage anyone's grief if their child died under a democratic president? I don't think so. People need to get beyond these surface appearances. There really isn't so much difference between Republicans and Democrats. Both parties are super wealthy, cretinous, lying, manipulating, opportunistic swine. Do not be hyponotized into thinking that either of these parties really care about you, the working class. Both parties sit at a big table. One throws us bones, the other table scraps, and we fight like crazed dogs over which is the tastier!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Hit that nail ... RE: Political hay Posted by: fedupamerican
» RE: Political hay Posted by: Erin
» RE: Political hay Posted by: gltirebiter
» RE: Political hay Posted by: overage
» RE: Political hay Posted by: kennyg315
We, as a country, are no better
Posted by: fedupamerican on Aug 16, 2005 7:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Enough, enough, enough... with republicans, democrats, conservatives, liberals, white, black, hispanic, muslim,
christian, catholic, jew, evangelical, and on and on and on ...

Labels...I'm sick of labels!

Can we not be "Humans and Humanity" WORKING TOGETHER for the GOOD OF ALL?????

guess i'm just too idealistic -- a dreamer and a "radical," as i have been called.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Cindy Sheehan - Tipping point
Posted by: bookwoman on Aug 16, 2005 8:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have always thought that the tipping point in the Vietnam War was the magazine cover which showed the pictures of the 75 men who had been killed there the week before. Something as quiet as that did what the riots in several cities had not done. I think that's a lesson which the current Administration learned well and is probably why they have, until recently, resisted allowing photographs of the dead being released. I think that is why the owners of Sinclair Broadcasting, a Bush supporter, refused to allow "Nightline" to be broadcast the night they ran the pictures of all the people who had been killed in Iraq to that point in time.

Two weeks ago, we learned that one Ohio area had lost 21 of its people to this war in one week. If one hasn't felt the weight of this terrible war by waking up each morning to the reporting of each day's butcher's bill, the one week toll on a small town in Ohio certainly brought our attention to the pain which is being inflicted by this conflict. My daughter pointed out, the other day, that it is getting to the point where many more people in this country know, personally, someone who has been killed or incredibly injured fighting over there.

Cindy Sheehan's protest and the refusal of President Bush to speak to her, except through his hired lackeys, is waking the citizens of our country to how little this man and his minions really care about anyone except themselves.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If its Wednesday, this must be *******
Posted by: bookwoman on Aug 16, 2005 8:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
O.K., who are we honoring today. (George Bush's remark upon arriving at the ceremony at which he previously met Cindy Sheehan)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

BamasBabe
Posted by: BamasBabe on Aug 16, 2005 8:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All other comments aside, I have but one question? WHY WON'T BUSH MEET WITH THE MOTHER????????OK, MAYBE 2 QUESTION?wHAT IS HE AFRAID OF? is she going to ask a hard question?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: BamasBabe Posted by: moogyboy
» RE: BamasBabe Posted by: nakis
Gramps
Posted by: gramps on Aug 16, 2005 8:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Cindy is a shape charge under the fascist administration's Humvee.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Marketing
Posted by: moogyboy on Aug 16, 2005 8:46 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Basically what's being said in this article is that the Democratic Party needs to pick up on this Grieving Mom thread (note the easily digestible Label) and market the hell out of it. Kind of like what every company in the nation has done with every fad from Grunge to Oat Bran, regardless of what they thought of it before it was "hot".

I don't want this to be treated as a fad by a bunch of cynical politicians and their PR hacks. I'm prepared to say scew the Democrats, we know what they stand for anymore. The people, grieving moms and all, need to constitute their own movement/party/whatever and kick the old geezers out forever. Cindy's touching peoples' consciences directly, and IMO neither she nor we have any need for some political party to jump in and "help," any more than people who want a personal relationship with God need a preacher to tell them how to do that. You know what I mean?

My hats off and deepest respect to Ms. Sheehan--she ought to be the first woman president IMO, much more so than chickenhawk Hillary. And a big spitty raspberry to that farmer with the shotgun at "Camp Casey," regardless of whether he broke any laws.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Marketing Posted by: philame
» Excellent post Posted by: WhatNow?
» RE: Marketing Posted by: Jeffrey Feldman
» RE: Marketing Posted by: moogyboy
» RE: Marketing Posted by: Jeffrey Feldman
Where are the Democrats?
Posted by: redfrog on Aug 16, 2005 9:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How can the Democrats get on this bandwagon? Is that really what we want, more mumming from a party that couldn't find a clue if they were standing in a field of clues, covered in clue musk at the height of clue season? (Thanks to whomever initially crafted that metaphor.) Lifelong Democrat here, completely sick of the Democratic Party testing the water with its big toe, ignoring its roots, unwilling to lead, seemingly incapable of political courage. Those few Democrats who do not fit in this catagory are sidelined by their own party.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Where are the Democrats? Posted by: thereoncewasAmerica
» RE: Where are the Democrats? Posted by: HeidiLockwood
» RE: Where are the Democrats? Posted by: overage
Another Idea
Posted by: michele0726 on Aug 16, 2005 9:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have an idea which could change this whole thing. How about a Representative Draft. Here is the idea: Let's put the names of everyone over 21 in this country, who are natural born or those who have gained citizenship, into a big database. Then every 2 or 4 years their names are randomly selected to serve at a local, state, or national level. Of course it would have to include some restrictions such as literacy, at least a high school education, and others which would need to be discussed. But in this system it would be us---the people of the country would be making the decisions. At one time we needed to have representatives go to Washington so they could meet and talk, however, now with the type of communication we have it would be possible for them to stay at home or be in central locations. This would break up the incestuous cabal that exists in Washington now and give the power to the regular folks.

I welcome any discussion about this and know that wiser people than I could make this happen.

Let's talk.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Another Idea Posted by: AppleMommie AZ
» RE: Another Idea Posted by: mark5761
What!? Bush ask a question to us commoners? Good Luck!
Posted by: thereoncewasAmerica on Aug 16, 2005 9:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The only way "Georgie Pordgie Kill'em-Die" would speak with Cindy Sheehan is:

1- if she donates money to his Republican party
2- if Cindy were of the "Oil Persuasion"
3- if George is accompanied by Dick Cheney in a secret meeting with Karl "the Traitorous" Rove at their side.

The creature in the White House couldn't ask an itelligent question. Is he capable of giving someone correct directions to the other side of a road?

Republicans need to be three times as angry as us Liberals because this PARASITE is sucking the life out of this country right from underneath their noses.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Vigil Wednesday Night @ 7:30 find one near you
Posted by: AppleMommie AZ on Aug 16, 2005 9:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Candle light vigils to show support for Cindy and countless other families are being held tomorrow night at 7:30 pm.

Click the links below to sign up and get info.

http://www.truemajority.org

http://www.moveonpac.org/event/cindyvigils/

Hope to see you there!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Me-too Democrats
Posted by: william.slavick on Aug 16, 2005 9:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Feldman et al still do not get it. Cindy has cut through the Bush crap about the war: "What is the noble cause?" He cannot answer. His ratings will continue to fall. So the Democratic leadership, with exquisite timing,comes out with a new policy strategy: stand behind the Iraq war, criticize its conduct, and show your bellicose balls everywhere else in the world. And, like Kerry, go down in flames again in offering Republican lite to an electorate already so dumbed down as to be incapable of thinking straight.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Will We Ever Get Well?
Posted by: davidt on Aug 16, 2005 10:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We live in a very sick country and now we have to decide if it is getting BETTER or WORSE.

No media watchdogs, no security for nuclear plants, chemical plants, airports--despite the millions spent, no government agency that doesn't ultimately knuckle under to the corporate weenies, shareholders in companies that could give a damn about anything but profits, a health care system that is cracking at the seams, a President that lies every time he opens his yap.

What are the causes?

Poverty, paranoia, jealousy, suspicion, revenge, cowardice, indolence, denial, transference, psychoses of all stripes, inculcated violence, a pandering entertainment industry, isolation, ignorance, lack of roots, loneliness, desperation, lack of trust in anything or anyone.

Cindy Sheehan and I have spoken through e-mails often and I have sent her information about the Bush clan that should be on the front page but isn't. Why?

Why did we have eight years of Clinton investigations--all of which were proven to be a waste of time and money--but George Bush's lies have spilled blood, cost billions, put us in a permanent state of bankruptcy, the financial inequality between the top and the bottom of the economic ladder now resembles a South American dictatorship.

Bush, Cheney, Rice, Wolfowitz, Perle, Rumsfeld, Delay, Frist, Novak, Rove, Libby, Limbaugh, Horowitz, Coulter, Dobson, Robertson, Hastert, Chao, Norton, O' Reilly...the list could fill this page. Do you know who these people are? Of course, they talk and the Media fawns.

Do you know these names? David Ray Griffin, David Cay Johnston, Mark Crispin Miller, Robert Kennedy Jr, Daniel Briody, Paul Thompson, Laura Flanders, Barbara Ehrenreich, Eric Alterman, Joe Conason, Molly Ivins, Helen Caldicott, Charles Sheehan-Miles, Chalmers Johnson, Daniel Levitas, James Bamford. It is doubtful, they talk and the Media yawns. Why? They tell the truth. Seek them out.

Why wasn't O'Reilly fired for sexually harassing a young intern?

Donohue was fired for giving a voice to BOTH sides of an issue, but that is now called liberal BIAS!

I was watching a discussion on 9/11 on C-SPAN and a gentleman came up to the microphone and said:

"We are now in a state of political paralysis in this country because we are allowed to believe anything and KNOW nothing!"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Right message -- wrong audience? (The Dems, that is)
Posted by: abogado717 on Aug 16, 2005 10:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article lacked some necessary context -- those of us on the left (from liberals, on through progressives, straight through to radicals of all stripes) have been losing almost every battle for the past 30 years because the Right has mastered the art of "framing" and we have not.

Framing is merely the art of crafting your message in terms of the values that are important to people. It can be manipulative (and has been in the hands of the Right) but it need not be. It is manipulative when it is used to support an agenda that is either politically opportunistic (and thus will change with expediency - e.g. Democrats treat their traditional base) or that is at odds with its stated purpose (e.g. Republicans defending "the family" while doing everything they can to hurt the family -- not raising the minimum wage, not supporting family leave, rolling back workers' rights, etc).

All of us who are opposed to the war in Iraq have been losing the battle for public opinion because of the strength of the "frame" that the Pro-War side has had -- The War on Terror. The War on Terror has become the Right's new Master Narrative, its mega-frame, along with so-called Family Values. Countering this Master Narrative is really tough. Cindy Sheehan's story provides a very powerful counter-narratvive. Regardless of what you think of it, "Grieving Mom" is a powerful frame.

I think this is a frame that the Anti-War Movement needs to adopt. But I get nervous at the idea that the Democratic Party should adopt it, since the DP has been so unwilling as an institution to take a firm stand against the Iraq War -- afraid to stand up to the master narrative of the War on Terror.

For more on "framing," see George Lakoff's Rockridge Institute http://www.rockridgeinstitute.org/ and the Breakthrough Institute http://www.thebreakthrough.org

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Go Cindy!
Posted by: beffie on Aug 16, 2005 11:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The thing I love is that she's making Bu$h look like the heartless turd he is. There's a women from Tracy, CA who is going to join Cindy in Crawford. I don't remember her name but she lost her son in Iraq. She invited the press to cover her son's casket arriving home. Heard it on KXJZ (local NPR station) a few days back. Tracy's a conservative town in the CA valley, rather like Fairfield.

I don't want to co-opt her for my own political agenda. I think she's doing a fine job. She's going to draw more supporters doing what she's doing than having someone like me try to attach myself to her. I'm a socialist. You dems are too centrist for me (grinning). I want the war over NOW and then I'll get back to my ultimate goal of convincing the people rise up and seize the means of production from the bloaty fat plutocrats.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You need an honest hero, not a liar...
Posted by: FreedomForAll on Aug 16, 2005 11:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am trying to read this with an open mind, but how can I?

You are all idolizing a woman who not long ago lavished praise on President Bush for his compassion, told of how wonderful she felt after meeting with him, and then gave him support for the war by telling him to make sure her son's death counts (not her exact words, I don't have the quote in front of me).

Now I read new accounts, as told by her, that the president was cold, saying things such as 'who are we honoring here?' and more. This is not anything close to what the President was heard saying the first time.

So, my question is, is Cindy Sheehan lying now, or was she lying then? And how can anyone here give so much credibility to a person who is lying? And I am not just calling her a liar to be mean - I don't know her - I am saying she is lying because she is ON THE RECORD as telling two COMPLETELY DIFFERENT stories!

I am being sent articles like this by a well meaning liberal friend in a effort to try to show me information that might help me form another viewpoint. But how can I when I read stuff like this article, dripping with misquotes, insults, and thinly vieled threats about the President "lying in a ditch"?

Look - I applaud you all for the obvious unity in your beliefs, and I support anyone who has a voice and wants to be heard. But you might not have a lot of success bring people over from the 'other side' unless you tone down the rhetoric to be a bit more factual and less, well, nasty.

Bush met with Cindy once, he's not going to do it again, especially if all she is going to do is stand outside his home swearing and insulting him, trying to taunt him into coming out and stepping into what is surely intended to be a verbal altercation.

Maybe if she were polite, just quietly waiting, he would actually feel quilty about leaving her out there (or maybe hs advisors would...), and he would be compelled to go outside. But by Cindy spewing venom and angry rants she is giving him an excuse not to come out and face a confrontation. And not many (outside of this website, maybe) wouldn't blame him. I certainly don't.

In the end, it should be obvious that maybe you guys need another poster mom, someone who isn't on the record as telling two completely different version of the same story.

You need a new, honest hero...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Grieving Mom
Posted by: mylesh on Aug 16, 2005 11:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Isn't it ironic that Democrats must use a Republican mantra (family values) to find an issue that they very much created by whole heartedly, or spinelessly, supported-- war against the Iraqi people for the conquest of others' natural resources.

Cry for Cindy and all the Cindy's but don't shed a tear for the Democratic Party.
Find an alternative party (Greens, probably) after they find their own backbone and start supporting their own, rather than 'progressive' Democrats like Kerry. But as a party only the Greens have opposed this war from the beginning and want them out now, not later. Leave the 'later' for Dean and the Democrats and other liberals who won't take a real stand for fear of political consequences.
Myles Hoenig

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Grieving Mom Posted by: overage
Democrats Do What?
Posted by: nakis on Aug 16, 2005 11:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I just read mylash's post and it is very pertinent.

There are many posts here about the problem with the Democratic party.
Yet I still wanted to post my own.

The author calls upon the Democratic party to take claim to this woman and her action. And do what? Use her? Make her a tool of political action?

As I posted above, the Democrats as well as Republicans have many good people in their party. They may disagree on some issues but they work for the people. But that's not the only similarity. Both parties also have the wealthy elite. The Bush's, the Clintons, who use the US not for promoting the ideals of the Constitution but the ideaology of wealth gathering. Both parties hands are red. Both are guilty of subservience to the wealthy elite and being the wealthy elite. Both have taken action to bring back the robber baron economies of old. Though the Democrats are the kindler gentler criminals, ahem, I mean statesmen, they really don't deserve our support.

Just as mylash states above, choose another party. Green works pretty good. But go with whom you like.
The Republicans are proving that they are bringing themselves down. As the Democrats have.

We can use better articles than ones calling for more of the same.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Democrats Do What? Posted by: Jeffrey Feldman
» RE: Democrats Do What? Posted by: overage
Nobody over 30
Posted by: Djon on Aug 16, 2005 1:12 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One piece of advice for you who matter most, you who may wind up killing or killed in the next few years: Don't trust anybody over 30.

I'm 61. I opposed the war in Vietnam legally and very illegally. Don't trust people my age, just talk to each other, think and act.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Nobody over 30 Posted by: aswgt@ix.netcom.com
» RE: Nobody over 30 Posted by: doctordee
» RE: Nobody over 30 Posted by: moogyboy
» RE: Nobody over 30 Posted by: Djon
» RE: Nobody over 30 Posted by: cyclone
Rod from Canada
Posted by: Rod from Canada on Aug 16, 2005 1:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The recent "gains" of the Republican party? The recent fraud would be more like it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Assume
Posted by: Guy on Aug 16, 2005 3:54 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is assuming that the majority of congressional Demos ARE anti-war. I don't think that's a given. Remember that the majority of them voted in favor of the invasion of Iraq. If the Demos run with this, they could prove that they are against the war, but I wouldn't make that assumption.

Guy

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Assume Posted by: Envi
HOW DARE YOU MISTAKE SHEEHAN'S COURAGE FOR A MINDLESS WORD GAME?
Posted by: becky141 on Aug 16, 2005 4:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Cindy Sheehan is a grieving Mom who gave her son to an AMERICAN WAR that is an insult to the human race. It doesn't have one D... thing to do with whether some political hack or a bunch of thoughtless bloggers get cauight up in "reframing" this as US vs THEM, REPUBS vs DEMS, CONS vs LIBS.

Every AMERICAN is in this thing together, and the longer we play the mindless word games, the more our sons and duaghters, our fathers and brothers, get slaugthered for the benefit of the wealthy Bush clan and the Gods of Halliburton; the more our soldiers kill and maim innocent civilians in our name;and the more our fragile Republic gets "terrorized" into submitting to Patriot Acts and Theocrats and bought-out Congressmen.

It doesn't take rocket science to cut through the crap. It took AMERICANS, lots of us, grieving and shouting and crying, to expose Johnson and his lies about VietNam. And it will take scores and legions of us, talking and scheming and asking the REAL QUESTIONS about what is important to the quality of our ordinary lives, to get our country back on track.

It's time for us to GROW UP and become true American Citizens by standing up to power in whatever way we can, individually, collectively, and with integrity. That's exactly why Cindy Sheehan has captured our attention. She has set the example, and unless we follow, God