My own two cents about Cindy Sheehan's announcement, for what it's worth

[Mythsaje]

Cindy is a highly visible public figure who is not connected to the establishment. She can say and do things that others can't. Her main cause is the war--she's certainly never pretended otherwise. But this has also led her to comment on several connected issues, and she's called just about every one of them in pretty much the same way as most DUers.

I wrote a post just after the election that said that THIS Democratic congress would suffer from far closer scrutiny than ANY before it, and that they'd be very wise to pay attention to what the watchers (bloggers and those of us at DU) had to say about the issues. It says a lot that the first thing that Pelosi said was that "impeachment was off the table." A LOT of people here and elsewhere were furious about that. Still are.

It doesn't so much matter whether it can succeed as much as people think that it's past time for the Democrats to take a solid stand. Together. Half-hearted measures aren't going to impede Bushco's rush to whatever the hell they're rushing for, and it can't be done with a handful of Dems standing in the middle of the tracks about to get run over by the Krazy Klown Train because they've been left there by those who are ostensibly their allies in Congress.

Cindy's applying PUBLIC pressure, by whatever means she has at her disposal. She is, in a way, becoming OUR public voice. While it would be better for her to stay within the Democratic Party to accomplish this, we all know that people outside the established order aren't exactly welcomed by the party as a whole. If nothing else, she'll help drag Pelosi more towards our positions just to counter Cindy's accusations.

I can see the anti-Cindy position well enough here, but I'm not sure everyone's seeing the big picture. Success or failure isn't nearly as important as the DEBATE surrounding it.

[polichick]

1. Exactly, she's a shit-stirrer...

It's an important part of the equation, and has been all along. Thank-you Cindy!

[walldude]

6. Shit-stirrer is kinda ugh... how about

Feces-reorganizer?

[polichick]

10. That works too...

It's a stinky job, but somebody has to do it ~ where there's shit, there's press!

[walldude]

12. Leading them by the nose.. It's not just a job it's an adventure! n/t

[polichick]

17. Lol nt

[EFerrari]

2. Yes! It's a debate worth having.!

:)

[Vinnie From Indy]

3. Well, in my view, your view is nonsense

You write,
"Success or failure isn't nearly as important as the DEBATE surrounding it."

Not hardly! Would you rather have a spirited debate about your heart surgery or would you rather have a successful surgery?

[EFerrari]

5. Democracy is more complicated than heart surgery.

That's our challenge, isn't it?

[robinlynne]

19. The way impeachment is going to happen is through PUBLIC debate, bonehead!

[Warren DeMontague]

4. I'm tired of people attacking Pelosi, I'm tired of the all-or-nothing Nader brigade. However...

I respect Cindy's accomplishments, and I was thinking more about this over dinner- she is forcing the media to use the "I" word. That's a good thing. Okay. I can see where the other side is coming from on this, too. :thumbsup:

[SledDriver]

9. A lot of people are tired of Pelosi NOT attacking anyone.

Just sayin'.

[Warren DeMontague]

24. And a lot of people are playing divisive muckity-muck games. For god-knows-what-reason.

Just sayin'.

[SledDriver]

34. Holding our elected leaders to account for their promises is a good reason.

Ending the occupation is another one.
Getting congress to impeach instead of covering *'s ass is still another.

Then there's the idea that just because Pelosi is a female and Speaker of the House does not make her an effective leader. So far it appears that she has been more willing to protect and enable * than do anything to stop him.

Muckity-muck games = playing politics (keeping your powder dry so the repukes don't speak ill of you while you spend all of your time fundraising for you re-election campaign) while soldiers are being maimed and killed in *'s war.

[Warren DeMontague]

39. So your real problem with Pelosi is that she's female?

Sorry, I don't get your post whatsoever. Sure sounds like that's what you're saying.

Seems like Harry Reid has been just as capable of backing the fuck down against the Administration, and he's allegedly got testicles.

I understand frustration with the way some things have been handled in this congress, but I think some of the folks attacking Nancy Pelosi have other agendas entirely, agendas that have nothing to do with helping our party, impeaching Bush, OR ending the war.

[SledDriver]

47. Ehh.. Whahh??

Obviously you didn't get that post. That blueberry kool-aid must be some strong shit.

As a female, Nancy Pelosi is noteworthy as being the first female speaker of the house and the first female to be third in the line of succession to the president. If * is the "most powerful man in the world", that makes her the "most powerful woman in the world".

My point in mentioning her gender, was basically that * as a male, the "most powerful male in the world" is a lousy leader, and while she maybe noteworthy as the "first female" this or that, it takes more than just gender and a title to make a good leader.

What's this now about Harry Reid's gentials...?

Oh, and I love this one: "...I think some of the folks attacking Nancy Pelosi have other agendas entirely, agendas that have nothing to do with helping our party, impeaching Bush, OR ending the war."

OK, dude, some of those things don't seem to be on Nancy Pelosi's agenda either.

[Quantess]

54. Gross.

You are even thinking about Harry Reid's genitals?
You must be extremely bored.

[SledDriver]

55. Read the post I was replying to.

n/t

[Quantess]

41. Do you even know anything about Pelosi?

Other than she's now madame speaker of the House, and she said "impeachment is off the table"? Apparently, that's all you know about her.

She isn't in her position for nothing. She's been great! I voted for her, when I lived in SF in the 1990s.

BTW, I'm upset with her for abandoning impeachment, as well. But I also see her as wanting to be diplomatic (although Bush is not a figure who deserves to be treated with diplomacy).

[Warren DeMontague]

42. This person thinks that other than the (D) after her name, there's no way to tell she's a Democrat.

Uh Huh. :crazy:

[SledDriver]

44. If I did, how would I convince you?

How about if I look her up on Wikipedia and then cut-and-paste some stuff into this post? OK, that was harsh, but really how?

She can be diplomatic all she wants. But her numbers are going down and the numbers supporting impeachment are going up.

[Quantess]

46. Oh believe me, I want impeachment for both of those clowns....

more than you do!
A lot more than you do!

10 x more than you do, I'll bet.

Edit: you could start by admitting that the only things you have previously heard about Nancy Pelosi, Madame Speaker of the House, is that she's a Liberal from the San Francisco District of California.

[SledDriver]

48. 1000 times more???

Really?

Which one of us was defending the congress person opposed to it?

You have a good night now.

[Quantess]

49. What the **** are you talking about?

"Which one of us was defending the congress person opposed to it?"

Opposed to what?
And, please enlighten me, what is it ?

[Quantess]

50. Oh, okay. "it" = impeachment.

Silly me.
I get confused when I'm dealing with contrary, Republican types, who lie, and say they are are Democratic in nature.

[SledDriver]

52. Republican types?

So anyone who DARES question the strategy of the Dem leadership is automatically a liar and a repuke?

I should just swallow the mother-fucking kool-aid and go along with whatever and keep my opinion to myself?

Oh, that's very Democratic in nature. Where have I heard that before?

[Quantess]

53. I meant those sentiments just for you.

Since you are such a sincere Liberal Democrat.

[Quantess]

51. Self edit.

[LittleClarkie]

40. That's about the only good thing I'm seeing so far. People are talking about it.

So I'll give her credit for that, and I hope that's all she was REALLY after. A publicity stunt, as it were, to get impeachment talk rolling.

[Swamp Rat]

7. Debate increases the likelihood of success.

There are a lot of claims made about her that are not true, some of which are occasionally used in debate, or more often used to just plainly attack her person, but neither are productive.

I really hope we can influence her to run as a Dem, as this will help us remain more unified against the republicans in the long run, during the general election.

[SledDriver]

8. I wonder how many here at DU...

who actually went down to Crawford in 2005 to Camp Casey in support of Cindy, are now shit-hammering her for challenging Nancy Pelosi (R)CA?

[Warren DeMontague]

25. Yes, "Nancy Pelosi is a Republican."

Give me a fucking break.

[SledDriver]

37. Aside from the D next to her name, how can you tell?

"Impeachment is off the table", "Yea" on the latest war spending bill...

Take a deep breath...

[Warren DeMontague]

38. People certainly have had a lot of fun with that "off the table" statement.

Frankly, it's massively taken out of context. The procedure to uncover potentially impeachable offenses in the Bush administration is proceeding as much as is possible given the circumstances, "off the table", "on the table", whatever. If it was "on the table" nothing would be different. Frankly, the impediment to finding out precisely how much Bush has broken the law isn't Nancy Pelosi and the subpoenas coming out of the house- it's the foot dragging and evasion by the Administration.. and if it (as I suspect it will) results in a Constitutional Confrontation that has to be decided by the SCOTUS, you can blame the SENATE - not the House - for the two right-wing hacks that Bush was allowed to place there.

But- you said, and I quote: "Aside from the D next to her name, how can you tell?" regarding Nancy Pelosi being a Democrat.

http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=H0222103&type=category&category=Abortion%20Issues

2006 Representative Pelosi supported the interests of the Planned Parenthood 100 percent in 2006.

2006 In 2006 NARAL Pro-Choice America-Endorsements endorsed Representative Pelosi.

2005-2006 Representative Pelosi supported the interests of the National Right to Life Committee 0 percent in 2005-2006.

2005 Representative Pelosi supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 100 percent in 2005.

2004 Representative Pelosi supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 100 percent in 2004.

2003-2004 Representative Pelosi supported the interests of the National Right to Life Committee 0 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Representative Pelosi supported the interests of the Democrats for Life of America 0 percent in 2003-2004.

http://www.ontheissues.org/CA/Nancy_Pelosi_Abortion.htm

(Granted, this site needs to be updated- they still have her as minority leader. But her positions haven't changed. Now, remember, your question was "Aside from the D next to her name, how can you tell Nancy Pelosi is a Democrat?")

Nancy Pelosi:


Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines.

Voted NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions.

Voted NO on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother’s life.

Voted NO on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad.

Supported funding contraception and UN family planning.

Nancy Pelosi on Civil Rights:

# Voted NO on Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage. (Jul 2006)
# Voted NO on making the PATRIOT Act permanent. (Dec 2005)
# Voted NO on Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage. (Sep 2004)
# Voted NO on protecting the Pledge of Allegiance. (Sep 2004)
# Voted NO on constitutional amendment prohibiting flag desecration. (Jun 2003)
# Voted NO on banning gay adoptions in DC. (Jul 1999)
# Voted NO on ending preferential treatment by race in college admissions. (May 1998)
# Constitutional Amendment for equal rights by gender. (Mar 2001)
# Rated 87% by the ACLU, indicating a pro-civil rights voting record. (Dec 2002)
# Supported legislation on violence against women & safety. (Jul 1999)
# Supported funding for women's and disadvantaged businesses. (Jul 1999)

Nancy Pelosi on Crime:

# Voted YES on funding for alternative sentencing instead of more prisons. (Jun 2000)
# Voted NO on more prosecution and sentencing for juvenile crime. (Jun 1999)
# Voted YES on maintaining right of habeus corpus in Death Penalty Appeals. (Mar 1996)
# Voted NO on making federal death penalty appeals harder. (Feb 1995)
# Voted YES on replacing death penalty with life imprisonment. (Apr 1994)
# Rated 88% by CURE, indicating pro-rehabilitation crime votes. (Dec 2000)
# Moratorium on death penalty; more DNA testing. (Mar 2001)
# More funding and stricter sentencing for hate crimes. (Apr 2001)

Nancy Pelosi on the idiotic, bullshit "Drug War":

* Voted NO on military border patrols to battle drugs & terrorism. (Sep 2001)
* Voted NO on prohibiting needle exchange & medical marijuana in DC. (Oct 1999)
* Voted NO on subjecting federal employees to random drug tests. (Sep 1998)
* Legalize medical marijuana. (Jul 2001)

Nancy Pelosi on Education:

* Voted YES on allowing Courts to decide on "God" in Pledge of Allegiance. (Jul 2006)
* Voted YES on $84 million in grants for Black and Hispanic colleges. (Mar 2006)
* Voted NO on allowing school prayer during the War on Terror. (Nov 2001)
* Voted YES on requiring states to test students. (May 2001)
* Voted NO on allowing vouchers in DC schools. (Aug 1998)
* Voted NO on vouchers for private & parochial schools. (Nov 1997)
* Reduce class size to 18 children in grades 1 to 3. (Mar 2001)
* Opposes requiring schools to allow school prayer. (Jan 2001)
* Rated 100% by the NEA, indicating pro-public education votes. (Dec 2003)
* Supported funding for teacher training & other initiatives. (Jul 1999)

Nancy Pelosi on energy and oil:

* Bush's energy plan is running out the clock until 2008. (May 2007)
* Commit to achieve energy independence within 10 years. (Jun 2006)
* Voted YES on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies. (Jan 2007)
* Voted NO on scheduling permitting for new oil refinieries. (Jun 2006)
* Voted NO on authorizing construction of new oil refineries. (Oct 2005)
* Voted NO on passage of the Bush Administration national energy policy. (Jun 2004)
* Voted NO on implementing Bush-Cheney national energy policy. (Nov 2003)
* Voted YES on raising CAFE standards; incentives for alternative fuels. (Aug 2001)
* Voted YES on prohibiting oil drilling & development in ANWR. (Aug 2001)
* Voted YES on starting implementation of Kyoto Protocol. (Jun 2000)
* Regulate wholesale electricity & gas prices. (Mar 2001)
* Preserve Alaska's ANWR instead of drilling it. (Feb 2001)

Now, wait a minute. What was your question, again? Oh yeah- "Aside from the D next to her name, how can you tell Nancy Pelosi is a Democrat?"

Nancy Pelosi on the Environment:

* Voted YES on increasing AMTRAK funding by adding $214M to $900M. (Jun 2006)
* Voted YES on barring website promoting Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump. (May 2006)
* Voted NO on deauthorizing "critical habitat" for endangered species. (Sep 2005)
* Voted NO on speeding up approval of forest thinning projects. (Nov 2003)
* Rated 90% by the LCV, indicating pro-environment votes. (Dec 2003)

Nancy Pelosi on Health Care:

* Voted YES on requiring negotiated Rx prices for Medicare part D. (Jan 2007)
* Voted NO on denying non-emergency treatment for lack of Medicare co-pay. (Feb 2006)
* Voted NO on limiting medical malpractice lawsuits to $250,000 damages. (May 2004)
* Voted NO on limited prescription drug benefit for Medicare recipients. (Nov 2003)
* Voted YES on allowing reimportation of prescription drugs. (Jul 2003)
* Voted NO on small business associations for buying health insurance. (Jun 2003)
* Voted NO on capping damages & setting time limits in medical lawsuits. (Mar 2003)
* Voted NO on allowing suing HMOs, but under federal rules & limited award. (Aug 2001)
* Voted NO on subsidize privat insurance for Medicare Rx drug coverage. (Jun 2000)
* Voted NO on banning physician-assisted suicide. (Oct 1999)
* Voted NO on establishing tax-exempt Medical Savings Accounts. (Oct 1999)
* MEDS Plan: Cover senior Rx under Medicare. (Jan 2001)
* Rated 100% by APHA, indicating a pro-public health record. (Dec 2003)
* Make health care a right, not a privilege. (Nov 1999)
* Supported funding women's health needs. (Jul 1999)
* Supported funding older women's health. (Jul 1999)
* Supported funding Prenatal and Postpartum Care. (Jul 1999)
* Supported funding Family and Children's Coverage. (Jul 1999)

"Aside from the D next to her name, how can you tell Nancy Pelosi is a Democrat?"

Nancy Pelosi on war & peace:

* We cannot occupy Iraq indefinitely: We need an exit plan. (Feb 2005)
* Voted YES on redeploying US troops out of Iraq starting in 90 days. (May 2007)
* Voted NO on declaring Iraq part of War on Terror with no exit date. (Jun 2006)
* Voted NO on approving removal of Saddam & valiant service of US troops. (Mar 2004)
* Voted NO on authorizing military force in Iraq. (Oct 2002)

Nancy Pelosi on the Iraq War, before it became trendy to be opposed to it:

"I have absolutely no regret about my vote against this war. The same questions remain. The cost in human lives, the cost to our budget, probably 100 billion. We could have probably brought down that statue for a lot less."

Geez. Yeah, Chief. It's really fucking hard to tell that Nancy Pelosi is a Democrat.

CNN: May 21, 2004: Pelosi Questions Bush's Competence

How about something a little more current?

Nancy Pelosi, 7-9-07: "The American people are outraged at the Bush Administration’s misplaced priorities – that is why Congress will hold the Administration accountable with votes this month to end the war and redeploy the troops. This will include a vote on legislation to begin redeployment of our troops within 120 days."

Nancy Pelosi, 7-10-07: "The American people have rejected the President's failed policies in Iraq and his war without end. The situation on the ground in Iraq is worsening, and the Iraqi government has failed to meet the benchmarks set in law. This week, every Member of the House will have an opportunity to vote to set a new direction in Iraq. The American people want Congress to bring our troops home, refocus our efforts to fighting terrorism, and hold the Bush Administration accountable.”

...In short, Nancy Pelosi is 100% pro-choice, anti-Iraq War, anti-Bush, pro equal rights for Gays, in favor of the separation of church and state, with respect for the constitution and civil liberties.

that's a really funny fucking sounding Republican.

Do you need more quotes? More links? More evidence? Or are you still gonna fart around here spewing garbage about how "other than the D after her name, how can you tell Pelosi's a Democrat."?

[SledDriver]

43. Wow, did you put all of that together to rebut little old me?

I hope you didn't spend too much time compiling all that. Thanks. Very informative.

Yep, that there is the voting record of a real Democrat. I notice that all of those items, with the exception of maybe 3 or 4 , are dated prior to January 2007. So I will grant that, based on that fantastic compilation, she certainly was very probably a D prior to January 2007. My bad.

But then came that whole "impeachment off the table" thing... and everybody kinda went "huh?".
Some of us frowned, cocked our heads, and went "what the fuck is this shit now?".
Others paused, then quickly downed that last swig of blueberry kool-aid and continued to cheer.

I am aware of the fact that Ms. Pelosi has voted with the Ds %100 of the time in this current congress.

Here's a quote for you:
"The election of 2006 was a call to change — not merely to change the control of Congress, but for a new direction for our country. Nowhere were the American people more clear about the need for a new direction than in Iraq. The American people rejected an open-ended obligation to a war without end."

I'm still waiting for this 100% pro-choice, anti-Iraq War, anti-Bush, pro equal rights for Gays, in favor of the separation of church and state, with respect for the constitution and civil liberties leader to start moving us in that new direction. Voting to require negotiated prescription prices for Medicare D is great and noble and only applies to a very small majority of people who voted D in November to END THE WAR AND BRING THE TROOPS HOME. Instead we get "impeachment is off the table" and another blank check for *'s war. And while we "wait until September" for the surge report, more people die.

We can go back and forth on this. I'll concede that you obviously support her regardless of what I perceive to be CYA *-enabling. Which is fine. We can agree to disagree. I'll also concede that you are more passionate in your support for her than I am in my support for Cindy to fuck with her margin in the next election, as evidenced by that fantastic cut-and-paste rebuttal you posted. That really shut me up!

:hi:

[Warren DeMontague]

56. Thanks. Going back to the original post upthread;

My point was that, upon consideration, perhaps Sheehan deserves some props for merely forcing the media to use the "I" word. Obviously I think there can and will be a point at which a run against Pelosi as an independent will become counter-productive.

Beyond that, I'm just tired of seeing people go off on Pelosi; She's about as Progressive as we could possibly hope for in a Speaker of the House; She's way more progressive than what we would have gotten out of Dick Gephardt. She has made ending the Iraq War a VERY high priority. By any yardstick, she's a solid Democrat. Yes, criticize her and the congress for dragging their feet and backing down; those are legitimate criticisms. But my point was merely that, it's not really fair to call her a "Republican".

Peace.

[SledDriver]

57. Sorry about the reublican thing.

That was way out on line and in retrospect, kinda dumb.

I am familiar with Ms. Pelosi's record, even more so now, as liberal, progressive, and of course a Democrat.

My point in backing Cindy was basically that by doing that she would be holding Ms. Pelosi's "feet to the fire" by getting and keeping the idea of impeachment out there, which IMHO is a good thing. And I agree, that a serious run against Pelosi as an independent would eventually hurt both and benefit neither. I did get carried away with the crticism, but in the end I meant no real disrespect.

Peace to you as well. :toast:

[Warren DeMontague]

58. I suspect we want exactly the same things.

Hopefully we'll get there. :patriot:

[ruggerson]

11. But no one takes her seriously

except for a small segment of people who already buy what she's offering.

She's a joke. A parody. She is not pushing the issue forward anymore, she is merely creating division, a sad diversion, and desperately trying to keep herself in the public eye.

I think she's very destructive at this point. (but then, she lost me a year and a half ago at the State of the Union.)

[IChing]

15. I disagree she brings the debate on impeachment to the table

I know California, you do not.
It is political theater and we need that.

After all Hollywood is here and not in your state.

[robinlynne]

20. I don't know of anyone else who feels the way you do. Everyone I know respects her

tremendously. She has given us a hell of a lot.

[beyurslf]

13. All she has done is ensure that Pelosi will not put impeachment on the table.

If she puts it out there now, she looks like the caved to blackmail.

[The Straight Story]

16. If pelosi is that weak...than she is no leader

And one might add she herself, before all this, took it off the table.

[ConsAreLiars]

14. Her greatest "sin," offending even some who post on DU, is to focus attention

on the corporatist/imperialist basis for the invasion and occupation. Bringing this fact into the public debate is, of course, highly irritating to those who believe that maintaining corporate support for Democratic politicians (and the reverse) is a good thing. This same outlook is seen when those same posters feign outrage at Nader or Moore or ANSWER or even Churchill Ward.

It is not that they oppose debate, it is that a certain subject should not be discussed, and trashing the messenger is a time-tested tactic for getting the discussion away from the core truths that are being exposed.

(edit to add missing comma)

[robinlynne]

21. right on!

[ConsAreLiars]

29. Thanks. There are cerrtain things that are forbidden to say, even here.

She says them.

[robinlynne]

18. Thank-you. You are so right!

[Bitwit1234]

22. No just think she has a right to run in the primary

but I think her statement, If they don't impeach she run...well answer me this..is that the only reason she would want to run for congress. A true patriot would want to run for congress to change the direction this country is going in. Health care for everyone. Education, stop the war. Energy, is another. A person should not be a one issue congress person. And that's the way I feel.

I also think that anybody has a right to run in the primary. If they loose they should stop. It only hurts the democratic party to see sour grapes like Liberman running as an independent....it splits the party.

[robinlynne]

33. don't compare cindy sheehan to lieberman. please.

[pnwmom]

23. If she chooses to run in the primary, that's her perfect right, and I wouldn't

criticize her for that.

But when she makes statements such as those I heard lately (for example, that all the recent wars except Vietnam -- including WW2 -- were STARTED by the Democrats, she sounds like she's losing her mind. Seriously.

[philosophie_en_rose]

26. "The Democratic Party is the Party of Slavery."

You're not seeing the big picture either. Do you think ranting about taxes and accusing modern Democrats of supporting fucking slavery is going to accomplish a damned thing?

[Mythsaje]

28. I had to re-read that particular statement myself...

But that's not what she's saying. The fact is that the Dems aren't historically blameless either. But compared to what we're seeing from the Republicans now, the Dems are a damn sight better. That doesn't mean they're not worthy of criticism, for many of the reasons she points out.

If we want the Democratic Party to represent US, we need to take it back from the corporatists. And that's just a basic fact, completely aside from what Cindy had to say about it.

[WilliamPitt]

27. "Success or failure isn't nearly as important as the DEBATE surrounding it."

:toast:

[Vidar]

30. Well stated. Cindy is using her position as a public figure to

apply pressure to Pelosi.

[OneBlueSky]

31. well, all I know is that, until today, the corporate media never even mentioned impeachment . . .

but today they were all talking about it . . . to me that's a pretty significant accomplishment for anyone, and particularly for a private citizen with no "official" platform . . .

as for Pelosi . . . well, she lost me a long time ago . . . last November we elected a Democratic Congress to do two things -- bring an end to the Iraq war, and expose BushCo's crimes, through impeachment if necessary (and it most certainly is necessary) . . . and to date they have not only accomplished neither, they haven't even made any real effort . . .

not what I, or many others, anticipated . . . not what I, or many others, find even remotely acceptable . . . and since they don't seem to respond to public pressure, maybe it's time for some new tactics to get their attention . . . I mean, people are dying every day, and the BushCo crime spree trundles merrily along every day, lining the pockets of the oil companies (and their White House cohorts) with ungodly profits . . . they MUST be stopped . . .

if not by Congress, then by whom? . . .

[Forkboy]

32. K&R

Your last line sums it up perfectly.

[buddhamama]

35. i applaud her efforts and thank her for being an engaged citizen

i am tired of the discussion already and this will be my last post on the topic of her possible run.

'We the People', remember? maybe it is because i am not a follower and never have been but i cannot dislike someone simply because they do not vote as i do. i might vehemently disagree with them and do, but the disagreements are due to fundamental differences of opinions/beliefs rather than the "D" or lack of it next to their name. i give credit to anyone who is an active, engaged citizen.
i realize i am at odds with the majority of DUers on this.

For me, There is nothing more frightening than an apathetic, disengaged citizenry.

Democracy is an ideal that must be lived. And when 50% of the electorate does not vote, the best that can be said for our Democracy is that it isn't dead. yet.

SO, while i disagree with the statement she made yesterday, i will not attack her for considering a run. She is exercising her Rights as a citizen of this country. i'd be a hypocrite if i disparaged her for it.

[cally]

36. Sheehan is not from Pelosi's district

so it annoys me that she's decided to run. I don't like any politician moving to run for office.

[Cleita]

45. I hate to put a Christian slant on things but it seems like

JC did similar things like Cindy. He stuck to his principles and stepped on very many establishment toes while he did so. He managed at times to even alienate his supporters just like Cindy has because he was so firm in what he believed was righteous. It got him crucified and no doubt so will Cindy be crucified in print even by those who support her in most of her positions. It's a shame that people don't separate their emotions from the person. It's okay to disagree with someone without having to destroy everything they stand for. After all that's what the propaganda media does. We should aspire to be better.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

59. She's an uppity citizen who dares to question the shibboleths of the establishment.

A dangerous woman who threatens the very foundations of a broken system that allows this nation to kill hundreds of thousands of people in the name of political expediency.

She is saying NO to the bosses while those who attack her continue to bow and scrape and make excuses for them.