Cindy Sheehan Occupies John Conyers' Office

[shraby]

From Dailykos:
<http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/7/23/134354/715>
I just got a live report from David Swanson, who says Conyers is nowhere to be found - but Sheehan, Rev. Lennox Yearwood, and former CIA presidential briefer Ray McGovern are inside his office holding a press conference!

In fact, there are so many reporters with Cindy that they are taking turns going into the packed office to ask questions.

At least 300 activists are lining the halls outside the office, both the marchers and those who went directly to the Capitol.

bob fertik's diary :: ::
Update 1:30: Conyers staff is negotiating with activists to move the protest to a larger room.

In Detroit, 50 people went to Conyers' district office, but they only let 5 people in and wouldn't let them keep their cellphones so we're not getting any reports.

Update 1:35: Conyers just arrived!! As he walked down the hall, activists shouted IMPEACH so loud the whole floor echoed. Conyers and his staff took Cindy, Rev., and Ray into a private office without the media.

<http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/7/23/134354/715>

[proud2BlibKansan]

1. K AND R!!

Go Cindy!!!

[DancingBear]

2. Good!!

Start the ball rolling, Cindy, start it rolling.

And a hearty "f$%k off" to all who think it isn't the right "venue."

Go Cindy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Swamp Rat]

3. Geaux Cindy!!

[Pachamama]

17. Geaux Geaux Cindy!!!!

:bounce:

[Swamp Rat]

21. WOOHOO!! PACHAMAMA!!!

:hug: :bounce:



:group: :patriot:

[Pachamama]

38. I wish I had a printer nearby....

I'd print out that bumpersticker and put it on the back of my Prius rental as I drive around in SoCal...

:hi:

[madokie]

32. OT here

would it be ok if I print this and put in on my truck's back window. I have some clear cling material that it would work well on and it says just exactly what I would like to say, errr well I wish dick would fit on there too, but, :-)

[Swamp Rat]

34. Of course. I made it for you and every other American patriot here.

:hi:

[madokie]

84. Thanks, but that one there would prolly get me whupped around here though

:rofl:

[Ghost in the Machine]

4. Go Cindy!

I'm glad to hear that the Honorable Mr. Conyers is meeting with them!

Keep us updated!

[Vidar]

5. Good for Cindy.

[wuushew]

6. Can someone explain how this is pragmatic goal seeking?

:shrug:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

8. Because Conyers is the kind of man who listens to sit-ins.

At least, he used to be.

[wuushew]

28. What does he as a senior member of Congress not know?

Numerous reports exist for the reading and it is not uncommon for politicians to go to Iraq periodically for a variety of reasons. Does Ms. Sheehan have new views pertinent to the Iraq war to reveal?

Look at the opportunity cost. The time Conyers spends with her could be used for more investigation of numerous Executive Branch breaches and she could be out giving a public speech somewhere.


I want to win the rhetoric battle. The psychology of public persuasion is well studied. Some actions that have occurred have been contrary to this purpose.

[MrMickeysMom]

64. Probably not too much that he doesn't know... however, that would not be the point

... which is that We, The People, would be reminding this body (highlighting it publicly) that this Congress must respond to duty under the Constitution.

I don't see it getting the coverage it deserves outside of this action. Nothing else I did carried this message to MY newspaper this morning, or included a mention at the top of the hour on NPR.

[MonkeyFunk]

9. They can't

Conyers is one of the few people actually trying to accomplish what they want.

Just more of the same - the left doing the right-wing's dirty work.

[Taverner]

18. Yep

Who needs Rove when you have Code Pink?

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[proud2BlibKansan]

61. The truth about Code Pink

I was in DC a month ago. I saw Code Pink and many other activists going into republican's offices and approaching republicans in the halls of the congressional office buildings. I also saw Code Pink and other activists going into the offices of Democrats. Guess who the media was following around?

I had lunch in the cafeteria of one of the office buildings with 2 of my friends from Camp Casey. They have been in DC for 6 months lobbying to end the war. One of them was called an "idiot liberal" by one of the most "liberal" members of the Democratic party. As we ate, reporters approached wanting interviews. There must have been dozens of congress reps and their staff members in that cafeteria. But I did not see any reporters interviewing anyone but my 2 activist friends. What had Congress worked on that morning? What bills were they considering for the afternoon session? What hearings were being held? Don't ask any of the reporters assigned to actually REPORT on Congress. They seem much more interested in controversy. I saw it with my own eyes.

To read here that these activists are giving the republicans a free ride and not pressuring them is disheartening. It is false information posted by keyboard commandos who have probably NEVER been where I was to see what I saw. And I somehow doubt they are interested in going to Congress and seeing the truth.

[stimbox]

95. sheesh

Who needs Rove when we have a butt load of DLCers around here.
:wtf:

[Webster Green]

124. More bullshit!

Code Pink is right on!

[Taverner]

126. Yeah, harassing all of our allies and further splintering the party is right on

I love how some here seem to revel in the circular firing squad we in this party always form.

Maybe they could run Nader against Conyers in this next election!

Or they could all defect to the Green party! yay!

Playing right into Rove's hands....joy

[DancingBear]

127. Or we could all stick our heads in the sand and pretend all is well

Will you show us how??

[Taverner]

128. No the way it works is you keep doing like congress has been doing

Offering up different bills to get us out of Iraq, hoping that if they keep doing it, eventually one will stick. If the bills aren't perfect, boo hoo. Nothing in this world is. If it doesn't do everything you want it to do, again, boo hoo - you go with what you can.

Honestly, would you rather wait for another 4000 soldiers to die, just so we can end the Iraq war on your terms - because that is what will happen. If we lose congress and don't gain the WH, then expect the Iraq war to rage on, indefinitely.

If the deaths of more soldiers is fine on your conscience, than fine with you. I want to end the war, personally.

[Webster Green]

123. Bullshit!

[guruoo]

175. Seen the effect first-hand...

during the '04 election. I'd have moderate, or conservative friends and others convinced that
Bush was wrong for the country one day, and the next time I'd see them they'd be right back
on the rightwing bandwagon after seeing media coverage of one of these
(for lack of a better term) 'protest actions'.

That's when I came up with a new 1st rule
of progressive politics: Don't scare the 'straights'.

[Swamp Rat]

10. What is "is pragmatic goal seeking" and when did Cindy ever claim to be doing it?

:shrug:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

12. Closing your eyes and thinking of England.

[ORDagnabbit]

14. cause conyers and the dems were screaming for impeachment befor they got into power this last

election.

they're either against whats going on in our country or they're working to keep the status quo

[pacalo]

19. Conyers has said since the madness began that congress can't act until they hear from the people.

In his words, their "hands are tied" until the people speak out.

(As a big fan of Conyers', I pay attention to everything he says, believe me.)

[proud2BlibKansan]

23. And the people haven't spoken out?

Cindy is handing Conyers petitions with ONE MILLION signatures. Is that enough speaking out?

[pacalo]

43. That should do it! One million signatures -- WOW!

[Cerridwen]

27. I want to make sure I understand a general sentiment I see

here, partly expressed in your post...

Why do we try to address the repubs when we know they won't listen?

Why do we then address those who support our ideas because they already agree?

So, if I understand this correctly, we shouldn't waste our time on people who disagree because they disagree and we shouldn't waste our time on people who agree because they agree?

There's a funny line in West Wing in which Sam asks Toby why he's being asked to "preach to the choir" to which Toby responds, "That's how you get them to sing."

I hope Cindy took her tuning fork.

:D

[John Q. Citizen]

33. Conyers is powerful. Power makes no concessions without demands being

placed upon it.

Read "A People's History of the US," and you will see that it is indeed an extremely pragmatic tactic.

If you believe we can just leave everything up to the powerful and it will get us squat, you aren't being pragmatic at all.

[wuushew]

52. When did I say that?

I saw the movie "Amazing Grace" this year and in that film they to were trying to abolish the British slave trade by a variety of means. Some of those tactics were not not positive in the pursuit of that goal. Appeals to emotion, moral propaganda and guile were ultimately successful.

Cindy strikes me as more of a John Brown type character. How was he useful to abolition when he scared the shit out of the South and accelerated the succession movement?


How do you influence politicians? There is only one way I know of and that is to make their current political views less than 50% popular in a primary election, thereby forcing a change in professed views.


what illicits sympathy: stoic suffering and dignified resolve. It has been shown time and time again that in group dynamics people tend to eschew boat rockers. The trick to winning friends and influencing people is to create the impression that the majority view is being hampered by the oppression of a minority.


The anti-war movement needs to apply the principles of human psychology with a greater degree of efficacy.

I applaud the goals but question the tactics.

[John Q. Citizen]

80. Cindy is non-violent, so I don't see how your analogy is relevant. Also,

the succession movement speeded up drastically the abolition of slavery.

The Emancipation Proclaimation was in responce to the succession movement.

Let's look at the civil right's movement. They sat in, they refused to leave and they were non-violent. But without the Black Panthers and other groups who didn't profess non-violence, the non-violent part of the civil rights movement would have had a much harder and longer struggle.

The public was able to accept MLK as "centrist" because the more violent wing of the struggle was of course percieved as more radical. It became a question of hamburger A or hamberger B.

I suggest you put into practice your theories of what Cindy should do and do them yourself. Then you can see if your tactics are truely the most effective.

Did you run last election? If not, why not?

[wuushew]

87. Please admit there is at least some angle to rebut your views

If you can't do that we can't have a rational discussion.

[John Q. Citizen]

92. My views or my facts? Do you conceed that Cindy is non-violent and that

Brown led a violent revolution against the slavers? Do you conceed that those are facts, or are you referenig to that as my "views?"

[wuushew]

94. I only brought up Brown because of the depth of his activism

There are other examples. Carey Nation was pro-temperance and she didn't kill anybody.

[John Q. Citizen]

101. Martin Luther King is another example. Or Gandhi. They were very active.

So you see Cindy as someone like MLK or Gandhi?

[wuushew]

103. You're just making my point

I want Cindy to be MORE like those two.

All my posts have revolved around the degree and effectiveness to which her message has an effect on political behavior and public opinion. I wanted to hijack this thread and discuss ways at which we all agree these things can be measured and objectively graded and evaluated in terms of success or failure.

[John Q. Citizen]

109. Since the whole country is talking about and focused on impeachment, and

ending the illegal occupation that the Dems keep voting to fund, I would assume that Cindy has been doing a superb job.

It wasn't the Dems that have led on either of these two issues, so the credit certainly doesn't go to them. They are far behind the citizens on both of these issues.

Pelosi taking impeachment and the power of the purse off the table has impeeded progress somewhat, but with effort and solidarity, we will overcome!

[saracat]

133. The whole country is NOT talking about Impeachment.They are talking about ending the war

NOT impeachment.That is only the left fringe!

[proud2BlibKansan]

88. John Brown was a violent murderer

Cindy is non-violent. What a stupid comparison.

[Mark E. Smith]

169. It isn't

Just the usual run amok stuff one finds so much of in this neck of the woods.

Destructive and embarrassing is how I'd describe it.

[panader0]

7. Let me be number 5

[blondeatlast]

11. Good--just please allow them to get their work done. nt

[pacalo]

13. Share the praise for Ray McGovern, too! My thanks to both Cindy & Ray!

[Swamp Rat]

16. Yaaay Ray!!!!

:kick:

[pacalo]

20. Thanks, Swampie!

:hi:

[Swamp Rat]

24. Ray's a true American patriot, like Cindy.

[thereismore]

15. Thank you Cindy, Thank you John Conyers. nt

[matcom]

22. um, why aren't they in the offices of the repukes who are wavering?

why the one guy who has SAID he was ready to impeach?

what am I missing here?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

29. Is Conyers advocating impeachment?

Then he's got nothing to worry about by talking to Cindy and Code Pink.

[Freddie Stubbs]

30. Which Republican are wavering about impeachment?

:shrug:

[Swamp Rat]

31. Because the problem begins with the Democrats who will not impeach.

We already know where the refucklicans stand. They won't listen to her, especially since they do not have family dying in Iraq.

[DancingBear]

37. YES!!!!!!!

She is EXACTLY where she should be, and if she asks for a little help I'll be there with bells on.

[proud2BlibKansan]

35. What power do the repukes have?

Can they introduce articles of impeachment?

We also don't know that there are no activists in repuke offices today. But I think we can guess the MSM is more interested in the activists in Conyers' office. I was in DC a month ago and saw this with my own eyes. The media is far more interested in the activists who are lobbying the Dems. The ones in repuke offices were ignored.

[Swamp Rat]

39. Well, they have the power to stop hating America and resign.

Two years from now many of the neo-nazi refucklicans will be gone. :)

[proud2BlibKansan]

42. We need to start removing them now

They can do a lot of damage in 16 months.

[Swamp Rat]

46. IMPEACH NOW!!

:kick:



:kick:

[KansDem]

89. We need to start removing them now--to restore faith in our system.

I'm all for impeachment, but these yahoos have to be held accountable, or they'll just return later. Rep. Lee Hamilton wanted to be "http://www.consortiumnews.com/2000/110500b.html">bi-partisan" about the whole Iran/Contra affair and where did that get him? His counterpart on the Republican side was no other than...Rep. Dick Cheney! So there we have it: a coverup in which the principle crooks got away was assured. Impeachment is only the beginning; Impeach then indict and, following a fair trail, imprison. We can't afford to have these thugs and cutthroats back for another round of neo-con fascism, American style.

[proud2BlibKansan]

93. Amen!!

[Enrique]

73. they have enormous power

if the republicans signed on to impeachment, it would happen and it would be meaningful. If they don't (which they won't), then impeachment won't happen, or else (not likely) it will happen but it will be just another partisan impeachment like Clinton's.

[John Q. Citizen]

86. Uh, why aren't you? What's missing is you, here. If you have a better idea, go for it,

and let us know how well it works.

In the meantime, I'm glad Cindy is doing what she's doing.

[proud2BlibKansan]

90. He said he was ready in 2005, he said he was ready in 2006,

he said he was ready in January and in March and then again this last Friday. So if he is ready, he needs to DO IT.

[ellisonz]

136. Not much.

[bdamomma]

26. great, let Cindy do her thing.

I'm with her, I want these psychotic men to go.

[shireen]

36. i would have loved to hear that sound effect!

As he walked down the hall, activists shouted IMPEACH so loud the whole floor echoed.

I have a feeling that Conyers will be a gracious host to the protestors. He's on our side regarding the impeachment issue, but as chair of the judiciary committee, he has to tread carefully. I believe he's thinking strategically about it.

[cmkramer]

40. Why is he enabling this cheap famewhore? n/t

[yodermon]

41. let's see what you do when your children are slaughtered. n/t

[kster]

49. Have your children slaughtered and come to find out it was ALL based on a LIE

Cindy is being polite compared to how some people would react. :nuke:

[cmkramer]

59. Here's the thing

Nobody forced Sheehan's kid to join the service. When you join during wartime, you take a huge risk which unfortunately for him and his loved ones, did not pay off.

[blogslut]

70. Oh, I see

So, all these American soldiers died totally by their own choice? What about their commander in chief? He is blameless?

Your argument is old and weak and your comment about Ms. Sheehan sounds bitter and petty.

[doublethink]

83. Gee that line of thinking really irks me .... always has.

So your idea of supporting our troops is 'tough shit' is it? Ever hear of the concept of never sending them into harms way again unless it's the absolute last resort? Guess not, guess a war based on proven lies and bullshit is enough for you. Enough to send innocent kids off to their death. Or maybe your making money off this blood for oil bullshit? Is it 'paying off' for you? Just asking. Your playground response of 'nobody asked the kid to join the service' ..... they all volunteered crap-ola sounds like the 'cut and run' mantra' na na na na na na bullshit the RW throws out on their playground. Maybe you should go play with the children and let the adults who really want to support the troops get on with the business of ending this war and getting our troops home, re-deployed etc... etc... That's all I have to say. Peace.

[doublethink]

85. E D I T ....

M U S T ........ N O T ....... L E T ....... S H I T ........ L I K E ....... T H I S ...... G E T ........ T O ...... M E..... :smoke:

[John Q. Citizen]

99. Ah, blame the troops for poor leadership. That's a new angle. I heard that

on another board.
I was put forth by rightwingers who adored the bushcrime family.

[midnight]

134. Well the real thing is this. Casey along with the George

took an oath to uphold the constitution........ Casey did and George didn't. I hope this makes sense to you now....

[ComerPerro]

144. well, to be fair, according to Wikipedia he first enlisted in 2000

It mentions that he re-enlisted just before the Iraq war, but doesn't say if he did so voluntarily or was forced back in.

I feel for those who enlisted before 9/11, and even for those well-intentioned who enlisted in response to 9/11, to go to Afghanistan and capture bin Laden.

But those who enlisted during the runup to the Iraq war, and after? How could they not have known?

[EFerrari]

44. That's a great if badly phrased question. Why do you think? nt

[me b zola]

71. Oh shit, that is how I read the post too

:rofl:


on edit: I'm the last person to be a spelling nazi, but did the poster mis-spell 'flame'?

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

45. How offensive can you be? n/t

[burythehatchet]

47. better to be cheap than worthless

[Ghost in the Machine]

57. another 'post and run' slam? How many family members have YOU lost

to this war?? What have YOU done to help end this war??

[mod mom]

60. what a despicable comment. Have you lost children in the Iraq War?

[sniffa]

75. such utter trash

:puke:

[Bluebear]

108. Who you calling cheap, freeloader?

:hi:

[JVS]

117. shame on you

[LWolf]

48. I'm glad to hear it.

Do 300 activists = Conyer's magic number of 3 more supporters?

If Conyers himself cosigned, he'd only need 2 more.

I've contacted my rep, but I won't hold my breath. Greg Walden is unlikely to support impeachment of any republican.

[Bitwit1234]

50. First....CONYERS is for impeachment

isn't it a little ridiculous to protest his office. Why don't they go to one of the offices where a congress person has not come out for impeachment. That would make more sense wouldn't it. AND then they should go to the republican offices and call all of them out. THEY ARE ONES WHO HAVE TO GET ON BOARD.

[Ghost in the Machine]

53. Are you for real?? Republicans ARE on board... on board the Pelosi

"impeachment is off the table" train. BTW, when did the repugnant ones regain the power to start impeachment proceedings?

Conyers wanted to hear from the people... the people have spoken...

[John Q. Citizen]

55. You should do that. Great idea! Which office are you going to first?

Oh, you mean you see yourself as Cindy's supervisor and she should be doing what you tell her?

Darn, I thought you meant you had a great idea and the guts and confidence to actually carry it out.

Oh well. No wonder Cindy has to do all the heavy lifting here.

[Freddie Stubbs]

67. If he is REALLY for impeachment, why hasn't he introduced articles of impeachment?

:shrug:

[wuushew]

76. IMHO more investigation is needed

the most likely case of impeachment is the continued contempt charges and executive privilege abuses stemming from the Justice Department meltdown.

Impeachment IS a political process and is only possible after both political parties agree what a rule is and under what conditions the President may have broken it.

Many republicans do not believe that torture is wrong nor wiretapping so although these are more egregious they are longer shots.

[midnight]

135. I look at it more as cheering him on to get this impeachment on.

I also see this movement as a very courages move by Cindy. Thanks Cindy.

[mirrera]

51. Put it ON the table!!

[bobthedrummer]

54. Impeach Cheney first-k&r!

[KAT119]

56. THANK YOU CINDY!!! K&R!!!!!!!

[Madspirit]

58. k&r...n/t

[stirlingsliver]

62. YOU Are Our Voice, Cindy!!

You speak for All Of Us, Cindy!!

Thank you -- THANK YOU-- THANK YOU SO VERY VERY MUCH!

We LOVE YOU!

[saracat]

96. She does NOT speak for me. I do NOT respect those who enable Republicans

by trashing Democrats.Cindy is NOT a Democrat.She doesn't speak for me or any members of the Democratic Party.She doesn't have the authority.

[DancingBear]

110. You, then, must prefer Democrats who enable Republicans,

as you have just made a strong case for them.

Cindy speaks the truth that your cowardly "friends" are either unwilling or unable to say.

[eggman67]

105. Speak for yourself

She can be your voice, but I'll keep my own thank you.

[Cameron27]

106. Cindy doesn't speak for me.

[Marrah_G]

120. Sorry she doesn't speak for me

If she speaks for you then great.

[philosophie_en_rose]

147. Some of can speak for ourselves, thanks.

:hi:

[LostInAnomie]

63. Maybe next week she can bring a petition telling him to stop supporting slavery...

... and to dismantle the unconstitutional income tax. :eyes:

[mzmolly]

97. Sorry, but I must ...

:rofl:

[saracat]

98. Ha! ha! ha! Good one!

[mmonk]

65. Great. Thanks.

[bluedog]

66. Conyers said "our only recourse is elections,"

*****if this is from same post as the one above.................

After an 80-minute meeting, Cindy emerged and told the activists that Conyers said "our only recourse is elections," and the activists groaned. Cindy announced she will run against Pelosi, and the activists cheered. Rev. Yearwood is giving a fired-up speech and activists are crowding in to Conyers' office for the sit-in.

[mod mom]

68. and our elections are compromised as Rep Conyers attested to in his "Preserving

Democracy: what Went Wrong in Ohio".

[Captain Hilts]

69. She does not understand how government works and should stop this. nt

[BuyingThyme]

72. You don't know how government works and should learn.

[Captain Hilts]

74. She's making the anti-war movement look stupid. nt

[BuyingThyme]

77. She is the anti-war movement and she's highly intelligent.

For the time being, John Conyers is a neutered dog. Cindy Sheehan is giving John Conyers an opportunity to grow some balls in the place of the ones Nancy Pelosi cut off and heaved into the Potomac.

[saracat]

111. Do NOT insult the anti-war movement by crediting it to Cindy! Many people led the anti-war effort

before Cindy even put her mug on camera.

[DancingBear]

115. Care to name a few?

You should know a whole bunch, huh?

I'll bet you were even in Crawford.

Not.

[saracat]

118. I absolutely did protest the war before Cindy and I know many others that did as well.

And nearly every district chair in my state and their PC's marched and attended vigils.Many also were in Women in Black.My husband also marched Get real.

[DancingBear]

129. Wow

And just think, it did absolutely no good until a woman from California sat in a ditch and galvanized everybody.

That same woman you now condemn because she won't buy a ticket on The Ship Of Fools that is the current Democratic Party.

How sad it is to be so blinded by party ideology that you can't even step out of line to stop the killing.

One of us IS real.

It isn't you.

Of course, when you referenced "district chairs" I knew there was no getting through...

[saracat]

132. Wow! So what are you doing on Democratic Underground?

Maybe there is a Cindy site somewhere that doesn't like Dems?

[BuyingThyme]

139. Do not insult the anti-war movement by taking credit away from Cindy.

We don't need pretenders.

[Lilith Velkor]

141. So anyone who isn't Cindy is a pretender?

Put the fucking bong down and get some oxygen, dude.

[BuyingThyme]

142. If the truth were on your side, you wouldn't have to make up lies

to put in people's mouths. But it sure makes you easy to recognize.

[Lilith Velkor]

156. I'm not the one who's lying about the antiwar movement pre-Sheehan

That one is easy to recognize, indeed.

[BuyingThyme]

157. Well, since I haven't said anything about that, I guess it's you.

Again.

[Lilith Velkor]

168. Can't you even read your own posts?

Oh wait - that would mean you have to stop lying about the antiwar movement.

Nevermind...

[BuyingThyme]

170. What post is that? Funny you failed to mention.

It's like you're playing a child's game. Go figure.

[Lilith Velkor]

171. Look in the upper right-hand corner of this post.

You will see "response to:" and then there's a link on which you click. Repeat the process until you come upon your own posts. That is how you follow a conversation.

Sorry if I mistook you for an adult. Won't happen again, pinky swear. :eyes:

[BuyingThyme]

172. More childish games? How about you just identify the post number?

Well, we know why you won't, don't we. You feel you have to keep making things up and maybe I'll get tired of your dishonesty and go away, right? Well, how about instead of that, we keep pointing out your blatant dishonesty. Don't you think that's the right thing to do?

[Lilith Velkor]

194. Knew you wouldn't do it

And your lying about me doesn't change the fact that you lied upthread.

[Karenina]

91. You looking stupid has NOTHING to do with Cindy. n/t

[rucky]

113. if by "stupid," you mean "effective"

then I agree.

Let's go back to a time before Cindy Sheehan busted onto the scene. Scenes where thousands took to the streets, as seen on Indymedia and other obscure venues. Oh yeah, CNN covered 'em a little bit. First the took a couple of numbers off the end of the turnout estimates, then they made sure the cameras panned in on the people with the tie-dyes, rainbow wigs and pink glitter.

Cindy had her 15 minutes, and now half the media pundits are debating the war. She's not one of them. This "fringe" mom took the discussion mainstream. She had her 15 minutes and made the most of it. Now she's out of the MSM limelight and back in the trenches, sans rainbow wig. Yeah, she's freaking everywhere. But you wouldn't know it from watching CNN, so who does she look stupid to? You?

[saracat]

119. Effective? How? She took Conyers from a firm supporter to a "solve it by elections "position.

Good work.Not.He doesn't want to be affiliated with her.

[rucky]

121. SHE did that?!

I have more respect for Conyers than that.

[saracat]

122. Apparently.He seemed to be saying that he changed his mind since

this weekend.Saturday he was saying get rid of "those two' and he meets with Cindy and sayd"let the elections decide".I am sure there is more to this but just saying, she sure didn't influence him in a meaningful way to get impeachment on the table!

[rucky]

125. yeah, the reports from the field seem a bit sketchy.

i really do hope it didn't turn out as initially reported.

[BuyingThyme]

148. That was some lady named Nancy Pelosi.

You might know her as the off-the-table lady.

[Individualist]

78. Brava Cindy!

[LittleClarkie]

79. If they're working with Conyers, wouldn't he be in his office?

Just wondering, since some thought she might be working with him.

[bigtree]

81. amazing, really

I wonder if they bothered to discuss the very important work Conyers is actually doing to hold the administration accountable. I doubt it, somehow.

[bluedog]

100. protesting conyers seemed to have backfired!

he was on our side ...........but......

[Cameron27]

102. He's still on our side,

he just said he wouldn't call for impeachment today, I believe. Cindy has a right to protest, but Conyers doesn't have to follow her timetable.

[rsmith6621]

82. So The Question Now IS!!!!!!!!!

Will Cindy put enough pressure on Conyers to not worry about three more Reps to call for impeachment?????

[me b zola]

104. Woo-hoo, Cindy!

:yourock:

[cutlassmama]

107. I KNEW she was going to kick some ass today! Way to go Cindy!!!! eom

[Tatiana]

112. Cool. When they are done, why don't they pay Mitch McConnell a visit? n/t

[pberq]

114. Go Cindy!!!!

We are so fortunate that this woman is stepping up to the plate - along with Ray McGovern, Rev. Lennox Yearwood, Col. Ann Wright, etc.

[pberq]

116. Hundreds of people lining the hallway to Conyers' office

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/7/23/15936/6861

. . .I am sitting on the floor of a phone booth, so the police will not make me stand and blog. Lisa from C-ville is standing in front of it, hoping I will not be noticed.

I have never seen anything like this one, folks.

There are HUNDREDS of people lining the hallway to John Conyers' office. Cindy and a few others are inside, speaking to the staff, we assume. But the scene is incredible--people have come from all over the country to deliver the message that we can not tolerate illegal actions and an unConstitutional government.

[THUNDER HANDS]

130. when did Conyers become president?

must have been while I was on line for the Harry Potter book.



it was a long line, you know.

[ClayZ]

131. GO Cindy! K and R

IMPEACH

[Senator]

137. K&R

[creeksneakers2]

138. I don't like Cindy dissing John Conyers

If Cindy and her followers wanted John Conyers' support they should have gone there and asked for it politely. John Conyers has done the world for the left and doesn't deserved to be pushed toward anything he doesn't agree with. I think John Conyers knows way more about strategy than Cindy Sheehan does.

John Conyers is holding a hearing on Wednesday to find Meirs and Bolten in contempt. Conyers is going to have his hands full with this battle with Bush. Unlike Sheehan, Conyers is setting out to actually accomplish something. Conyers deserves full support.

[The Count]

140. Yeay! Cuz Conyers is a bad guy...oh, wait, he's not! Yeay, cuz the MSM eats it up!

That's the ticket!
I guess protesting Pelosi wasn't hitting hard enough the resistance to impeachment - glad they found the fellow to lay it on!:eyes:

[EFerrari]

145. He chairs the House committee that could start impeachment.

Lol! I've posted that factoid about 50 times today and I'm annoyed with myself.

But, it's the truth and the only reason to go to Mr. Conyers. No Republic nor any other critter can do what he can do as chair.

Okay, I'm outta here. :)

[illinoisprogressive]

143. sounds like she's lost her mind

[ComerPerro]

146. attacking one of the most outspoken and liberal members of Congress, way to go Cindy

:eyes:

[BuyingThyme]

149. Conyers has decided to become a Pelosi lackey.

He should be shamed and ridiculed until he comes back to the people and the Constitution.

[ComerPerro]

150. And it is far more productive to harass liberal Dems than to, say, go after Bush and Repigs, right?

[BuyingThyme]

151. Pukes no longer hold majorities on committees and Bush is probably against impeachment.

I know he's for the war.

So, yes, far more productive. Any more brilliant questions?

[ComerPerro]

152. for one thing, its pukes in the Senate who will need to be swayed to vote for conviction

and second, if she wants the war ended, why not go to protest the war's biggest supporter, Bush himself?

[BuyingThyme]

153. Conviction? How about impeachment first.

And she slept on the guy's driveway. Maybe you read about it.

[ComerPerro]

155. impeachment without conviction is worthless

[BuyingThyme]

158. A great talking point for people with nothing but talking points,

but history proves you way wrong.

There's also that horse and wagon thing.

[ComerPerro]

159. this is not Watergate, these are not Nixon-era Repigs

and Bush is not Nixon. He will not resign, Cheney will not step down.

[BuyingThyme]

160. So?

[ComerPerro]

161. well, only way Impeachment means anything without conviction is if Bush backs down and resigns

[BuyingThyme]

162. Who says?

If we don't document the crimes, how can we have democracy? Hindsight isn't 20/20, particularly when you don't bother to look back.

[ComerPerro]

165. not only do you document the crimes, you also document the fact

that he was not convicted of the crimes.

[BuyingThyme]

166. Great. Let's do it!

[ComerPerro]

167. so best case scenario results in evidence that could be used to say

that Bush committed crimes, and that Repigs are pathetic hacks?

Its nice, but all anyone would have to do to dispute that argument is remind us that Bush was not convicted.

[BuyingThyme]

173. The best case scenario is that Bush is headed for prison and Democracy returns to America.

[ComerPerro]

174. not gonna happen. Even by a slim chance that he is convicted, he won't be in prison for long

[BuyingThyme]

176. Make up your mind.

[ComerPerro]

177. about? Seriously... do you even think things through, or do you just post BS all day?

[BuyingThyme]

178. You first say there's no chance, then you say there's a slim chance.

And you accomplished this all on the same line.

But the funniest thing of all is when you followed up by calling my posts BS.

[ComerPerro]

179. I was indulging your fantasy of Bush going to jail

and illustrating how if even that happened, nothing would ever come of it.

Anyone with a fourth grade reading comprehension level could have understood that. It was clear enough.

Are you a fucking idiot, or just a huge asshole?

[BuyingThyme]

180. Wow, you sure get upset when I point out the obvious errors in your posts.

If you don't want people to respond to what you post, why do you post?

And, by the way, how is it that you again contradicted yourself in the exact same way as before? And why did you ask for a best-case scenario when it drives you so crazy? Do you need more help with this?

[ComerPerro]

181. you are either batshit insane or completely full of shit. Now which is it?

[BuyingThyme]

182. Again, why so upset? All I did is respond to your posts.

I've explained why it's important to pressure democrats to impeach, I've explained a little about how the impeachment process works, I've explained that talking points are counterproductive, I've explained that documenting the Bush crimes via impeachment is extremely important, I've explained the best-case scenario of impeachment as requested, and I've exposed the contradictions in your posts.

But now you've gone all nutzo.

Which part drove you off the cliff?

[ComerPerro]

183. well, for starters, there was no contradiction in my post

Only reason I mentioned it was to stress how worthless impeachment would be.

Only thing worse than arrogant assholes is arrogant assholes who are proud of their ignorance, and you and George W Bush are classic cases.

[BuyingThyme]

185. Okay then, let's pretend that a slim chance and no chance are the same thing.

Now, why does it drive you so crazy that somebody would actually think otherwise?

ON EDIT: Oh, wait... I see what's goin' on. You're trying to get this sub-thread deleted so people don't see what you said. Well, you're going to have to alert yourself because I don't generally do that for bad language and the like.

How often do you have to do this?

[ComerPerro]

186. you completely left reality. And now you accuse me of treason

[ComerPerro]

184. Ok, fuck it, no more games, I am upset because you said you plan on supporting McCain or Romney

and you believe Republicans are the only way to set this country straight.

Prove that you didn't

[BuyingThyme]

187. Yes, clearly a case of a person trying to get his own sub-thread deleted

out of embarrassment.

There should be a name for this phenomenon.

[ComerPerro]

188. how the hell can you compare Elizabeth Edwards to Ann Coulter?

[BuyingThyme]

189. In all seriousness, are you crying right now?

[ComerPerro]

190. don't deny it, the proof is right here in this thread. You should be ashamed of yourself

[BuyingThyme]

192. So now you post endless lies about DU truth tellers in an effort

to get your sub-thread deleted?

It won't work fast enough, but it's a wonderful thing to expose you. Keep it up. I'll send some more people over to see what you really are.

[ComerPerro]

193. hey, far as I can tell, completely making shit up about other DUers is perfectly fine

you do it all the time.

Saw a post of yours where you claimed that Denny Hastert didn't harm the Democratic party in any way, and then just a few minutes later you not only denied ever saying it, but you actually had the audacity to attack the people calling you on your bullshit, and you then began making up lies about them and what they said.

[Major Hogwash]

154. Next thing you know, you people will start shouting "Impeach Conyers".

Mob mentality.

[BuyingThyme]

163. No, that's called democracy. Mob mentality is what's going on in Iraq via DC.

And most people agree that Representatives cannot be impeached.

[knowledgeispwr]

164. They're already shouting "Shame on Conyers!"...

and saying Conyer's actions would break Rosa Park's heart and kill her.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1415819

[ComerPerro]

191. before long Cindy will threaten to run against him too