I say go for it Cindy She-Man. Sure, once Michael Moore endorses you your campaign will be in ruins, but you’ll give us a lot of laughs in American politics. Here’s a possible campaign slogan for you:
“Cindy Sheehan-She really is that crazy.”

I’ve long argued that this conflict in the Democratic party has been of the EW-Liberals v. Old Guard. [Not to be confused with Mayoral elections in Cleveland, which are between white-collar and blue-collar Liberals]. I believe that’s what we’re seeing here; The Mooreon, DailyKos crowd doing what it said it would: working to seize control of the Democratic party.

While in Californ-i-a it’s unlikely a Republican, and even less likely a Conservative, would win due to Sheehan’s interefereance (vote siphoning is likely going to be nill), she would be knocking out a Liberal talking head.

While it certainly doesn’t take a tin foil hat to see it, I can’t help but wonder whether the game plan is to get as many Mooreon sympathizers in power as possible (Dean, Gore, Etc.) while eliminating the Old Guard (Kennedy, Feinstein, etc.) as the opportunities arise.

I have no doubt the media will turn on Sheehan (if she runs) since the Mooreon blogs have turned on the media [even as recently as the judiciary commitee, DailyKos was going on about how the liberal mass national media WAS NOT the Democrats friend--that the blogs like DailyKos were. (sounds like a possesive boyfriend… but I digress)].

Personally, I welcome it. The more the two sides attack eachother, the weaker they get--not because they expend their vast special-interest resources (George Soros et. al.), but rather because they show the American people who they are. The Democrats in power know they’ve lost the ideological debate, so they’ve been dodging the final showdown of ideas; whereas the Mooreons are sincere and have REPEATEDLY said they’d rather go down in flames for what they believe.

From a political science standpoint, going with the Mooreons will probably be better for the Democrats in the long-run. The mass national media ia imploding after all, whereas the bloggers have just gotten started. And sure, the Liberals will be out of power for--if historical trends hold--somnething like 50 years, but hey: they use that time to get ideologically consistant, and get their act together, and hope that Conservatives get as porky as they did, and BAM! 2056 election will be all theirs.

Of course, I’m actually kinda hoping the Democrats go the way of the Whig Party. Maybe have the Libertarian party come into ascendency as the second party: Libertarians, at least, aren’t (for the most part) stark-raving loons--certainly not to the extent the Mooreons are.

oh please god let this happen, it would be a show to remember.

Not only would the press finally turn on her and expose her vacuousness and her ignorance, but it would teach the KosKids a lesson in humility...they worship at her feet and she would get humiliated in a real political race.

JimK, I’m not sure the media would “turn” on her—they’ve had ample opportunity to report even just a few of the idiotic things she has said and the despicable people with whom she has associated.  But every opponent she has (even a Democratic one in the primary) would be foolish not to enumerate the long list of moonbattery she has said and done.  The media would then have no choice but to report that, however grudgingly.

I hope she does run just so that everyone (i.e. the general public) will finally know what a dimwitted vacuous dishonest loon she is and how the only thing she has done is to make a fool of herself and attempt to dishonor the memory of Casey.  What is ironic about her extended 15 minutes of fame is that while she and her fellow travelers really don’t give two s**ts about Casey and what he stood for, those on the other side from her care more about him and his sacrifice.

Doesn’t it seem a little odd that people like us are the only ones who take Sheehan seriously.

The media report her every move.  Democrats the party over refer to her (usually in glowing terms) all the time.  She just kissed the dictator of Venezuela and then spoke of him as though he were the Second Coming.  Fully a third of the (D) side of the aisle is aligned with Kos, Move-On or Common Dreams...and they all line up behind Moore, who pimps her like he owns her.

Who’s not taking her seriously again?

Way too many take her seriously, I was just in a debate on another board recently, she got brought up and some guy said he hoped i would lose my future kids in a war so i could understand her ain, and then he threw in some other insults.

i posted all the crap she has done, using a lot of links to this site, it shut the guy up good..only the other idiots chimed in, made fun of me using links, said i needed to go to college and learn how to debate, mostly flung insults and never brought up a single fact.

the cindy supporters are all the same.

Damn you Jim!  I was in the middle of writing up a blog on this and you beat me to it!!
Dammit Jim, I’m a Doctor not a speed typer!!
:)

The media report her every move.

Yeah, but not with the sheer fanfare that they did when she first parked her boney, peeling ass on the President’s lawn.

Anyway, I really do hope she runs.  Fienstien can be somewhat moderate WHEN SHE WANTS TO.  Lateley, though, she’s been pandering to her left wing base (mostly with the abortion-as-litmus-test philosophy, but also… interestingly… stating that she thought Bush should have met with Sheehan).  I think if it happens, Fienstien might start listening to people like me from time to time.

Of course… what if CS won? : (

Of course… what if CS won? : (

Actually, might not be as bad as all that. After all, while it would theoretically put her in a position to screw things up, she can only do so much without her party being in majority.
And besides, stick her and Kennedy next to each other, let them take turns ranting, and all of a sudden anyone that had any chance of returning to sanity might actually think about going Independent instead of just saying they’re Independent because it sounds more free-thinking and individual.

I see… very reassuring.

So what do you think she’ll run under, Green?

Sheehan can’t win unless she runs against Hitler (the real one, not McChimpHitler).  As JimK said, the media report her every move.  The problem is that they report very little of what she says that is not acceptable to the Democratic mainstream.  The moment she runs, everything she has ever said will be aired and the people who depend only on the MSM for news will find out what a real loon she is.  Even in the Democratic primary I would be astonished if she could garner more than 5% outside of Berkley.

She’d probably run as a democrat in the primaries and if she didn’t win that she’d go for some 3rd party.  I think it would be pretty funny if she became a senator and bush still refused to ever meet with her.

Actually, I just thought of another way this could be amusing. Right now, Cindy’s whole Humble White Trash image makes the Libtards feel good about supporting her because then she’s all “woman of the people” and “a common person” and so on. But if she wants to run for senate, she’d have to hire an image consultant and all that.

Bye bye white trash image. Hello suits that turn her from “woman of the common people” to just an ugly chick in a designer label.

just an ugly chick in a designer label.

So, Hillary Clinton then?

Yeah, but without the husband with a high CHA stat.

The photo montage is visual proof of the mental illness Bush Derangement Syndrome.  Would anyone really be surprised if instead of Chavez, she was sitting down with Ahmadinejad, Castro or al Sadr?

Some words from cindy…

“It is our governments who want to demonize and marginalize other cultures, religions, races and ethnic groups. George Bush and his coldhearted cronies and his easily misled and willingly blind followers want to “fight them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here!” Who are these “thems” that we are fighting over there? Are they the babies lying in their cribs when a bomb (chemical or conventional) is dropped on their house? Is it the mother who has gone shopping for her family’s daily food who is killed by a car bomber who never even thought to commit such a heinous act until his country was occupied by a foreign invader? Is it the grandmas and grandpas who are too old, or too stubborn, to leave their lifelong homes when the coalition troops are illegally carpet bombing civilian centers?”

How about saddams ethnic cleansing,how about his invasion of other muslims countries,cindy should read a history book.

Fairplay:

Working to seize control?  Have you listned to comments on the senate floor, have you heard Howard Dean open his mouth?  Moveon.com said they are the democratic party, the only radio station the left could muster up is hateful Air America, who are the fundraisers to the deomcratic party Soros among others.  Hell they pretty much have control of it.

I’d argue they’re well on their way, sure. But, in fairness, while sane people would look at the pandering the Democratic Party establishment is doing for their base and see a ‘virtual take-over’, the Moore people don’t believe that the Democratic Party is representing them--adequately if at all.

They want to do MORE than just influence the rhetoric. They want to call the game plan. They want to decide who runs for what offices and where. They want to decide the policy, not just the talking points. They’re sick of the fact that their issues aren’t being brought up since Democrats know it’ll kill their electoral chances. They want to make the Democrats care about ideology and not power.

Granted, the Mooreonic Left has WAY more influence in its party than the Religious Right has in the Republican Party [contrary to the Moore spin--after all, (one example) when Robertson gets out of line, the White House tells him off. When Moore gets out of line, he only gets praised]. However, I don’t believe the Moore folks ‘run things’ yet because they would rather the party go down in flames than go moderate; whereas the Democrats pander to their base only so much as to keep the money coming. To the Democrat Elite, this is about power. To the Mooreons, this is about principle.

Personally, I don’t think they’ll be happy until 1) it’s the DailyKos Democratic Party, and 2) they have a party with the cohesion of a European Parliamentary party. I wish them all the luck in the world. Run Cindy, run. Meet with Chavez. Stop taking your BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome) medication.

Hell, WIN Cindy! Get on the Congessional floor! Let the WHOLE COUNTRY hear what you’re about--in a forum where the American people can hear the other side of the argument and compare! Never let them shut you up! Maybe loan yourself for a filibuster! I believe in your ability to talk until others would pass out (or pass on).

Because every time y’all ‘get your message out’ [beyond the pandering base] that’s just another person that renounces the Mooreon crowd.

Yeah, but without the husband with a high CHA stat.

LMAO, and a crappy WILL save (couldn’t resist Monica Lewinsky)

Nightwing; Feinstein is BARELY moderate at times. She’s a rabid gun hater. I wouldn’t trust her as far as I could throw her but I would still be amused at her crushing Sheehan.

I just re-read the article and she almost seems like a character out of a comic book or a sitcom. Never goes to work, we never see her working anywhere, yet she has all this money, goes wherever she wants and meets all these big people.

I wonder if Kramer ever lost somebody in Iraq...?

Be proud, Casey, your mother is doing this in honor of you!

[/sarcasm off]

There was a time when they used to burn witches at the stake, a time we like to refer to as the good old days.

Posted by Stewart Hart on 01/29 at 06:12 AM (Link to this comment)

“While in Californ-i-a it’s unlikely a Republican, and even less likely a Conservative, would win due to Sheehan’s interefereance (vote siphoning is likely going to be nill), she would be knocking out a Liberal talking head.”

I’m with the editor who posted the article. She would never win. She would never beat Feinstein. The moderate liberal media has always pulled it’s punches for Cindy because while she is kooky, they have similar goals. Now, centrist liberal vs. moonbat, the media will let loose with all barrels. Cindy (and the Moveon crew) will get treated like conservatives… and since they have a lot of hide / are kooky, they’ll go down in flames… :)

LMAO, and a crappy WILL save (couldn’t resist Monica Lewinsky)

Well, he’s gotta have a WIS under 10, and I’m betting he took a flaw at first level to get another feat for boosting his Bluff skill…

Man, those truthout fuckers are completely and utterly enthralled with this kooky bitch arent they?  I went to that site and found about a dozen or so films about or dedicated to her.
I realize now that when I went to the rally for her earlier this month, I should have worn a “Gore For President” or “Fuck Bush” t-shirt.  I’m sure she would have spoken to me then!

Is it just me or does it look like someone is giving her a fishhook from off camera in that first photo?

Well, he’s gotta have a WIS under 10, and I’m betting he took a flaw at first level to get another feat for boosting his Bluff skill…

Every Saturday from 7:30 - 1:30AM. Pizza (or Chinese), Tostitos, queso, Coke and Mountain Dew. 26 years of RPG-ing and still going strong! :)

Back on topic: You know, for someone whose son was killed in Iraq, she sure does smile alot!

Who here thinks CIndy should meet up with some terrorist in IRAQ,and see if she can talk with them?

Yeah i know i shouldn’t joke about the horrible things that happends to radical left who thinks they can talk to them and end up beheaded but still :S

Who here thinks CIndy should meet up with some terrorist in IRAQ,and see if she can talk with them?

Never happen. Essential part of being a Libtard: The terrorists need to be calmly spoken to in a civil and respectful way… ... by somebody else.

Didn’t she stand on stage with the leader of the militia group that ambushed and killed her son?

I think I read that somewhere.

Camriksan:
yes that was when she was in London this last December.  She was all chummy with the spokesman of the leader whose men killed her son.  But in her speech here in Hawaii that I attended, she stated that she doesn’t blame the men who killed her son, she blames Bush for sending her son there.

Also, I just found this on CNN regarding President Bush’s state of the union address:

Anti-war protester Cindy Sheehan is expected to attend the speech as a guest of Rep. Lynn Woolsey, a California Democrat.

Sheehan—whose son Army mechanic Casey Sheehan was killed in Iraq in 2004—has demonstrated against Bush and the war since August, when she camped outside the president’s Crawford, Texas, ranch in an effort to meet with him.

I can see it now: all the liberal-loving media reporters clamoring to talk this broad and her standing there beaming with her undeserved sense of accomplishment while she regurgitates whatever statement she was fed by the Soros/Moore consultation team.

Fairplay:
an even better question is why do the liberals support him?  especially considering this little bit of his history:

After an extended period of popular dissatisfaction and economic decline [10] under the neoliberal administration of Carlos Andrés Pérez, Chávez made extensive preparations for a military-civilian coup d’état [11] Initially planned for December, Chávez delayed the MBR-200 coup until the early twilight hours of February 4, 1992. On that date, five army units under Chávez’s command barreled into urban Caracas with the mission of assaulting and overwhelming key military and communications installations throughout the city, including the Miraflores presidential palace, the defense ministry, La Carlota military airport, and the Historical Museum. Chávez’s ultimate goal was to intercept and take custody of Pérez before he returned to Miraflores from an overseas trip.

So this guy was going to use <gasp> military force against someone else with the goal of “assaulting” and “overwhelming” the presidential palace (gee, wonder if there were any innocent civilians in there?) and the “Historical Museum” (and how is that a key strategical move, exactly?)
So the liberals are OK with that but not with our military taking out a vicious dictator?

Posted by Fairplay on 01/31 at 02:19 PM (Link to this comment)

“What do you guys have against Hugo Chavez?”

That he actually is what left-wingers project onto Bush. A fascist, crushing dissent, starting foreign conflicts / entanglements to solidify power. That kind of stuff.