http://www.prisonplanet.com/peace-activist-cindy-sheehan-%e2%80%9ci-am-a-911-truther%e2%80%9d.html
Peace Activist Cindy Sheehan: “I am A 9/11 Truther”
Anti-war campaigner goes on record with assertion that attacks were an inside job
Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
Tuesday, Sept 14th, 2010
Cindy Sheehan, the anti-war activist who lost her son to the ongoing war in Iraq, delivered an impassioned and emotional speech during which she specifically addressed concerns over the 9/11 attacks and stated that she believes they were orchestrated by elements of the U.S. government for political gain.
Sheehan was speaking at the All Souls Church on the upper East Side of Manhattan, on the eve of the ninth anniversary of 9/11.
Addressing a large crowd, Sheehan announced “I am a 9/11 truther.”
Following thunderous and sustained applause she continued, “I do think it was an inside job. We just don’t know – I don’t know – how far inside it went. But, you know, I’m sure Dick Cheney had something to do with it.”
Sheehan’s son Casey was killed in battle in 2004. Since that time Cindy has worked tirelessly to campaign for an end to the US led wars.
Perhaps most prominently, Sheehan camped close to George W. Bush’s ranch in Crawford Texas in 2005, attracting much media attention when the president failed to address one question from the grieving mother.
Sheehan also spoke of the need to look beyond the left/right political paradigm, noting that “So many people have sold their souls to this empire. Whether it’s someone from the Republicans or the Democrats, or the military industrial complex – it’s all the same.”
“They all have the same goals, they all get paid by the same people, and I like to call the Democrats and the Republicans The War Party.” She continued.
“Since Obama has been president, everything that he and his justice department did was to protect the criminals of the Bush regime. They protect each other because they all want to do the same thing, they all want to have the same power.” Sheehan implored.
She also spoke of the loss of domestic civil liberties and the systematic erosion of the Bill of Rights in the wake of 9/11 and the endless “war on terror”.
“Just because I’m traveling doesn’t give you the right to take away my Bill of Rights.” Sheehan urged, as she spoke of her experiences of flying to and from events around the country. “Every time they ask me to go through one of the body scanners I say no, do what you have to do but I am not going through that.”
She asked those in attendance to give some regard on the anniversary of 9/11 to the plight of the Iraqi, Afghan and Pakistani people, noting “I havn’t heard anybody speak for these people… We’re the occupiers – it’s up to us to do something about it”.
Sheehan has previously voiced support for the 9/11 Truth movement, noting on the Alex Jones show in 2007 that the collapse of the twin towers looked like a controlled demolition and that there should be a new investigation into the terrorist attacks.
Sheehan questioned why U.S. air defenses were distracted by drills and exercises scheduled for the morning of 9/11 and why standard operating procedure for intercepting errant aircraft was not followed for the first and only time in history.
“When you lose control of an airplane, you intercept it with a military jet and that should only take seconds – from what I understand it’s not even an order to do that it’s mandatory,” said Sheehan at the time.
Showing posts with label Cindy Sheehan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cindy Sheehan. Show all posts
Friday, September 24, 2010
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Barack Obama to Cindy Sheehan: Get Lost
http://original.antiwar.com/john-v-walsh/2009/09/03/barack-obama-to-cindy-sheehan-get-lost/
Barack Obama to Cindy Sheehan: Get Lost
At Obama's Summer Place with Cindy - "Leadership" of Peace Movement, MIA
by John V. Walsh
September 04, 2009
I spent but a short time with Cindy Sheehan as she carried her antiwar protest from an earlier time at Crawford, TX, to Martha’s Vineyard, vacation spot for Obama and many other Democrat Party elite. As Cindy remarked, the real story was not that she was protesting Obama’s wars but that the "leadership" of the peace movement did not support her protest. When the target was Bush in Crawford, she was all the rage with antiwar celebrities, but not so now that the target is Barack Obama. While there is considerable enthusiasm for her anti-Obama protest on the part of the rank and file in the anti-war movement, a refusal of its "leaders" to notify their members far and wide, high and low, crippled the action.
As a result of this betrayal, the numbers at Martha’s Vineyard were not large. But Cindy and her fellow anti-warriors were undeterred. While I was there, she mounted a spirited march down the road to Obama’s place, no more than a quarter mile away from where she stayed. The purpose was to present the President with a poster of Cindy bearing a signed plea to end the wars. The considerable armed force at the gate and the Secret Service officers would not even bring out the lowliest of staffers to receive the poster. Clearly the message from Obama was "Get lost, Cindy." And we were quickly told to move a considerable distance down the road. At least in Crawford it had been possible to demonstrate at the checkpoint to the site – not so at Obama’s place. Thus, did Obama greet a mother whose son was lost in the wars, which he continues and enlarges by the day.
The site chosen by Obama for his vacation appeared restful, even idyllic, that afternoon though the house itself was a considerable distance away from the road, hidden from view. But the image of the "antiwar" candidate lounging comfortably by the ocean, his family nearby, while ordering the deaths, by drones and assorted other killing instruments, of people half a world away, complete innocents, unknown to this man or his advisers, was disturbing indeed. What sort of man could do this? Does Obama bring his much ballyhooed "coolness" down a degree or two for cold blooded murder? Are these wars a matter of conscience or patriotism for Obama? If that were so, does one suppose in a future imperial war that Obama will urge his daughters to volunteer to die in some Muslim land any more than did Bush offer his daughters? Is there no shame to this poltician, Obama, who rose to high office on the yearning of so many for peace? How long will we allow the soothing words of this latter day Elmer Gantry to cover up his deeds?
Despite the silence of the antiwar misleaders, news of Cindy Sheehan’s presence did make the rounds of Cape Cod and the Islands. And who knows but that it might have gone further. Was Obama going to be caught unprepared? A cynic or a realist, or merely someone familiar with the Obama PR machine, might be pardoned for thinking that a plan was in place – and executed in the form of an anti-Cindy mom. And so it came to pass that, while there was no time for Cindy, the Obamas did make it a point to pay a highly publicized visit to another mom, Lisa X, who had lost her son in Obama’s AfPak war. This young man Obama had happened to encounter earlier this year at Camp Lejeune. The Cape Cod Times reported the meeting thus:
So, yesterday afternoon, the family drove from Yarmouthport to Coast Guard Air Station Cape Cod. They waited about two hours at the base. …The Obamas entered. …. President Obama called them all by their first names, Lisa said. "It was like seeing a friend you hadn’t seen in a couple months," Lisa said of the nearly 10-minute meeting. …
President Obama offered his condolences. "He told us whatever decisions he makes, he has Nick (and others serving) in mind," Lisa said. Earlier this year, Nicholas X met President Obama and shook his hand. The president gave a speech at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina. Shortly after, Nicholas decided he wanted to be part of the new offensive in Afghanistan, his father told the Times in July.
Lisa said her son called her right after the meeting. "He shook his (President Obama’s) hand and called me moments later and said, ‘Mom, the President was amazing, his hand was the softest thing I’ve ever touched, like a baby’s bottom,’" Lisa recalled.
She made sure to tell President Obama that yesterday, drawing a laugh from him. Lisa X said her family is "still pretty numb and raw" over losing Nicholas. But she thought of his likely reaction to the family meeting the Obamas. "He is probably laughing hysterically … and proud."
Such an account should break your heart and stir your anger at this hypocritical politician. The more so if, as one might suspect, this encounter made cynical use of this grieving woman’s trust. That soft hand of Obama’s is soaked in considerable blood now, some of it Nicholas X’s, no less than the rough hands of Bush and Cheney. Obama’s message is clear. Sacrifice your child and endure without complaint the "numb and raw" emotions that come of your grief. And then Barack Obama will glad hand you for "nearly ten minutes" and get some good press – after you cool your heels for two hours awaiting the cool, great man. But protest the senseless death of your son, and you get the bum’s rush at Obama’s gate. Thus, does the erstwhile "antiwar candidate" (How silly that phrase sounds now!) treat Cindy Sheehan whose like he once called on to join him in making peace. And the "leaders" of the antiwar movement are nowhere to be seen or heard.
Barack Obama to Cindy Sheehan: Get Lost
At Obama's Summer Place with Cindy - "Leadership" of Peace Movement, MIA
by John V. Walsh
September 04, 2009
I spent but a short time with Cindy Sheehan as she carried her antiwar protest from an earlier time at Crawford, TX, to Martha’s Vineyard, vacation spot for Obama and many other Democrat Party elite. As Cindy remarked, the real story was not that she was protesting Obama’s wars but that the "leadership" of the peace movement did not support her protest. When the target was Bush in Crawford, she was all the rage with antiwar celebrities, but not so now that the target is Barack Obama. While there is considerable enthusiasm for her anti-Obama protest on the part of the rank and file in the anti-war movement, a refusal of its "leaders" to notify their members far and wide, high and low, crippled the action.
As a result of this betrayal, the numbers at Martha’s Vineyard were not large. But Cindy and her fellow anti-warriors were undeterred. While I was there, she mounted a spirited march down the road to Obama’s place, no more than a quarter mile away from where she stayed. The purpose was to present the President with a poster of Cindy bearing a signed plea to end the wars. The considerable armed force at the gate and the Secret Service officers would not even bring out the lowliest of staffers to receive the poster. Clearly the message from Obama was "Get lost, Cindy." And we were quickly told to move a considerable distance down the road. At least in Crawford it had been possible to demonstrate at the checkpoint to the site – not so at Obama’s place. Thus, did Obama greet a mother whose son was lost in the wars, which he continues and enlarges by the day.
The site chosen by Obama for his vacation appeared restful, even idyllic, that afternoon though the house itself was a considerable distance away from the road, hidden from view. But the image of the "antiwar" candidate lounging comfortably by the ocean, his family nearby, while ordering the deaths, by drones and assorted other killing instruments, of people half a world away, complete innocents, unknown to this man or his advisers, was disturbing indeed. What sort of man could do this? Does Obama bring his much ballyhooed "coolness" down a degree or two for cold blooded murder? Are these wars a matter of conscience or patriotism for Obama? If that were so, does one suppose in a future imperial war that Obama will urge his daughters to volunteer to die in some Muslim land any more than did Bush offer his daughters? Is there no shame to this poltician, Obama, who rose to high office on the yearning of so many for peace? How long will we allow the soothing words of this latter day Elmer Gantry to cover up his deeds?
Despite the silence of the antiwar misleaders, news of Cindy Sheehan’s presence did make the rounds of Cape Cod and the Islands. And who knows but that it might have gone further. Was Obama going to be caught unprepared? A cynic or a realist, or merely someone familiar with the Obama PR machine, might be pardoned for thinking that a plan was in place – and executed in the form of an anti-Cindy mom. And so it came to pass that, while there was no time for Cindy, the Obamas did make it a point to pay a highly publicized visit to another mom, Lisa X, who had lost her son in Obama’s AfPak war. This young man Obama had happened to encounter earlier this year at Camp Lejeune. The Cape Cod Times reported the meeting thus:
So, yesterday afternoon, the family drove from Yarmouthport to Coast Guard Air Station Cape Cod. They waited about two hours at the base. …The Obamas entered. …. President Obama called them all by their first names, Lisa said. "It was like seeing a friend you hadn’t seen in a couple months," Lisa said of the nearly 10-minute meeting. …
President Obama offered his condolences. "He told us whatever decisions he makes, he has Nick (and others serving) in mind," Lisa said. Earlier this year, Nicholas X met President Obama and shook his hand. The president gave a speech at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina. Shortly after, Nicholas decided he wanted to be part of the new offensive in Afghanistan, his father told the Times in July.
Lisa said her son called her right after the meeting. "He shook his (President Obama’s) hand and called me moments later and said, ‘Mom, the President was amazing, his hand was the softest thing I’ve ever touched, like a baby’s bottom,’" Lisa recalled.
She made sure to tell President Obama that yesterday, drawing a laugh from him. Lisa X said her family is "still pretty numb and raw" over losing Nicholas. But she thought of his likely reaction to the family meeting the Obamas. "He is probably laughing hysterically … and proud."
Such an account should break your heart and stir your anger at this hypocritical politician. The more so if, as one might suspect, this encounter made cynical use of this grieving woman’s trust. That soft hand of Obama’s is soaked in considerable blood now, some of it Nicholas X’s, no less than the rough hands of Bush and Cheney. Obama’s message is clear. Sacrifice your child and endure without complaint the "numb and raw" emotions that come of your grief. And then Barack Obama will glad hand you for "nearly ten minutes" and get some good press – after you cool your heels for two hours awaiting the cool, great man. But protest the senseless death of your son, and you get the bum’s rush at Obama’s gate. Thus, does the erstwhile "antiwar candidate" (How silly that phrase sounds now!) treat Cindy Sheehan whose like he once called on to join him in making peace. And the "leaders" of the antiwar movement are nowhere to be seen or heard.
Saturday, August 30, 2008
Cindy Sheehan Bugged in Denver
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Cindy-Sheehan-Bugged-in-De-by-Rob-Kall-080825-412.html
August 25, 2008
Cindy Sheehan Bugged in Denver
by Rob Kall
Cindy Sheehan returned to her Denver hotel room today to find the door unlocked and ajar. She walked in to discover a man working on her phone, screw driver in hand.
Sheehan reported, in an email:
"As I walked toward my room, I noticed that the door was opened with the security bolt blocking the complete closing of the door. I knew immediately that I had not left the door open, and I double checked to make sure it was the right room because, as a frequent traveler, I have been known to forget my room number, but it was the right room.
I was upset at first thinking that housekeeping had made a mistake and left my room open and I was worried that something might be missing. So I walked into my room and bigger than life, there was a man standing by my desk holding the room phone with a screwdriver in his hand!
I immediately said; "What the hell are you doing? Are you putting a bug on my phone?" He looked like he got caught with his hand in the cookie jar and stammered out: "N--no, we are having problems with the phone." I told him to get out of my room because my phone was fine and I called the front desk and the person at the front desk stammered something out about "problems" with some of the phones.
This room was reserved soon after we got to Denver last night because the room we had was inadequate for 3 people. The room was reserved under my campaign manager's name with a CFC debit card. By the time we left for the march, it could have very well been ascertained that I was the one in this room, and the room we did reserve could be bugged, also. I am confident that that's what was happening when I walked in on the "maintenance" man"
You don't come in the room with a screwdriver if there are problems with the hotel phones. You do it electronically, through the system or you hook up a new phone."
She said to me, "How many hotel rooms have I been in the past four years? It was so obvious."
I asked, "Do you think it was Pelosi's people?" since Sheehan is running against Pelosi, for her congressional seat.
She replied, "Of course, I don't know."
I asked, "Have there been any other episodes that would make you believe this kind of action is being taken against you?"
She replied:
"Not since I've been running for congress, but there were several times when I was in Crawford, or protesting in D.C., when I felt like we were being surveiled. And actually, in Washington D.C., for a period of time, they would just blatantly follow me, and I would just invite them to come in and have coffee with me. Whenever I was in D.C., whose ever jurisdiction it was, I'd have either the Metro police, the Capitol Hill police or the Park police right on me. Sometimes they were in uniform and sometimes they were plainclothes. But they were very obvious."
Asked how her campaign is going, Sheehan replied:
"I believe the momentum is definitely on our side, especially the last couple weeks, with our signature drive.
The department of elections started to mess with our signatures and say that so many were in-valid, when we knew for a fact that they were valid, because I was checking them myself, on the computer. That really motivated people to help us-- to come to the office to help us or sign the petition (to get Cindy on the ballot) or whatever, that said that they had been meaning to help and that this was something that got them of the fence and got them to actually come into the office and volunteer. We've had ten of thousands of dollars come into the campaign since then and we really have a comfortable amount of money to get our message out-- the message that our country is in deep trouble and Nancy is definitely not the solution. She's part of the problem. And we're going to educate the people of San Francisco about this using alternative forms of media and convince them that I am the alternative-- that I will work to be the voice of the people of San Francisco. And that's something that she has not ever been. I think there is a lot of positive excitement and momentum. Her book tour didn't help her out any.
The campaign's going great. We've been able to hire more staff."
Asked about her goals for Denver, she described:
"After protesting the Republicans for so many years, the Democrats have been moving steadily to the right. We want to show that we're not okay with that, that we want to bring the party closer to the people and further from the corporate lobbyists."
So many people are waking up and starting to realize that there is very little difference in the leadership of the two parties. Working for an altenative third party or independent is one way to bring about real change.
So many people with Obama shirts and pins have come up to me and told me that they're 100% on my side and they're very distressed with the right turn of the Obama campaign and the democratic party and they're hoping that demonstrations that we were at earlier, and that will be happening all week, will bring their party to where they think it should be.
Meanwhile, Cindy's hotel room phone is in the hotel room refrigerator.
Rob Kall is executive editor and publisher of OpEdNews.com, President of Futurehealth, Inc, inventor . He is also published regularly on the Huffingtonpost.com. He is a frequent Speaker on Politics, Impeachment, The art, science and power of story, heroes and the hero's journey, Positive Psychology, Stress, Biofeedback and a wide range of subjects. He is a campaign consultant specializing in tapping the power of stories for issue positioning, stump speeches and debates. He recently retired as organizer of several conferences, including StoryCon, the Summit Meeting on the Art, Science and Application of Story and The Winter Brain Meeting on neurofeedback, biofeedback, Optimal Functioning and Positive Psychology.
My radio show, The Rob Kall Show, runs 9-10 PM EST Wednesday evenings, on AM 1360, WNJC and is archived on www.whiterosesociety.org.
Or check the archived interviews at: whiterosesociety.org
A few declarations.
-While I'm registered as a Democrat, I consider myself to be a dynamic critic of the Democratic party, just as, well, not quite as much, but almost as much as I am a critic of Republicans.
- My articles express my personal opinion, not the opinion of this website.
August 25, 2008
Cindy Sheehan Bugged in Denver
by Rob Kall
Cindy Sheehan returned to her Denver hotel room today to find the door unlocked and ajar. She walked in to discover a man working on her phone, screw driver in hand.
Sheehan reported, in an email:
"As I walked toward my room, I noticed that the door was opened with the security bolt blocking the complete closing of the door. I knew immediately that I had not left the door open, and I double checked to make sure it was the right room because, as a frequent traveler, I have been known to forget my room number, but it was the right room.
I was upset at first thinking that housekeeping had made a mistake and left my room open and I was worried that something might be missing. So I walked into my room and bigger than life, there was a man standing by my desk holding the room phone with a screwdriver in his hand!
I immediately said; "What the hell are you doing? Are you putting a bug on my phone?" He looked like he got caught with his hand in the cookie jar and stammered out: "N--no, we are having problems with the phone." I told him to get out of my room because my phone was fine and I called the front desk and the person at the front desk stammered something out about "problems" with some of the phones.
This room was reserved soon after we got to Denver last night because the room we had was inadequate for 3 people. The room was reserved under my campaign manager's name with a CFC debit card. By the time we left for the march, it could have very well been ascertained that I was the one in this room, and the room we did reserve could be bugged, also. I am confident that that's what was happening when I walked in on the "maintenance" man"
You don't come in the room with a screwdriver if there are problems with the hotel phones. You do it electronically, through the system or you hook up a new phone."
She said to me, "How many hotel rooms have I been in the past four years? It was so obvious."
I asked, "Do you think it was Pelosi's people?" since Sheehan is running against Pelosi, for her congressional seat.
She replied, "Of course, I don't know."
I asked, "Have there been any other episodes that would make you believe this kind of action is being taken against you?"
She replied:
"Not since I've been running for congress, but there were several times when I was in Crawford, or protesting in D.C., when I felt like we were being surveiled. And actually, in Washington D.C., for a period of time, they would just blatantly follow me, and I would just invite them to come in and have coffee with me. Whenever I was in D.C., whose ever jurisdiction it was, I'd have either the Metro police, the Capitol Hill police or the Park police right on me. Sometimes they were in uniform and sometimes they were plainclothes. But they were very obvious."
Asked how her campaign is going, Sheehan replied:
"I believe the momentum is definitely on our side, especially the last couple weeks, with our signature drive.
The department of elections started to mess with our signatures and say that so many were in-valid, when we knew for a fact that they were valid, because I was checking them myself, on the computer. That really motivated people to help us-- to come to the office to help us or sign the petition (to get Cindy on the ballot) or whatever, that said that they had been meaning to help and that this was something that got them of the fence and got them to actually come into the office and volunteer. We've had ten of thousands of dollars come into the campaign since then and we really have a comfortable amount of money to get our message out-- the message that our country is in deep trouble and Nancy is definitely not the solution. She's part of the problem. And we're going to educate the people of San Francisco about this using alternative forms of media and convince them that I am the alternative-- that I will work to be the voice of the people of San Francisco. And that's something that she has not ever been. I think there is a lot of positive excitement and momentum. Her book tour didn't help her out any.
The campaign's going great. We've been able to hire more staff."
Asked about her goals for Denver, she described:
"After protesting the Republicans for so many years, the Democrats have been moving steadily to the right. We want to show that we're not okay with that, that we want to bring the party closer to the people and further from the corporate lobbyists."
So many people are waking up and starting to realize that there is very little difference in the leadership of the two parties. Working for an altenative third party or independent is one way to bring about real change.
So many people with Obama shirts and pins have come up to me and told me that they're 100% on my side and they're very distressed with the right turn of the Obama campaign and the democratic party and they're hoping that demonstrations that we were at earlier, and that will be happening all week, will bring their party to where they think it should be.
Meanwhile, Cindy's hotel room phone is in the hotel room refrigerator.
Rob Kall is executive editor and publisher of OpEdNews.com, President of Futurehealth, Inc, inventor . He is also published regularly on the Huffingtonpost.com. He is a frequent Speaker on Politics, Impeachment, The art, science and power of story, heroes and the hero's journey, Positive Psychology, Stress, Biofeedback and a wide range of subjects. He is a campaign consultant specializing in tapping the power of stories for issue positioning, stump speeches and debates. He recently retired as organizer of several conferences, including StoryCon, the Summit Meeting on the Art, Science and Application of Story and The Winter Brain Meeting on neurofeedback, biofeedback, Optimal Functioning and Positive Psychology.
My radio show, The Rob Kall Show, runs 9-10 PM EST Wednesday evenings, on AM 1360, WNJC and is archived on www.whiterosesociety.org.
Or check the archived interviews at: whiterosesociety.org
A few declarations.
-While I'm registered as a Democrat, I consider myself to be a dynamic critic of the Democratic party, just as, well, not quite as much, but almost as much as I am a critic of Republicans.
- My articles express my personal opinion, not the opinion of this website.
Saturday, August 16, 2008
Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan on the ballot
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/08/08/MNC2127RCJ.DTL
Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan on the ballot
John Wildermuth, Chronicle Staff Writer
Saturday, August 9, 2008
SAN FRANCISCO -- Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan qualified Friday for a November showdown with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, collecting the signatures needed to get on the ballot as an independent candidate for Congress.
"We're very excited," said Sheehan, 51, the mother of a soldier killed in Iraq who is well-known for her protest outside President Bush's Texas ranch. "Now we have to get organized and regroup."
Republican Dana Walsh and Libertarian Philip Berg will join Pelosi and Sheehan on the Nov. 4 ballot.
The collection of signatures by Sheehan's campaign was more exciting than usual. On Wednesday, the campaign was well short of the 10,198 signatures needed to get on the ballot after San Francisco elections officials found that more than 40 percent of the people who signed weren't registered in the city's Eighth Congressional District.
Sheehan's supporters redoubled their efforts to collect enough signatures to beat the 5 p.m. Friday deadline, ultimately turning in more than 17,000 signatures to ensure that she qualified.
"It was a little disconcerting to see all the problems with the signatures," Sheehan said from her Mission Street headquarters, where more than 100 supporters gathered to celebrate. "The last couple of days, I've been checking the registrations myself on the computer."
With her ballot spot guaranteed, Sheehan can focus on the fall campaign, where she will challenge Pelosi from the left, slamming the speaker for refusing to start impeachment proceedings against President Bush and not taking a stronger stance against the war in Iraq.
"The next part is going to be exciting," she said. "I want at least one debate with all four candidates so that Nancy Pelosi has to answer for her record."
Sheehan, a former Vacaville resident who lives in the Mission District, became involved in the anti-war movement in 2004, after her son Casey was killed while serving in Iraq. A year later she founded Gold Star Families for Peace and spoke out against the war in Iraq.
For months, she stayed at "Camp Casey," an area near President Bush's Crawford, Texas, ranch where she and other peace activists demonstrated against Bush and the war.
Sheehan will be the longest of longshots in her attempt to oust Pelosi, one of the nation's best-known and most powerful Democrats.
While Sheehan said Friday that she has raised more than $300,000 for the race, Pelosi had collected more than $2.3 million by the end of June and had $455,138 in the bank.
Sheehan's campaign also missed the July 15 filing deadline for her most recent federal campaign statement, which Sheehan blamed on the frantic efforts to qualify her campaign for the ballot.
"One of the first things we need to do is hire a professional accountant to deal with those reports," she said.
E-mail John Wildermuth at jwildermuth@sfchronicle.com.
This article appeared on page B - 2 of the San Francisco Chronicle
Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan on the ballot
John Wildermuth, Chronicle Staff Writer
Saturday, August 9, 2008
SAN FRANCISCO -- Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan qualified Friday for a November showdown with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, collecting the signatures needed to get on the ballot as an independent candidate for Congress.
"We're very excited," said Sheehan, 51, the mother of a soldier killed in Iraq who is well-known for her protest outside President Bush's Texas ranch. "Now we have to get organized and regroup."
Republican Dana Walsh and Libertarian Philip Berg will join Pelosi and Sheehan on the Nov. 4 ballot.
The collection of signatures by Sheehan's campaign was more exciting than usual. On Wednesday, the campaign was well short of the 10,198 signatures needed to get on the ballot after San Francisco elections officials found that more than 40 percent of the people who signed weren't registered in the city's Eighth Congressional District.
Sheehan's supporters redoubled their efforts to collect enough signatures to beat the 5 p.m. Friday deadline, ultimately turning in more than 17,000 signatures to ensure that she qualified.
"It was a little disconcerting to see all the problems with the signatures," Sheehan said from her Mission Street headquarters, where more than 100 supporters gathered to celebrate. "The last couple of days, I've been checking the registrations myself on the computer."
With her ballot spot guaranteed, Sheehan can focus on the fall campaign, where she will challenge Pelosi from the left, slamming the speaker for refusing to start impeachment proceedings against President Bush and not taking a stronger stance against the war in Iraq.
"The next part is going to be exciting," she said. "I want at least one debate with all four candidates so that Nancy Pelosi has to answer for her record."
Sheehan, a former Vacaville resident who lives in the Mission District, became involved in the anti-war movement in 2004, after her son Casey was killed while serving in Iraq. A year later she founded Gold Star Families for Peace and spoke out against the war in Iraq.
For months, she stayed at "Camp Casey," an area near President Bush's Crawford, Texas, ranch where she and other peace activists demonstrated against Bush and the war.
Sheehan will be the longest of longshots in her attempt to oust Pelosi, one of the nation's best-known and most powerful Democrats.
While Sheehan said Friday that she has raised more than $300,000 for the race, Pelosi had collected more than $2.3 million by the end of June and had $455,138 in the bank.
Sheehan's campaign also missed the July 15 filing deadline for her most recent federal campaign statement, which Sheehan blamed on the frantic efforts to qualify her campaign for the ballot.
"One of the first things we need to do is hire a professional accountant to deal with those reports," she said.
E-mail John Wildermuth at jwildermuth@sfchronicle.com.
This article appeared on page B - 2 of the San Francisco Chronicle
Sunday, December 30, 2007
Beast of the Month - November 2007
Beast of the Month - November 2007
Nancy Pelosi, House Speaker
"I yam an anti-Christ... "
John Lydon (aka Johnny Rotten) of The Sex Pistols, "Anarchy in the UK"
"This is a song called Livin' In the Future. But it's really about what's happening now. Right now... Over the past six years we've had to add to the American picture: rendition, illegal wiretapping, voter suppression, no habeus corpus, the neglect of that great city New Orleans and its people, an attack on the Constitution. And the loss of our best men and women in a tragic war. This is a song about things that shouldn't happen here happening here."
Bruce "The Boss" Springstreen, introducing a song to Today Show viewers in September.
In September, college student Andrew Meyer was tasered and arrested at the University of Florida by a gang of jack-booted campus police. His crime? Asking 2004 Democratic Party candidate John Kerry two questions at a forum created precisely for that purpose. His two questions, incidentally, were about evidence that the 2004 election was stolen and if Kerry was a member of the Skull & Bones. Oddly, though Meyer clearly was being overwhelmed by police force, Kerry droned an unconvincing reply while Meyer screamed "Don't tase me, bro!" The big loser in the media frenzy afterwards was John Kerry, and though it's impolite to kick a man while he's down politically - especially when that man should legitimately be sitting in the White House - frankly Kerry deserves it. But beyond Mr. Kerry, what happened perfectly symbolizes everything that's gone on over the past seven years: leaders of the Democratic Party sitting back passively, pretending nothing is wrong, while basic American liberties are trampled upon.
Apparently, a lot of people agree with The Konformist at this point. Opinion polls show George W. Bush widely detested, as his popularity has sunk to a Watergate-era Tricky Dick: an October Zogby poll gave him a 24% approval rating. And yet, the same polls indicate that the Democrat-controlled Congress is even MORE detested. Indeed, the same Zogby poll indicates Congress has a paltry 11 percent approval rating, and polls consistently show the legislature exceeding the record low of 1992 when the era of Bush I and check-bouncing Congressmen inspired a "throw the bums out!" mentality in the masses (which sadly later fueled the rise of the Newtoids.)
Mainstream pundits try to spin this in arguing the problem is a lack of Beltway bipartisanship, but the numbers prove this to be a lie. The smoking gun is revealed by looking at popularity among party affiliation of the voters: while Bush has a decided ideological split (as Salon's Glenn Greenwald noted, he still had a 64-29 approval-disapproval rating among GOP voters in an August Gallup poll, vs. an 8-90 rate among Democrats) there is no real rift about Congress (a 24-66 among Republicans and 28-59 among Democrats.) Indeed, another Gallup poll in September indicated Congress was more popular among Republicans than Democrats. That would indicate the problem is not a lack of bipartisanship, but rather a lack of Congress rightfully taking on Bush and his right-wing minions (hence why party voters are even more disgusted with the performance than Republicans.)
None of this should be a surprise. The stage was set in May 2006, when current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (The Konformist Beast of the Month) declared: "Impeachment is off the table." In retrospect, these words have shaped the current political climate more than "Macaca" ever could (or, as sayings go, "Don't tase me, bro!") By publicly declaring the Democrats would remain toothless in any defiance of the law by the Bush Team, it has only encouraged Shrub and his minions to escalate their arrogance in massive criminality. Even after further revelations of fraudulent lies leading to the Iraq War, widespread illegal wire-tapping by the DOJ, torture of POWs in defiance of the Geneva Convention and even the Nixonian pardon of White House perjurer Scooter Libby, the Democrats have remained faithful to Pelosi's pledge. This is even after a July poll by the American Research Group showed 45 percent of the public favors impeachment of Bush (and an even higher 54 percent of Donkey Dick Cheney.)
Some would argue the Pelosi pledge was a pragmatically wise move: Pelosi was attempting to counter right-wing ravings that a Democratic-controlled would be so left-wing it would resemble a gang of Stalinists (or, worse, a Hillary clone army.) By denying the demands of the most radical members of the Democratic Party, the theory goes, it enabled the Democrats to appeal to moderates and ensure their 2006 Election victory. But as far as lies go, backing off on the no-impeachment promise appears to be one that can be without little fallout, especially since, as opinion polls now show, impeachment is no longer a fringe movement but a mainstream one with strong support from moderates.
The official position of why the "no impeachment" mantra is still being followed: that the American public wants results, not highly politicized hearings that would be divisive. So, what results have come from the Democratic-controlled Congress so far? Let's see: continued funding for the Iraq War even with no timetables put into place, passage of a FISA bill which gave Bush a virtual blank check to spy on Americans without a court order, and continued torture of POWs which has given America a black eye on the world stage. Meanwhile, a bill to expand the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) to cover more low-income children failed to override a Bush veto by 13 votes in the House. Apparently, Ms. Pelosi was unable to arm-twist thirteen GOP members to side with sick children over a widely unpopular Bush. Indeed, during a July breakfast with progressives, Pelosi itemized a list of the Democratic Party's alleged agenda: ending the war in Iraq, expanding health care, creating jobs and preserving the environment. So far, they have far more success implementing the GOP "to do" list (hence their unpopularity among Democrat voters.)
The real reasons why impeachment isn't being pursued? To begin with, there is again pure pragmatism: so long as Bush and Cheney occupy the White House, they (and the Iraq War) remain an albatross hung around the neck of any Republican seeking the presidency in 2008. Even someone as unlikable as Hillary can win in such a contest, or so the theory goes. Another reason the "I" word is being avoided is that it opens a can of worms, where the Democratic Party's complicity over the last seven years will become quickly apparent.
But perhaps the biggest reason: the Democratic Party is led by those who, almost universally, believe in the American establishment, even more so than the GOP. And admitting that the US government has been a criminal enterprise the past seven years hardly brings out mass faith in this establishment. While a portion of the Democrat leadership have noble sentiments, when push comes to shove, they will side with the establishment anytime it conflicts with the desires of the working class and progressives, and thus betray the foot-soldiers of the party.
A telling quote comes from Barack Obama, a fellow The Konformist concedes is certainly one of the more decent men in D.C. Yet on the impeachment issue, he shows establishment fawning and cluelessness. He opposes it, declaring: "I think you reserve impeachment for grave, grave breaches, and intentional breaches of the president's authority." Hmmm. And by grave breaches of the president's authority, do you exclude little things like illegal spying on American citizens, violating the Geneva Convention and using fraud to push the US into a costly and destructive war?
The bad news is, politically speaking, the Democratic Party leaders appear to be the winners despite all this. At this point, a majority of Americans will back a party of sniveling, unprincipled cowards over what the GOP has turned into during the Bush years. The Democrat establishment also believes, rightfully, that no matter how much they betray the progressive movement, they will come crawling back to them at election time over shards of glass rather than be stuck with Republicans controlling Congress or the Presidency. That means in 2008, the two most powerful politicians in America likely will be Hillary and Pelosi.
The good news: don't pen in Pelosi as a 2008 winner just yet. She may have an even tougher battle than Hillary does against Obama and John Edwards. Peace activist Cindy Sheehan, the mother of an American soldier who died in Iraq, and who during the summer of 2005 shamed the korporate media to finally cover tragedy in Iraq as much as they follow the lives of Britney, Lindsay Lohan, Paris Hilton and Brangelina, has announced a run for Congress as an independent against Ms. Pelosi. On why she is running against the top Dem in the House, Sheehan has explained that Republicans "are literally like rats jumping off the sinking ship of state and they are distancing themselves from George and Dick faster than the Democrats. With the mood of the country, we know this is not a moral position but a politically expedient one. Why can't we urge the Democrats to a moral position? Because they have been elected with a (D) they become one of the Untouchables?"
Whether Sheehan can win is still to be seen: Pelosi, after all is an incumbent, and a powerful one at that. On the other hand, Ms. Sheehan has overcome bigger odds politically in the past, and if ever the Speaker of the House could lose an election in a "secure" seat, it would be Pelosi against Cindy in a race decided by extremely progressive Bay Area voters. Because of this, The Konformist gives an early endorsement of Ms. Sheehan without reservations, both because of admiration of Sheehan and loathing of Pelosi. Frankly, somebody needs to be held accountable for the last seven years, and if the Democrats won't put that on Bush and Cheney, then they need to be punished for their own culpability. Go to it, Cindy!!!
In any case, we salute Nancy Pelosi as Beast of the Month. Congratulations, and keep up the great work, Nancy!!!
Beastly Update: Showing the continued sniveling servitude by the Democratic Party, Michael Mukasey was confirmed as Attorney General 53-40 on November 8 by the US Senate, despite his refusal to espouse his views on the legality of torture by the US government.
Sources:
For more on the Cindy Sheehan 2008 campaign:
http://www.cindyforcongress.org/
Antosca, Nick. "Kerry Should be Ashamed, and the Cop Who Tased Andrew Meyer Should be Jailed." The Huffington Post 18 September 2007 <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nick-antosca/kerry-should-be-ashamed-_b_64873.html>.
Berman, Ari. "Why Pelosi Opposes Impeachment." The Nation 31 July 2007 <http://www.thenation.com/blogs/notion?bid=15&pid=218930>.
Conover, Bev. "The Media and John Kerry's Disgusting Display." Online Journal 20 September 2007 <http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_2440.shtml>.
Greenwald, Glenn. "Why is the Democratic Congress so unpopular?" Salon 21 August 2007 <http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/08/21/congress/index.html?source=search&aim=/opinion/greenwald>.
Kleefeld, Eric. "Poll: More Republicans Than Democrats Approve Of Congress." Talking Points Memo 20 September 2007 <http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/09/poll_more_republicans_than_democrats_approve_of_congress.php>.
Parry, Robert. "Bush Gets a Spying Blank Check." ConsortiumNews.com 5 August 2007 <http://www.consortiumnews.com/2007/080507.html>.
"Peace Activist Sheehan to Challenge Top Democrat Pelosi." Monsters and Critics 10 Aug 2007 <http://news.monstersandcritics.com/usa/news/article_1341231.php/Peace_activist_Sheehan_to_challenge_top_Democrat_Pelosi>.
Rjmac. "Springsteen Gets Political on Today Show." Daily Kos 28 September 2007 <http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/9/28/101850/975>.
Sheehan, Cindy. "Strange Bedfellows..." MichaelMoore.com 12 July 2007 <http://www.michaelmoore.com/mustread/index.php?id=886>.
Nancy Pelosi, House Speaker
"I yam an anti-Christ... "
John Lydon (aka Johnny Rotten) of The Sex Pistols, "Anarchy in the UK"
"This is a song called Livin' In the Future. But it's really about what's happening now. Right now... Over the past six years we've had to add to the American picture: rendition, illegal wiretapping, voter suppression, no habeus corpus, the neglect of that great city New Orleans and its people, an attack on the Constitution. And the loss of our best men and women in a tragic war. This is a song about things that shouldn't happen here happening here."
Bruce "The Boss" Springstreen, introducing a song to Today Show viewers in September.
In September, college student Andrew Meyer was tasered and arrested at the University of Florida by a gang of jack-booted campus police. His crime? Asking 2004 Democratic Party candidate John Kerry two questions at a forum created precisely for that purpose. His two questions, incidentally, were about evidence that the 2004 election was stolen and if Kerry was a member of the Skull & Bones. Oddly, though Meyer clearly was being overwhelmed by police force, Kerry droned an unconvincing reply while Meyer screamed "Don't tase me, bro!" The big loser in the media frenzy afterwards was John Kerry, and though it's impolite to kick a man while he's down politically - especially when that man should legitimately be sitting in the White House - frankly Kerry deserves it. But beyond Mr. Kerry, what happened perfectly symbolizes everything that's gone on over the past seven years: leaders of the Democratic Party sitting back passively, pretending nothing is wrong, while basic American liberties are trampled upon.
Apparently, a lot of people agree with The Konformist at this point. Opinion polls show George W. Bush widely detested, as his popularity has sunk to a Watergate-era Tricky Dick: an October Zogby poll gave him a 24% approval rating. And yet, the same polls indicate that the Democrat-controlled Congress is even MORE detested. Indeed, the same Zogby poll indicates Congress has a paltry 11 percent approval rating, and polls consistently show the legislature exceeding the record low of 1992 when the era of Bush I and check-bouncing Congressmen inspired a "throw the bums out!" mentality in the masses (which sadly later fueled the rise of the Newtoids.)
Mainstream pundits try to spin this in arguing the problem is a lack of Beltway bipartisanship, but the numbers prove this to be a lie. The smoking gun is revealed by looking at popularity among party affiliation of the voters: while Bush has a decided ideological split (as Salon's Glenn Greenwald noted, he still had a 64-29 approval-disapproval rating among GOP voters in an August Gallup poll, vs. an 8-90 rate among Democrats) there is no real rift about Congress (a 24-66 among Republicans and 28-59 among Democrats.) Indeed, another Gallup poll in September indicated Congress was more popular among Republicans than Democrats. That would indicate the problem is not a lack of bipartisanship, but rather a lack of Congress rightfully taking on Bush and his right-wing minions (hence why party voters are even more disgusted with the performance than Republicans.)
None of this should be a surprise. The stage was set in May 2006, when current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (The Konformist Beast of the Month) declared: "Impeachment is off the table." In retrospect, these words have shaped the current political climate more than "Macaca" ever could (or, as sayings go, "Don't tase me, bro!") By publicly declaring the Democrats would remain toothless in any defiance of the law by the Bush Team, it has only encouraged Shrub and his minions to escalate their arrogance in massive criminality. Even after further revelations of fraudulent lies leading to the Iraq War, widespread illegal wire-tapping by the DOJ, torture of POWs in defiance of the Geneva Convention and even the Nixonian pardon of White House perjurer Scooter Libby, the Democrats have remained faithful to Pelosi's pledge. This is even after a July poll by the American Research Group showed 45 percent of the public favors impeachment of Bush (and an even higher 54 percent of Donkey Dick Cheney.)
Some would argue the Pelosi pledge was a pragmatically wise move: Pelosi was attempting to counter right-wing ravings that a Democratic-controlled would be so left-wing it would resemble a gang of Stalinists (or, worse, a Hillary clone army.) By denying the demands of the most radical members of the Democratic Party, the theory goes, it enabled the Democrats to appeal to moderates and ensure their 2006 Election victory. But as far as lies go, backing off on the no-impeachment promise appears to be one that can be without little fallout, especially since, as opinion polls now show, impeachment is no longer a fringe movement but a mainstream one with strong support from moderates.
The official position of why the "no impeachment" mantra is still being followed: that the American public wants results, not highly politicized hearings that would be divisive. So, what results have come from the Democratic-controlled Congress so far? Let's see: continued funding for the Iraq War even with no timetables put into place, passage of a FISA bill which gave Bush a virtual blank check to spy on Americans without a court order, and continued torture of POWs which has given America a black eye on the world stage. Meanwhile, a bill to expand the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) to cover more low-income children failed to override a Bush veto by 13 votes in the House. Apparently, Ms. Pelosi was unable to arm-twist thirteen GOP members to side with sick children over a widely unpopular Bush. Indeed, during a July breakfast with progressives, Pelosi itemized a list of the Democratic Party's alleged agenda: ending the war in Iraq, expanding health care, creating jobs and preserving the environment. So far, they have far more success implementing the GOP "to do" list (hence their unpopularity among Democrat voters.)
The real reasons why impeachment isn't being pursued? To begin with, there is again pure pragmatism: so long as Bush and Cheney occupy the White House, they (and the Iraq War) remain an albatross hung around the neck of any Republican seeking the presidency in 2008. Even someone as unlikable as Hillary can win in such a contest, or so the theory goes. Another reason the "I" word is being avoided is that it opens a can of worms, where the Democratic Party's complicity over the last seven years will become quickly apparent.
But perhaps the biggest reason: the Democratic Party is led by those who, almost universally, believe in the American establishment, even more so than the GOP. And admitting that the US government has been a criminal enterprise the past seven years hardly brings out mass faith in this establishment. While a portion of the Democrat leadership have noble sentiments, when push comes to shove, they will side with the establishment anytime it conflicts with the desires of the working class and progressives, and thus betray the foot-soldiers of the party.
A telling quote comes from Barack Obama, a fellow The Konformist concedes is certainly one of the more decent men in D.C. Yet on the impeachment issue, he shows establishment fawning and cluelessness. He opposes it, declaring: "I think you reserve impeachment for grave, grave breaches, and intentional breaches of the president's authority." Hmmm. And by grave breaches of the president's authority, do you exclude little things like illegal spying on American citizens, violating the Geneva Convention and using fraud to push the US into a costly and destructive war?
The bad news is, politically speaking, the Democratic Party leaders appear to be the winners despite all this. At this point, a majority of Americans will back a party of sniveling, unprincipled cowards over what the GOP has turned into during the Bush years. The Democrat establishment also believes, rightfully, that no matter how much they betray the progressive movement, they will come crawling back to them at election time over shards of glass rather than be stuck with Republicans controlling Congress or the Presidency. That means in 2008, the two most powerful politicians in America likely will be Hillary and Pelosi.
The good news: don't pen in Pelosi as a 2008 winner just yet. She may have an even tougher battle than Hillary does against Obama and John Edwards. Peace activist Cindy Sheehan, the mother of an American soldier who died in Iraq, and who during the summer of 2005 shamed the korporate media to finally cover tragedy in Iraq as much as they follow the lives of Britney, Lindsay Lohan, Paris Hilton and Brangelina, has announced a run for Congress as an independent against Ms. Pelosi. On why she is running against the top Dem in the House, Sheehan has explained that Republicans "are literally like rats jumping off the sinking ship of state and they are distancing themselves from George and Dick faster than the Democrats. With the mood of the country, we know this is not a moral position but a politically expedient one. Why can't we urge the Democrats to a moral position? Because they have been elected with a (D) they become one of the Untouchables?"
Whether Sheehan can win is still to be seen: Pelosi, after all is an incumbent, and a powerful one at that. On the other hand, Ms. Sheehan has overcome bigger odds politically in the past, and if ever the Speaker of the House could lose an election in a "secure" seat, it would be Pelosi against Cindy in a race decided by extremely progressive Bay Area voters. Because of this, The Konformist gives an early endorsement of Ms. Sheehan without reservations, both because of admiration of Sheehan and loathing of Pelosi. Frankly, somebody needs to be held accountable for the last seven years, and if the Democrats won't put that on Bush and Cheney, then they need to be punished for their own culpability. Go to it, Cindy!!!
In any case, we salute Nancy Pelosi as Beast of the Month. Congratulations, and keep up the great work, Nancy!!!
Beastly Update: Showing the continued sniveling servitude by the Democratic Party, Michael Mukasey was confirmed as Attorney General 53-40 on November 8 by the US Senate, despite his refusal to espouse his views on the legality of torture by the US government.
Sources:
For more on the Cindy Sheehan 2008 campaign:
http://www.cindyforcongress.org/
Antosca, Nick. "Kerry Should be Ashamed, and the Cop Who Tased Andrew Meyer Should be Jailed." The Huffington Post 18 September 2007 <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nick-antosca/kerry-should-be-ashamed-_b_64873.html>.
Berman, Ari. "Why Pelosi Opposes Impeachment." The Nation 31 July 2007 <http://www.thenation.com/blogs/notion?bid=15&pid=218930>.
Conover, Bev. "The Media and John Kerry's Disgusting Display." Online Journal 20 September 2007 <http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_2440.shtml>.
Greenwald, Glenn. "Why is the Democratic Congress so unpopular?" Salon 21 August 2007 <http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/08/21/congress/index.html?source=search&aim=/opinion/greenwald>.
Kleefeld, Eric. "Poll: More Republicans Than Democrats Approve Of Congress." Talking Points Memo 20 September 2007 <http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/09/poll_more_republicans_than_democrats_approve_of_congress.php>.
Parry, Robert. "Bush Gets a Spying Blank Check." ConsortiumNews.com 5 August 2007 <http://www.consortiumnews.com/2007/080507.html>.
"Peace Activist Sheehan to Challenge Top Democrat Pelosi." Monsters and Critics 10 Aug 2007 <http://news.monstersandcritics.com/usa/news/article_1341231.php/Peace_activist_Sheehan_to_challenge_top_Democrat_Pelosi>.
Rjmac. "Springsteen Gets Political on Today Show." Daily Kos 28 September 2007 <http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/9/28/101850/975>.
Sheehan, Cindy. "Strange Bedfellows..." MichaelMoore.com 12 July 2007 <http://www.michaelmoore.com/mustread/index.php?id=886>.
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Hillary the She-Bush
Cindy Sheehan
cspeacemom@sbcglobal.net
Friday, September 28, 2007
Hillary the She-Bush by Cindy Sheehan
Dear Friends,
With the deplorable performance of Hillary at the debate, the other evening, I decided to post an article that appeared in The Progressive Magazine earlier this year.
Cindy
Let’s face it: In 2008, we are not going to get much worse than George W. Bush. I shudder to even think of what a President worse than George would look like.
I am hoping with 2008, though, that the American electorate will not settle for someone who is not as bad as George W., but we will seek out, support and celebrate someone who is far better and will lead our country back on a path of healing and peace in a way that will also show the rest of the planet that the United States is regaining her sanity after the horribly destructive Bush years.
I am praying that we are finished with politicians who either don’t listen to the American public at all, or like Hillary Clinton, play political games while our troops are dying by the dozens every week.
It’s hard to figure out which Hillary will appear on a given day. In a voice that alternates between nails on a chalkboard and the charm, warmth, and modulation of a dripping faucet, Hillary changes her rhetoric and her positions as fast as her advisers can send her a message on her Blackberry. (A recent disturbing trend she has been exhibiting is laughing wildly and inappropriately at weird random times...it's truly creepy).
One of the reasons that I’m opposed to a Hillary Clinton Presidency is that another Clinton in the White House would mean that for the last twenty years we have had either a Clinton or a Bush in power. America does not do dynasties. We broke away from a monarchy 231 years ago, and we have engaged in imperialism all over the world allegedly deposing dynasties. Even though the monograms are already in place, it sets a dangerous precedent, especially with another Bush in the offing.
Everyone who knows me, though, understands the main reason I do not, have not, or will not support Hillary Clinton. It is not because she is annoying. It is not because she is a Clinton. It is because she is a She-Bush warmonger. She can twang all she wants that she has always been against the invasion and occupation of Iraq, (as she did on a recent MSNBC Countdown with Keith Olbermann) but anyone with a memory and a basic awareness of current events knows she is not exactly telling the truth. She said this on the floor of the Senate before she cast her original vote: “The facts that have brought us to this fateful vote are not in doubt. . . . Saddam must disarm or be disarmed.”
I want Senator Clinton to show remorse for her complicity in the murder of my son, Casey, and his buddies, and for the mass murder of the Iraqi people. Even though saying, “I’m sorry for my vote that caused so much pain,” will not raise anyone from the dead, or rebuild the smashed structures and infrastructure in Iraq, it may go a long way toward healing and also toward bringing the rest of the troops home so they can live a long life on top of the earth, not prematurely buried beneath it.
But Hillary refuses, even at this late, to apologize. “Mrs. Clinton believes that reversing course on Iraq would invite the charge of flip-flopping that damaged Mr. Kerry,” The New York Times reported on February 18. “She argued to associates in private discussions that Mr. Gore and Mr. Kerry lost, in part, because they could not convince enough Americans that they were resolute on national security, the associates said. Mrs. Clinton’s image as a strong leader, in turn, is critical to her hopes of becoming the nation’s first female President. According to one adviser, her internal polling indicates that a high proportion of Democrats see her as strong and tough, both assets particularly for a female candidate who is seeking to become commander in chief.”
Still, she tries to have it both ways, saying that if she becomes President in 2009 she will “bring the troops home from Iraq” if they are still there. My answer to that is: Come in off of the fundraising track and work on bringing the troops home now. While the Senator is out campaigning and equivocating, people are dying.
I, my sister, Dede, and another Gold Star Mother, Lynn Braddach, whose son, Travis Nall, was killed in Iraq in 2003, met with Senator Clinton in September of 2005. We poured our hearts and souls out to her. We cried as we told her of our sons and our fear for the people of Iraq and the escalating body count of our brave young people. She sat there stone-faced and walked out and told Sarah Ferguson of the Village Voice, “My bottom line is that I don’t want their sons to die in vain. . . . I don’t believe it’s smart to set a date for withdrawal. . . . I don’t think it’s the right time to withdraw.” She may as well have slapped us in the face using Bloody George’s own lines and using our son’s sacrifice to justify her own warmongering.
Since we met with her, more than 1,000 of our young people have come home in body bags and tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis have died while she was waiting for the best political time to be semi-against the war. How many of our troops are lying in Walter Reed with devastating injuries that could have been prevented if a Senate leader like Clinton would have taken a moral, instead of a political, stance?
On January 18th, Senator Clinton introduced a meaningless bill to put a cap on the number of soldiers that can be in Iraq. She set the cap at January 1st levels. It is as weak and meaningless as the nonbinding resolution, and it is just as politically safe, since about two-thirds of the country now opposes the war—and Bloody George, too.
This occupation of Iraq can’t be won by being smarter; it was lost before we went in. The United States was the big loser in a capricious military expedition that began with the support of Senator Clinton. She is an amazingly brilliant person, and she cannot credibly say that she was fooled, or lied to, by George. But that is what she said, as she began to backpedal as early as October 17, 2003.
“The Administration gilded the lily, engaged in hyperbole, took whatever small nugget of intelligence that existed and blew it up into a mountain,” she said on the Senate floor that day.
I don’t want a President who admits to being fooled by George Bush, one of the biggest fools in American history.
Now, as Bush threatens war with Iran, Senator Clinton is in no position to hold him back. In fact, she out-hawks George W. on the imminent invasion of Iran. Early last year, she had this to say to a meeting of AIPAC (American-Israeli Political Action Committee): “U.S. policy must be clear and unequivocal: We cannot, we should not, we must not permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons,” she said. “In dealing with this threat . . . no option can be taken off the table.”
To avoid letting Iran get a nuclear weapon, she is willing to go nuclear. She dares to threaten using a weapon of mass destruction, which has only ever been used by the U.S., to pick the mote out of Iran’s eye when Israel has hundreds of logs in its own eye, and America has thousands.
I want a President who keeps us safe. But I crave a President who keeps us safe not by killing innocent people, or embarking on an insane arms race to add weaponry to our already formidable arsenal, but by implementing wise policies that give fewer people abroad any good reason to despise us. I crave a President who does not aspire to run the empire just like the guys but who understands the need to dismantle the empire and to turn this country into a real democracy, instead.
I, again, affirm my commitment to peace. I don’t care if it is a man or a woman; Democrat, Republican, Green; white, brown, or black; Christian, Jew, Muslim, or otherwise. I will only support a candidate who is courageously and uncompromisingly committed to peace.
Hillary Clinton is not that person. She never will be.
Cindy Sheehan is the mother of Specialist Casey Sheehan, who was killed in Bush’s war of terror on 04/04/04. She is the co-founder and president of Gold Star Families for Peace and the Camp Casey Peace Institute.
Cindy@CindyforCongress.org
cspeacemom@sbcglobal.net
Friday, September 28, 2007
Hillary the She-Bush by Cindy Sheehan
Dear Friends,
With the deplorable performance of Hillary at the debate, the other evening, I decided to post an article that appeared in The Progressive Magazine earlier this year.
Cindy
Let’s face it: In 2008, we are not going to get much worse than George W. Bush. I shudder to even think of what a President worse than George would look like.
I am hoping with 2008, though, that the American electorate will not settle for someone who is not as bad as George W., but we will seek out, support and celebrate someone who is far better and will lead our country back on a path of healing and peace in a way that will also show the rest of the planet that the United States is regaining her sanity after the horribly destructive Bush years.
I am praying that we are finished with politicians who either don’t listen to the American public at all, or like Hillary Clinton, play political games while our troops are dying by the dozens every week.
It’s hard to figure out which Hillary will appear on a given day. In a voice that alternates between nails on a chalkboard and the charm, warmth, and modulation of a dripping faucet, Hillary changes her rhetoric and her positions as fast as her advisers can send her a message on her Blackberry. (A recent disturbing trend she has been exhibiting is laughing wildly and inappropriately at weird random times...it's truly creepy).
One of the reasons that I’m opposed to a Hillary Clinton Presidency is that another Clinton in the White House would mean that for the last twenty years we have had either a Clinton or a Bush in power. America does not do dynasties. We broke away from a monarchy 231 years ago, and we have engaged in imperialism all over the world allegedly deposing dynasties. Even though the monograms are already in place, it sets a dangerous precedent, especially with another Bush in the offing.
Everyone who knows me, though, understands the main reason I do not, have not, or will not support Hillary Clinton. It is not because she is annoying. It is not because she is a Clinton. It is because she is a She-Bush warmonger. She can twang all she wants that she has always been against the invasion and occupation of Iraq, (as she did on a recent MSNBC Countdown with Keith Olbermann) but anyone with a memory and a basic awareness of current events knows she is not exactly telling the truth. She said this on the floor of the Senate before she cast her original vote: “The facts that have brought us to this fateful vote are not in doubt. . . . Saddam must disarm or be disarmed.”
I want Senator Clinton to show remorse for her complicity in the murder of my son, Casey, and his buddies, and for the mass murder of the Iraqi people. Even though saying, “I’m sorry for my vote that caused so much pain,” will not raise anyone from the dead, or rebuild the smashed structures and infrastructure in Iraq, it may go a long way toward healing and also toward bringing the rest of the troops home so they can live a long life on top of the earth, not prematurely buried beneath it.
But Hillary refuses, even at this late, to apologize. “Mrs. Clinton believes that reversing course on Iraq would invite the charge of flip-flopping that damaged Mr. Kerry,” The New York Times reported on February 18. “She argued to associates in private discussions that Mr. Gore and Mr. Kerry lost, in part, because they could not convince enough Americans that they were resolute on national security, the associates said. Mrs. Clinton’s image as a strong leader, in turn, is critical to her hopes of becoming the nation’s first female President. According to one adviser, her internal polling indicates that a high proportion of Democrats see her as strong and tough, both assets particularly for a female candidate who is seeking to become commander in chief.”
Still, she tries to have it both ways, saying that if she becomes President in 2009 she will “bring the troops home from Iraq” if they are still there. My answer to that is: Come in off of the fundraising track and work on bringing the troops home now. While the Senator is out campaigning and equivocating, people are dying.
I, my sister, Dede, and another Gold Star Mother, Lynn Braddach, whose son, Travis Nall, was killed in Iraq in 2003, met with Senator Clinton in September of 2005. We poured our hearts and souls out to her. We cried as we told her of our sons and our fear for the people of Iraq and the escalating body count of our brave young people. She sat there stone-faced and walked out and told Sarah Ferguson of the Village Voice, “My bottom line is that I don’t want their sons to die in vain. . . . I don’t believe it’s smart to set a date for withdrawal. . . . I don’t think it’s the right time to withdraw.” She may as well have slapped us in the face using Bloody George’s own lines and using our son’s sacrifice to justify her own warmongering.
Since we met with her, more than 1,000 of our young people have come home in body bags and tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis have died while she was waiting for the best political time to be semi-against the war. How many of our troops are lying in Walter Reed with devastating injuries that could have been prevented if a Senate leader like Clinton would have taken a moral, instead of a political, stance?
On January 18th, Senator Clinton introduced a meaningless bill to put a cap on the number of soldiers that can be in Iraq. She set the cap at January 1st levels. It is as weak and meaningless as the nonbinding resolution, and it is just as politically safe, since about two-thirds of the country now opposes the war—and Bloody George, too.
This occupation of Iraq can’t be won by being smarter; it was lost before we went in. The United States was the big loser in a capricious military expedition that began with the support of Senator Clinton. She is an amazingly brilliant person, and she cannot credibly say that she was fooled, or lied to, by George. But that is what she said, as she began to backpedal as early as October 17, 2003.
“The Administration gilded the lily, engaged in hyperbole, took whatever small nugget of intelligence that existed and blew it up into a mountain,” she said on the Senate floor that day.
I don’t want a President who admits to being fooled by George Bush, one of the biggest fools in American history.
Now, as Bush threatens war with Iran, Senator Clinton is in no position to hold him back. In fact, she out-hawks George W. on the imminent invasion of Iran. Early last year, she had this to say to a meeting of AIPAC (American-Israeli Political Action Committee): “U.S. policy must be clear and unequivocal: We cannot, we should not, we must not permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons,” she said. “In dealing with this threat . . . no option can be taken off the table.”
To avoid letting Iran get a nuclear weapon, she is willing to go nuclear. She dares to threaten using a weapon of mass destruction, which has only ever been used by the U.S., to pick the mote out of Iran’s eye when Israel has hundreds of logs in its own eye, and America has thousands.
I want a President who keeps us safe. But I crave a President who keeps us safe not by killing innocent people, or embarking on an insane arms race to add weaponry to our already formidable arsenal, but by implementing wise policies that give fewer people abroad any good reason to despise us. I crave a President who does not aspire to run the empire just like the guys but who understands the need to dismantle the empire and to turn this country into a real democracy, instead.
I, again, affirm my commitment to peace. I don’t care if it is a man or a woman; Democrat, Republican, Green; white, brown, or black; Christian, Jew, Muslim, or otherwise. I will only support a candidate who is courageously and uncompromisingly committed to peace.
Hillary Clinton is not that person. She never will be.
Cindy Sheehan is the mother of Specialist Casey Sheehan, who was killed in Bush’s war of terror on 04/04/04. She is the co-founder and president of Gold Star Families for Peace and the Camp Casey Peace Institute.
Cindy@CindyforCongress.org
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Peace activist Sheehan to challenge Pelosi
http://news.monstersandcritics.com/usa/news/article_1341231.php/Peace_activist_Sheehan_to_challenge_top_Democrat_Pelosi
Peace activist Sheehan to challenge top Democrat Pelosi
Aug 10, 2007
San Francisco - Blasting Democrats for failing to take steps to end the war in Iraq, top peace activist Cindy Sheehan on Thursday formally announced her candidacy to challenge Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi in next year's elections.
Pelosi, who represents a left-leaning congressional district centred on San Francisco, is the top-ranking Democrat in the House and the first woman to hold the speakership in US history.
Sheehan last month vowed to mount a challenge if Pelosi did not move to impeach US President George W Bush.
Speaking in tears Thursday to a crowd of supporters, Sheehan said that Pelosi had lost touch with the people and was more interested in 'protecting the status quo ... and the corporate elite.'
She said she was inspired to run by the memory of her 24-year-old son, Casey, who was killed in Iraq in 2004, setting her on a course that made her the country's most famous and controversial anti-war activist.
'The country is ripe for a change,' said Sheehan, who said she planned to run as an independent on a platform of anti-war policy and universal health care. 'It's going to start right here and right now.'
Peace activist Sheehan to challenge top Democrat Pelosi
Aug 10, 2007
San Francisco - Blasting Democrats for failing to take steps to end the war in Iraq, top peace activist Cindy Sheehan on Thursday formally announced her candidacy to challenge Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi in next year's elections.
Pelosi, who represents a left-leaning congressional district centred on San Francisco, is the top-ranking Democrat in the House and the first woman to hold the speakership in US history.
Sheehan last month vowed to mount a challenge if Pelosi did not move to impeach US President George W Bush.
Speaking in tears Thursday to a crowd of supporters, Sheehan said that Pelosi had lost touch with the people and was more interested in 'protecting the status quo ... and the corporate elite.'
She said she was inspired to run by the memory of her 24-year-old son, Casey, who was killed in Iraq in 2004, setting her on a course that made her the country's most famous and controversial anti-war activist.
'The country is ripe for a change,' said Sheehan, who said she planned to run as an independent on a platform of anti-war policy and universal health care. 'It's going to start right here and right now.'
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Sheehan Arrested in Impeachment Protest
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070723/D8QIIDSO0.html
Sheehan Arrested in Impeachment Protest
Jul 23, 2007
By NATASHA T. METZLER
WASHINGTON (AP) - Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan was arrested Monday at the Capitol for disorderly conduct, shortly after saying she would run against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi over the California Democrat's refusal to try to impeach President Bush.
Sheehan was taken into custody inside Rep. John Conyers' office, where she had spent an hour imploring him to launch impeachment proceedings against Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. Conyers, D-Mich., chairs the House Judiciary Committee, where any impeachment effort would have to begin.
"The Democrats will not hold this administration accountable, so we have to hold the Democrats accountable," Sheehan said outside of Conyers' office after the meeting. "And I for one am going to step up to the plate and run against Nancy Pelosi."
Sheehan and about 200 other protesters had walked to Conyers' office from Arlington National Cemetery. She said Conyers told her there weren't enough votes for impeachment to move forward on the issue.
Forty-five of Sheehan's fellow protesters also were arrested.
"Impeachment is not a fringe movement, it is mandated in our Constitution. Nancy Pelosi had no authority to take it off the table," Sheehan told her group of orange-clad activists before they began their march from the national cemetery.
Sheehan, whose 24-year-old son, Casey, was killed in Iraq, has been saying for two weeks that she would seek to oust Pelosi from office by running against her as an independent in her San Francisco district if Pelosi didn't change her mind by July 23 on trying to impeach Bush.
Conyers introduced a bill last term calling on Congress to determine whether there are grounds for impeaching Bush. Pelosi has steadfastly dismissed any talk of impeachment, saying Democrats should focus their efforts on ending the war in Iraq.
Sheehan Arrested in Impeachment Protest
Jul 23, 2007
By NATASHA T. METZLER
WASHINGTON (AP) - Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan was arrested Monday at the Capitol for disorderly conduct, shortly after saying she would run against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi over the California Democrat's refusal to try to impeach President Bush.
Sheehan was taken into custody inside Rep. John Conyers' office, where she had spent an hour imploring him to launch impeachment proceedings against Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. Conyers, D-Mich., chairs the House Judiciary Committee, where any impeachment effort would have to begin.
"The Democrats will not hold this administration accountable, so we have to hold the Democrats accountable," Sheehan said outside of Conyers' office after the meeting. "And I for one am going to step up to the plate and run against Nancy Pelosi."
Sheehan and about 200 other protesters had walked to Conyers' office from Arlington National Cemetery. She said Conyers told her there weren't enough votes for impeachment to move forward on the issue.
Forty-five of Sheehan's fellow protesters also were arrested.
"Impeachment is not a fringe movement, it is mandated in our Constitution. Nancy Pelosi had no authority to take it off the table," Sheehan told her group of orange-clad activists before they began their march from the national cemetery.
Sheehan, whose 24-year-old son, Casey, was killed in Iraq, has been saying for two weeks that she would seek to oust Pelosi from office by running against her as an independent in her San Francisco district if Pelosi didn't change her mind by July 23 on trying to impeach Bush.
Conyers introduced a bill last term calling on Congress to determine whether there are grounds for impeaching Bush. Pelosi has steadfastly dismissed any talk of impeachment, saying Democrats should focus their efforts on ending the war in Iraq.
Monday, July 16, 2007
Strange Bedfellows ...
http://www.michaelmoore.com/mustread/index.php?id=886
Strange Bedfellows ...
by Cindy Sheehan
Thursday, July 12th, 2007
Since I announced my challenge to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi a few days ago, I have been very thrilled that issues like impeachment and the inherent corruption of the "two" party system have been brought to the forefront of public discourse. Every interview that I have done has given me the opportunity to throw the impeachment issue out there. The democratic blogosphere has predictably lined up against me and must be very frightened because they are repeating the scandalous lies of the right. Wow, the right and left are finding common ground over slandering me. I must be a uniter.
I received an email from David Swanson from AfterDowningStreet.org yesterday saying that ADS was in trouble because the blogs were trashing us for targeting John Conyers and Nancy Pelosi. My question for these bloggers is whom should we target? Should we go after House Minority Leader John Boehner? Repugs are literally like rats jumping off the sinking ship of state and they are distancing themselves from George and Dick faster than the Democrats. With the mood of the country, we know this is not a moral position but a politically expedient one. Why can't we urge the Democrats to a moral position? Because they have been elected with a (D) they become one of the Untouchables?
Instead of trashing David Swanson and I for wanting our leadership to do their jobs why can't the left join with us and be concerned with the people who are being killed, maimed and displaced on a daily basis and not worry about Dems being held to the same standards that we have been trying to hold the Repugs to? David has a baby boy named Wesley that deserves a better future. There are millions of children in Iraq that deserve a better future. There are over 600 American troops that have been killed since the Dems took over the power structure in DC and did nothing to stop George's murderous surge. When the Repugs were in power we targeted them. Now the Dems are in power so they are the ones that we have to focus on. It is not a difficult concept.
There must be an underlying shady reason that Speaker Pelosi took impeachment off the table. Her office stated the other day that she will not put the issue back on the table because she is focused on "ending the war." The statement would be laughable if it weren't for the fact that she is using a neo-con strategy of saying the exact opposite of what is true. Ms. Pelosi would not allow Rep. Barbara Lee's bill that truly supported the troops by fixing a quick timeline for their withdrawal to be brought to the floor and instead used her power to whip her caucus into approving a "non-binding" resolution that by its very name is meaningless and useless. The Dems can accomplish much if they put their muscle behind it and the Dems could impeach BushCo and end the war if that was truly their focus. Besides all this, actions speak louder than words and one cannot say that she is focused on ending the war with her mouth while she is signing a one hundred BILLION dollar check to keep the war going with her signing hand.
Since I announced, along with the expected slurs from the "left," my team of my sister and assistant and I have received thousands of messages of support. People are lining up to donate to a potential campaign and are pledging to close businesses and quit jobs to move across the country to San Francisco to work on my campaign. I have been asked to run for Congress from districts all over the country, but I am a California home-girl and have spent the last 15 years less than an hour away from what we call "The City." If Ms. Pelosi does not exercise her mandatory (A president and vice-president SHALL BE impeached) constitutional duty to remove the uncontrollable Bush mob from power and I do run against her it will be a pleasure to sleep in the same bed every night and live near my family and friends!
I will be running on the People for Humanity platform that is coalescing right now with other possible exciting candidates coming on board to challenge other corrupt Repugs and do-nothing Dems. Politics are not the be-all and end-all of our society and one thing we all need to learn is that people power should run this county not a bunch of corporately controlled wealthy elitists that are disconnected from humanity and reality. The system of constant war and constant war profiteering needs to be challenged in a very pronounced way if we want constant peace and a system of sustainability. Great social change will not happen without great sacrifice and maybe its time to suck it up and work for a better country, and then a better world by default.
Our Journey for Humanity and Accountability has gotten off to a great start. We left Camp Casey in Crawford on July 10th. Our "parade" (we got in lots of trouble for not having a permit) that walked along the Lone Star Parkway in Crawford for about a mile received honks and waves and not one middle Our first stop was Houston, the former home of Halliburton and the headquarters of many immoral oil companies. Our second stop was New Orleans where mostly people of color are still homeless, or inadequately housed and still desperately seeking help. The young people who still put their own lives on hold to come from around America to help them are still my heroes.
Change is hard and scary, I know this all too well. My life changed irrevocably when Casey was killed in the occupation of Iraq that has been supported and funded by both parties. But oftentimes change can be good.
Don't fear change especially when the status quo is so freaking frightening.
For more information, or to donate money to our Caravan, please go to www.thecampcaseypeaceinstitute.org.
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Sheehan considers challenge to Pelosi
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070709/ap_on_el_ho/cindy_sheehan_pelosi
Sheehan considers challenge to Pelosi
By ANGELA K. BROWN, Associated Press Writer
7-8-7
Cindy Sheehan, the soldier's mother who galvanized the anti-war movement, said Sunday that she plans to seek House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's congressional seat unless she introduces articles of impeachment against President Bush in the next two weeks.
Sheehan said she will run against the San Francisco Democrat in 2008 as an independent if Pelosi does not seek by July 23 to impeach Bush. That's when Sheehan and her supporters are to arrive in Washington, D.C., after a 13-day caravan and walking tour starting next week from the group's war protest site near Bush's Crawford ranch.
"Democrats and Americans feel betrayed by the Democratic leadership," Sheehan told The Associated Press. "We hired them to bring an end to the war. I'm not too far from San Francisco, so it wouldn't be too big of a move for me. I would give her a run for her money."
Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly said the congresswoman has said repeatedly that her focus is on ending the war in Iraq.
"She believes that the best way to support our troops in Iraq is to bring them home safely and soon," Daly said in an e-mail to the AP. "July will be a month of action in Congress to end the war, including a vote to redeploy our troops by next spring."
The White House declined to comment on Sheehan's plans.
She plans her official candidacy announcement Tuesday. Sunday wrapped up what is expected to be her final weekend at the 5-acre Crawford lot that she sold to California radio talk show host Bree Walker, who plans to keep it open to protesters.
"The land itself has historical value," Walker said. "It is the first people's movement of the 21st century, and it needs to be kept as the hallowed ground that it is."
Sheehan announced in late May that she was leaving the anti-war movement. She said that she felt her efforts had been in vain and that she had endured smear tactics and hatred from the left, as well as the right. She said she wanted to change course.
She first came to Crawford in August 2005 during a Bush vacation, demanding to talk to him about the war that killed her son Casey in 2004. She became the face of the anti-war movement during her 26-day roadside vigil, which was joined by thousands. But it also drew counter-protests by Bush supporters, many who said she was hurting troop morale.
Sheehan, who has never held political office, recently said that she was leaving the Democratic Party because it "caved" in to the president. Last week, she announced her caravan to Washington, an undertaking she calls the "people's accountability movement."
"I didn't expect to be back so soon, but the focus is different than it was before," Sheehan said Sunday. "Instead of talking and making accusations, we're going into communities and talking to the people who've been hurt by the Bush regime. We're finding out how we can help people."
Sheehan, who will turn 50 on Tuesday, said Bush should be impeached because she believes he misled the public about the reasons for going to war, violated the Geneva Convention by torturing detainees, and crossed the line by commuting the prison sentence of former vice presidential aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby. She said other grounds for impeachment are the domestic spying program and the "inadequate and tragic" response to Hurricane Katrina.
Libby was convicted of lying and obstructing justice in an investigation into the leak of a CIA officer's identity.
Sheehan said she hopes Pelosi files the articles of impeachment so Sheehan can move onto her next projects, including overseas trips for humanitarian work. But if not, Sheehan said she is ready to run for office.
"I'm doing it to encourage other people to run against Congress members who aren't doing their jobs, who are beholden to special interests," Sheehan said. "She (Pelosi) let the people down who worked hard to put Democrats back in power, who we thought were our hope for change."
Pelosi was elected to the House in 1987 and became the first female speaker in January.
Sheehan said she lives in a Sacramento suburb but declined to disclose which city, citing safety reasons. The area is outside Pelosi's district, but there are no residency requirements for congressional members, according to the California secretary of state's office.
Sheehan considers challenge to Pelosi
By ANGELA K. BROWN, Associated Press Writer
7-8-7
Cindy Sheehan, the soldier's mother who galvanized the anti-war movement, said Sunday that she plans to seek House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's congressional seat unless she introduces articles of impeachment against President Bush in the next two weeks.
Sheehan said she will run against the San Francisco Democrat in 2008 as an independent if Pelosi does not seek by July 23 to impeach Bush. That's when Sheehan and her supporters are to arrive in Washington, D.C., after a 13-day caravan and walking tour starting next week from the group's war protest site near Bush's Crawford ranch.
"Democrats and Americans feel betrayed by the Democratic leadership," Sheehan told The Associated Press. "We hired them to bring an end to the war. I'm not too far from San Francisco, so it wouldn't be too big of a move for me. I would give her a run for her money."
Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly said the congresswoman has said repeatedly that her focus is on ending the war in Iraq.
"She believes that the best way to support our troops in Iraq is to bring them home safely and soon," Daly said in an e-mail to the AP. "July will be a month of action in Congress to end the war, including a vote to redeploy our troops by next spring."
The White House declined to comment on Sheehan's plans.
She plans her official candidacy announcement Tuesday. Sunday wrapped up what is expected to be her final weekend at the 5-acre Crawford lot that she sold to California radio talk show host Bree Walker, who plans to keep it open to protesters.
"The land itself has historical value," Walker said. "It is the first people's movement of the 21st century, and it needs to be kept as the hallowed ground that it is."
Sheehan announced in late May that she was leaving the anti-war movement. She said that she felt her efforts had been in vain and that she had endured smear tactics and hatred from the left, as well as the right. She said she wanted to change course.
She first came to Crawford in August 2005 during a Bush vacation, demanding to talk to him about the war that killed her son Casey in 2004. She became the face of the anti-war movement during her 26-day roadside vigil, which was joined by thousands. But it also drew counter-protests by Bush supporters, many who said she was hurting troop morale.
Sheehan, who has never held political office, recently said that she was leaving the Democratic Party because it "caved" in to the president. Last week, she announced her caravan to Washington, an undertaking she calls the "people's accountability movement."
"I didn't expect to be back so soon, but the focus is different than it was before," Sheehan said Sunday. "Instead of talking and making accusations, we're going into communities and talking to the people who've been hurt by the Bush regime. We're finding out how we can help people."
Sheehan, who will turn 50 on Tuesday, said Bush should be impeached because she believes he misled the public about the reasons for going to war, violated the Geneva Convention by torturing detainees, and crossed the line by commuting the prison sentence of former vice presidential aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby. She said other grounds for impeachment are the domestic spying program and the "inadequate and tragic" response to Hurricane Katrina.
Libby was convicted of lying and obstructing justice in an investigation into the leak of a CIA officer's identity.
Sheehan said she hopes Pelosi files the articles of impeachment so Sheehan can move onto her next projects, including overseas trips for humanitarian work. But if not, Sheehan said she is ready to run for office.
"I'm doing it to encourage other people to run against Congress members who aren't doing their jobs, who are beholden to special interests," Sheehan said. "She (Pelosi) let the people down who worked hard to put Democrats back in power, who we thought were our hope for change."
Pelosi was elected to the House in 1987 and became the first female speaker in January.
Sheehan said she lives in a Sacramento suburb but declined to disclose which city, citing safety reasons. The area is outside Pelosi's district, but there are no residency requirements for congressional members, according to the California secretary of state's office.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
