Nathan Deibenow is a condescending, thoughtless ass. And that's putting it mildly. Cindy Sheehan's goal should be entertaining him and the other press hyenas like him? Sure, and you know who else was just too serious? Martin Luther King Jr. What a drag that guy was. I don't think he became a recurring character on the Tonight Show. He could have had a series, and now all he's got is a postage stamp.
Let's see: Cindy's son was murdered in a criminal war, she's protested to little effect against a monolithic MSM (that, like Diebenow and Webster, is too interested in "entertainment" to actually report the truth), she's spent herself to physical, mental and emotional exhaustion trying to unseat Nancy Pelosi, the notoriously corrupt and loathed leader of our feckless Democratic Party, and now she's back protesting into the wind while Dick and Liz Cheney are chauffeured around the MSM to spout egregious lies about Dick's criminal and treasonous acts. So Cindy, why can't you lighten up a bit? You know, have some fun? You're competing with "Dancing with the Stars," you know. Jeez.

Authenticity is never as exciting as its simulacra.

Reality TV, anyone?

It's no coincidence that public discursive acts are always evaluated as 'performances.'

You know the Left is in turmoil when they're attacking their own people. I loathe much of what the Right stands for, but I respect the discipline and clear focus that they generally show.

How dare someone with a tiny fraction of cindy's track record for peace judge her at all much less proclaim who she should be reaching.

Shame on raw story - but then, like most of the self-proclaimed "advertise liberally" crowd, there is nothing progressive or liberal about site at all.

Just another hack site that is selling out by using our eyeballs to create a handsome revenue stream while taking cheap shots at those that actually work for change.

I just deleted them from my bookmarks - there are plenty of other places I can keep up on the news.

Hey Cindy, guess what? Your son was dumb enough to join the army, and it got him killed.

I support Cindy Sheehan 150%. She is a fighter and she has guts. She is fighting against evil. We need more people like her and we need them yesterday. If Cindy Sheehan asked me to join her personally on a day-to-day basis I would drop everything and do so. She is fighting the good fight whether it be popular or not. KEEP UP THE PRESSURE CINDY!!! WE LOVE YOU!!! -Joshua Smith (Dallas, TX)

This is way too much information on the Joe the Plumber of the antiwar left.

Does Joe the Plumber have the moral authority to have an opinion on anything? Because Cindy Sheehan sure as hell does, while I'm unaware of "Joe's" authority, moral or otherwise, on anything.

As to your apparently "antiwar left" slur, perhaps you meant the "antiwar American mainstream majority", as opposed to the "pro-war fringe kook right" from whence it seems you come? Just wondering.

Shame on raw story - but then, like most of the self-proclaimed "advertise liberally" crowd, there is nothing progressive or liberal about site at all.

Just another hack site that is selling out by using our eyeballs to create a handsome revenue stream while taking cheap shots at those that actually work for change.

Um, a news site is not supposed to be progressive, liberal, conservative, or libertarian. It is supposed to be independent of bias and opinion, which Raw Story does very well.

Who are these people you speak of that are "actually" working for change? Obama??? Pelosi??? Geithner???

1) War is still going on in Iraq and Afghanistan
2) Torture is still going on
3) Guantanamo is still open
4) The "bail-out" money is not tracked or traced
5) Bombing in Pakistan now
6) Said his administration wouldn't have lobbyists

Where is all this change we were supposed to have?
When is Obama going to stand by his words?

Sounds really progressive to me.

RawPenis is another pseudo-progressive site that isn't necessarily doing the true progressives any favors. If it tried to screw Cindy Sheehan over, by writing a bunch of bullshit about her latest endeavors, that wouldn't surprise me either. Nobody is above reproach, but RawPenis certainly is a house of cards in comparison, and if they truly weren't another propaganda shill agent for the DEMS (dinocrats) they wouldn't be so prone to writing really polarizing crap that makes people have this really assinine idea that the two parties really are IN OPPOSITION TO EACH OTHER'S AGENDA'S AND GOALS, when in fact, they're joined at the hip and both feeding at the K-Street pig trough, at OUR EXPENSE.

so fuck RawPenis. Really. They suck.

I agree with you, Erik. If i thought RS had a slant at all, I wouldn't read it.

This is news coverage, folks. nathan snail (troll) you should be ashamed of yourself for even suggesting it.

Just because it's against what you want to hear doesn't mean it's biased.

I have Cindy Sheehan on radio shows in both Sacramento and San Francisco...I'd admired her crawford action..thought it was helpful in waking up the country.. HOWEVER..that said...when someone starts speaking of themselves in the third person...instead of saying..I believe etc. be wary..at that point..in my experience of interviewing hundreds of people more famous and more powerful than Cindy Sheehan..when that happens..lookout..because in their own minds..it's all about them.
When I dared to question how cindy sheehan knew that a Bart policeman had WILLFULLY MURDERED. . a young mixed race man on new year's eve....she and her sister sent my email to one of her peace thugs to "set me straight'' fortunately for me..their email skills weren't too cool.and I received the email as well... yes, folks ..egotistical peaceniks can be bullies too..if it suits their purpose...hint to cindy..your time is sooooo over. clue...wrong president..why are you going after Obama...troops still in iraq..more in afghanistan...good luck. and please don't regale us with discussions of your son's sexual lack of experiences....

As nother has said, why join the army if you do not want to fight. That is what armies are for. If you go to war, legal or not, you have a chance of getting killed.
I love the old story "I am a pacifist and will kill anyone who tries to stop me!"

Well Christine, that was a bit much. Your attack on Cindy Sheehan. Although I'm not surprised, you did resort to new lows. It one reason I don't listen to your shows.

As for speaking in third person: I haven't heard Cindy do that, assuming that she does. But since you brought it up, there is one self-absorbed, all-self-important talk show host on KGO (initials are RT) with a very big head that frequently talks about himself in third person, but when I did listen to you I never heard you say a word about him speaking in third person.

I've found that most talk show gasbags have an over-inflated sense of their opinions and tremendously huge heads. Really, their opinion is no more valuable than anyone else's. They just think it is.

You asked why is Cindy going after Obama? Duh. She's going after him because he's continuing the Bush/Cheney neocon agenda or have you not been paying close attention to notice that? Damn-near every day he is doing something to continue what Bush did (which is what I had thought he would do, which is why I didn't vote for him).

Some talk show hosts are very well informed. Others are not. From your comments, it sounds like you would most likely fit in the latter category, if you have to ask why Cindy is going after Obama. I mean, that's a given.

In my previous comment I wrote, "Damn-near every day he [Obama] is doing something to continue what Bush did."

One example from yesterday is the following article. This is another example of "Change we can believe in."

Obama taps anti-abortion activist to faith-based health post
http://rawstory.com/blog...-anti-abortion-activist/

i also support cindy as much as possible. somebody has to do what she has the guts to do. it should not matter in the slightest if her story is "boring" or not from a media perspective. what she is doing is morally right. i hope that she and her supporters in texas harass bush until he's an old man nearing the end of his days. the u.s. public and the world needs to be continually reminded about the massive evil, death and destruction bush unleashed upon the u.s. and the world. and if it takes an angry mother to do it, so be it. we should all have as much anger, stamina and backbone.

I think some people are sour at Cindy because she left the Democratic party---just as I did---and became an independent (no party affiliation). Some people consider that unthinkable. She has every justification for being critical of Obama. To hear someone like Christine Craft tell it ("wrong president..why are you going after Obama..."), Cindy shouldn't be criticizing Obama simply because he has a D behind his name. That's what is rather infuriating about some people. When Bush was doing the same things (such as illegal wiretapping, torture or invading countries illegally), the so-called "left" was outraged. But when Obama does the same thing as Bush, one is not supposed to be critical or outraged. Many instead make excuses for Obama because he's from the "Dem Team" and not the "Repug Team." It's blatant Hypocrisy on the part of those who pretend to be from the so-called "left."

It is sure must feel like hell to lose your Casey as others have lost there loved ones in IRAQ. It saddens our hearts to read of your plight. I understand how consuming it is for you.

We have found that life is not always fair, in the grown up world that we are slammed into from youth we are asked to assume many positions in life that do come as hardships. Moving from one tragedy to another seems to be the plight of some of us even though we wonder when this torment will end.

While understanding that hardships did become harder in my life when I tried undoing the injustice as well as undo the spiral of time, only showed me that no mortal has the power or the responsibility of our lives other than us. Your son Casey is gone along with many other sons of ours but we must move on for our time on earth is to short to waist trying to correct the unachievable. We wish you well but will be more joyful for you as you enter the next stage of your life.

Even those who may not agree with Ms. Sheehan's method/style: She deserves respect. And yes, she does have the moral authority. Have you lost a son/daughter? To an illeal nonsense war? She is doing it in her way, based on what she believes, can...I don't have to agree or disagree, but I certainly do respect the lady.

Man, this post has attracted some flies.
Phil E. Drifter hasn't recognized that RawStory tilts to the left but still feels righteous enough to taunt Cindy Sheehan for her son's joining the military and being murdered in an unjust war. Yeah, what a sucker for putting his life on the line to defend his country; be like Phil and never commit your life to anything but mocking your betters and eating Cheetohs. You're the sort of person the creationists will point to when they claim evolution is a lie, Phil.
Marron hasn't recognized that the Left always quarrels because we tend to be independent thinkers, while the Right presents a united front because they're rightwing authoritarians for whom submission to authority, no matter how evil or incompetent, is the greatest good.
Christine Craft whines that one of Cindy's "peace thugs" emailed her, no doubt thuggishly. Ooo, so mean, those uncool emailing peace thugs. Christine...I think your...utter cluelessness about punc...tuation is a SIGN that your...MIND isn't too good at...assembling...coherence...either.
And Ken R speaks for all of us when he tells Cindy that trying to right wrongs just makes grieving harder and she should--and Ken loves you, Cindy--get the f. over it, already and stop trying to attain a measure of justice for her murdered son. Thanks, Ken.

I don't know why anyone would care what Cindy Sheehan does, to tell her to "move on." What's it to you? She does what she feels she must/should do. She has never claimed to be a spokesperson for the "Left" to my knowledge. She's just trying to stop war occupations and hold war criminals Bush, Cheney, Pelosi and Obama accountable. That sounds pretty "Left" to me. At least she's doing something and not sitting on her ass like much of the so-called "left" does, many of whom have never been to their first protest! And most are not about to protest now because they've been brainwashed not to be critical of their lord and savior Obama. Some of these "liberals" are the same "liberals" who call themselves "gun toting liberals." Man if that isn't a contradiction. When was the "liberal" movement ever into guns? The same crowd also shops at WalMart and eats dead animals and drives around in big gas-guzzling Sheep Utility Vehicles (SUVs) honking and complaining about bicyclists. That's "liberal?" I always thought that "liberal" meant vegetarian, supporting local independent businesses, buying organic GMO-free food, just for starters. But not toting guns like Christine Craft does (or did the last time I listened to her which hasn't been for years).

Cindy, please do what you feel you must do. Ignore the right-wing crowd who charade as people from the "Left."

Go Cindy!

As Laurel Thatcher Ulrich says,

"Well-behaved women seldom make history."

And I think that's the problem little ole "eff" has with you, actually. Cindy, you're not a well-behaved woman.

I mean, look what he says. the REAL Cindy has a self-deprecating sense of humor.

Well-behaved women are self-deprecating, aren't they?

And the REAL Cindy would never "bash" two cool writers, now would she? That's not well-behaved.

And of course a well-behaved woman would "dance tenderly and sweetly---" He's kidding, right?

But this really got my hackles up (emphasis added):

But right now, she's too poisonous. If she was more self-effacing she could probably get it done. But I don't know why she's taking such a hard tone."

((Eff, are you kidding me? What century do you live in that you can criticize a woman for not being self-deprecating and self-effacing and making all nice and pretty to the MEN. "Hard tone?" Unbelievable.))

So there you have it, Cindy. According to Eff, a real, strong, pissed-off, furious woman can't get anywhere or do anything to advance any "liberal" cause. In fact, she can't even be "real."

Leave Eff and his ilk in the dust.

The DP operatives at RawStory have been on a bit of an anti-independent tear recently. They just ran an Adam ("AIPAC Stooge") Holland smear piece on Cynthia McKinney and now they're doing their own hit pieces on Cindy Sheehan. Did the DP just issue them a hit list or something?

I was one of the first people in the country to put Cindy Sheehan on the radio...for an hour..long before anyone had any clue who she was.
I've seen her martyr side up close and personal as they say at ABC sports..sitting thigh to thigh actually in a radio studio.
Let me say it again very succinctly. I've also seen Cindy Sheehan's self adoring side and her bullying side..so I'm not a fan.. got it? good.

I also said many times on the air on the biggest station in America that Obama would not change much in the Middle East or certainly on health care...which was why I supported Senator Clinton.

In an event..one wishes the president great successes and I certainly voted for him in the general election. The woman who blogged that she didn't vote for him..one has to wonder...a mcCain voter? I get the sense that Cindy Sheehan would only be happy if this country were humiliated and destroyed. We have a chance to remedy many things ..The President gave a great speech in Egypt..You should listen to it. a whole lot better than bush/cheney.
..I don't dig that at all.

it's one thing to be an uppity woman and make history, believe me. It is something else entirely to know when the moment is golden, and when it is tedious.

I took quite a bit of flak for guesting cindy sheehan early in her game..and flak now for saying that I'm now less than impressed. Seems to me that Ms. Sheehan announced after smooching hugo chavez that she was quitting the american political activism scene...remember that? wha happen ??According to this story..the Crawford newspaper that gave Ms. Sheehan a big voice also now has plenty of reservations...hmmmm why would that be..I'm not the only one.

well Sam..I don't eat meat..and I don't tote guns. I own guns, as is my constitutional right. Funny , when you are held at gunpoint in your driveway with a sawed off shotgun by two men in the wee hours of the morning and when you get death threats for doing things like organizing big successful demonstrations ...you go to the gun range and learn how to protect yourself. There are many fine Americans who own guns..many are leftist intellectuals.

Christine Craft,

You have one BIG head. That's not a personal attack. That's my observation from what you've said about Cindy Sheehan. Your head is possibly the biggest head on the Internet. Not Cindy's. Talk about bullying. Stiff. Cold. Smug. (That "got it, good" stuff that you wrote). Extremely Arrogant.

As for your messiah Obama's speech, isn't there something more than feel-good pabulum in a speech that is important to you? What about his Bush-accomplice senatorial voting record or did you not bother to examine that? What about his actions to continue the Bush agenda as president? Some Obamabots are making excuses by saying such things as "his hands are tied" or "give him time." The man has almost a super-majority in congress. His pathetic Bush-accomplice party has La Casa Blanca. When the Republicans want something, they get it done regardless of whether they are in the White House and regardless of whether they are in the minority or the majority in congress. It doesn't matter. They get it done immediately. The same cannot be said about your Bush-accomplice Dems. But the Bush-accomplice party you support and your messiah Obama do little for We The People even with a damn-near super majority and the White House. We can't even get universal health care "on the table." And impeachment was removed from "the table" by Bush-accomplice/war criminal Pelosi. Now, your messiah Obama wants to ignore/excuse war crimes under Bush/Cheney such as torture and illegal invasion of other nations.

Obama doesn't even mention that 911 was an inside job or even give fair trials to the people being held in Guantánamo or other locations.

And the list just keeps growing day-by-day.

Oh, but he gave a wonderful speech in Egypt (that some speech writer wrote for him). That's all that matters, really! Some speech. Ignore his Bush-accomplice ACTIONS.

2012: It's long past due that people get out of the D and R RUT and vote for a credible, progressive third party candidate. If a progressive third party candidate is not on your ballot, WRITE THE PERSON'S NAME ON YOUR BALLOT IN INK.

Anybody who harasses Bush is OK in my book! I'm not the least bit interested in seeing him remake his image. The man is a killer who illegitimately represented me and my country. If the courts won't do anything, I'm glad somebody as brave and focused as Cindy IS!

She is attacking Obama more then I like to see, but Obama is a big man and I'm sure he can take it.

One word sums up Webster's & Deibenow's criticism of Cindy Sheehan --- petty!

I agree Cindy, EFF You RAW Story. You are an Effing Media Joke! That you back Obama makes you a bunch of assholes as well.

I know both Cindy and Nathan, and would count both as friends. I understand the criticism that those in the protest community are preaching to the choir, and that we seldom do anything that reaches outside of that small circle. Our tactics must change or we will fade into obscurity, where the right would consign us anyway. Let's don't help them. Let's find a way to take our message to the complacent middle and make them see that our cause and their interests are in fact the same. Cindy reacted emotionally to what she perceived as a personal slam, but it isn't truly personal--it's a critique of the movement. When you stand out in front of the movement, however, you're the first to get attacked. Sorry this had to happen, but maybe it's the first step in making positive change.

More proof of the mindless fluff pushed by the media. Focus on the trivial and ignore the substance. This country is doomed.

Winning may be about spin, PR, "message force multipliers" and being politically correct. Doing the right thing is different. Thank you, Cindy, for doing the right thing.

I think Raw Story is really a way to get the right wing message out in the guise of criticism. I don't read them much, anymore (GOLEFT TV, either). Brad Blog doesn't seem too favorable to her, either.

Extremely Arrogant.

Well, of course she's an arrogant ass. She's a Clintonista - the only creature more smug and snide than an obamabot. Practically the only thing these faux-liberal villagers have in common, besides the desire to further their careers by doing absolutely nothing, is an arrogant contempt of people like Cindy who are actually liberal.

yes sam,,,you go right ahead and write your progressive candidate's name in INK..that'll show em' by golly.

your statement that obama is my messiah..is quite amusing..I'm the one who was tagged a racist for saying the messiah stuff was crap.

alansmithee...if cindy sheehan epitomizes the REAL liberal...liberalism deserves all the brickbats...do you think cindy sheehan loves this country??

ALANSMITHEE.. perhaps you are not aware in your accusation that i criticize cindy sheehan because i'm trying to ''ADVANCE MY CAREER'' do you know what I do every day of the week?? I am a lawyer in a california law firm representing injured california workers against insurance giants..on that adversarial battleground fighting for the worker..not liberal enough for you?? bleep yourself.

Craft.. Hard to love a country that was founded on genocide and the theft of Lands through bogus and dissed treaties. Hard to love a country that lets an illegitimate president torture people to justify and illegal war in order to steal resources. Hard to even stand a media that is so bad that they let things like Tower 7 slip by, and give voice to losers like liz cheney, rove etc.

Love the country? Acountry that allows theft and murder to stand. Our nation is pitiful.

Love her, hate her, wish we all should ignore her-Cindy Sheehan is an American Hero.

To Phil E. Loser- Wow, how much more callous and disrespectful could you be? That's an awful thing to say about someone's son, or anyone who enlisted to protect this nation. That's just f*cked up man.

...I...don't know...who you...are, but trying..to read your..posts is...insufferable. I'm not criticizing what you say, or who you are, just how you say it in writing. It really is hard to read. Sorry, I'm a dick.

And finally, NoOneYouKnow at #20, I pretty much agree with everything you say, and your explanation of why the left isn't as organized as the reich in message cohesion- brilliant.

I would say the Democratic Party could do better, but eff the Democratic Party and the two-headed monster that controls politics. We need a viable, progressive third party BAD.

COMMENT #29 [Permalink]
... cann4ing said on 6/7/2009 @ 5:58 am PT...

One word sums up Webster's & Deibenow's criticism of Cindy Sheehan --- petty!

I've got a better word for Diebenow's:

SEXIST

it's one thing to be an uppity woman and make history, believe me. It is something else entirely to know when the moment is golden, and when it is tedious.

Christine,

Cindy is demanding accountability from the thieves and liars that ran this country.

How is that tedious?

GO CINDY!

...lawyer in a california law firm...

Oh, and you're an ambulance chaser as well as a useless do-nothing nafta-sucking war-pimping clintonista. Thanks for that update.

As Christine Craft is a "public person" (as a radio personality in Sacramento and San Francisco), personal attacks are "allowed", as they are on me. If she chooses, therefore, she can also attack back.

That said, personal attacks on non-public person commenters are specifically disallowed by the few rules we have for commenting here at The BRAD BLOG. We're begin to walk a fine line in comments here, in that regard, and as neither Agent 99 (volunteer moderator) or myself wish to start removing comments for violating those rules, I'm posting this as a request for folks to cool the rhetoric down where possible.

Please do your best to remain respectful and/or civil with other commenters, even when you disagree, when making your points here, whatever they may be. Thanking you in advance for a good continuing discussion/debate. --- Brad

And I'm sucking as a moderator today.... Too busy running to the bathroom with my food poisoning to deal with saying what Brad just said, so, thank you, Brad.

alan smithee..you are not terribly well informed about the law..ambulance chasers are the personal injury lawyers who go after deep pocket defendants. california applicant's lawyers represent injured workers..people who are injured on the job and whose employers are insured to cover workplace injury. Our fees are minimal and are totally governed by statute.. think the boobengrabber..the governor who has reformed worker's comp ...so that an injured worker with say lower and upper extremity amputations has to rely on a system that is now designed to screw over that worker. We step in to challenge all that and get future medical care for these workers..believe me the personal injury lawyers want no part of that action..but since you are so sure that you will never be injured in the workplace or that you wouldn't need a comp lawyer in that situation..that you could handle it just fine by yourself..I'll let you swim in that profound ignorance and I'll promise never to fight the big insurance companies like AIG to secure your rights..really.

Lora ..here's a little tiny hint..the man who said that her son had died for a noble cause.......big hint.......is no longer in power.

AND lORA..ONE MORE THING. as a peace loving progressive..there are sides and aspects to cindy sheehan..that you might not find all that attractive.but believe as you must..don't dare think critically of your heroine.

Although I live in NC, I financially supported Cindy's Californai campaign to unseat one of the biggest liers in Congress, Nancy Pelosi. Like Cindy, I'm an Independent and like her have been criticized and attacked for my efforts to vet Obama's long form Birth Certificate.

At this point, I feel we are like the Patriots in 1776. We have petitoned the GOP and DP for years, only to be ignored. IMO, we citizens MUST immediatley creat Local Homeland Security Units in every USA County working with or under the Sheriff. We must use defensive force IF necessary to top any attempt at gun/ammunition confiscation and any attempt to place our neighbors in FEMA Reeeducation/Detention Camps. And yes, they exist no matter how many times the MSM says they don't

BOTTOM LINE CINDY, STAND TALL. I WILL BE BESIDE YOU WHEN I CAN.

Doug

(Don't sweat it, Agent99. You're doing fine. This faux-liberal Randi Rhodes-wannabe is just getting the shellacking she deserves.)

Right, your sooooo busy fighting for the downtrodden and yet you spend all day scanning blogs, looking for opportunities to arrogantly sneer down your nose at peace activists. What a pathetic sight you must appear in court - a small, nasty, crabbed little pwogwessive.

Your clients must desperately regret having somehow gotten stuck with a crimped, mealy-mouthed villager like you. It's no wonder you're so abjectly jealous of real activists like Cindy Sheehan. Still, maybe you should just stick to pushing pins into your Ralph Nader doll. You really suck at character assassination.

Does anyone notice that Christine Craft is fixated and obsessed with someone who is not in a position of power? (Cindy Sheehan)

Cindy is demanding accountability for the parasite war criminals (both D and R) in positions of power (both Bush and Obama regimes). She is demanding that the US Constitution be re-instated. (We still have the Bush regime's USA Patriot Act, as one example). Christine Craft apparently doesn't like that Cindy is demanding these things. So she's on this anti-Cindy agenda. Why does Christine Craft care so much about Cindy Sheehan and what she does and the "sides" of her?

I've seen some new "sides" of Christine Craft in this thread I was unaware of until now and she is one piece of work (and that's being polite).

If Christine were to put as much effect, bile, venom and nastiness into holding the Bush Crime Family accountable and messiah Obama accountable for continuing the Bush agenda as she puts into Cindy Sheehan, something might change for the positive in this nation at some point. But it would appear that Craft is comfortable with the status quo, because I've not read from her anything of detailed substance addressing any problems she has with messiah Obama continuing the Bush regime nor has she written anything about the Bush regime not being held accountable by the Bush-accomplice "Dem Team." Apparently she doesn't care (much) about any of that. Instead, her obsession, fixation and focus is with Cindy Sheehan, who is not even in any position of power. I've concluded that Christine Craft is really in need of some psychological help. Something is wrong with the woman. The woman has issues far deeper than Cindy Sheehan. It's as if she's using Cindy Sheehan as a scapegoat for something.

In conclusion, Christine wrote this stuff to me:

"yes sam,,,you go right ahead and write your progressive candidate's name in INK..that'll show em' by golly."

My point was that INK cannot be easily erased the way PENCIL can, especially in a stolen election. Clearly, my point went over your head. If you don't want to vote for a progressive third party candidate, then enjoy your D/R Rut where you can enjoy the status quo.

alan...all day scanning blogs...I think this is the first time I've ever blogged on brad's site..I have him on frequently as a guest on KGO. and will continue to in the future..I was and am a big Randi fan..but we don't get her in Sacramento anymore..and kkgn in San Francisco is hard to get..often..I didn't appreciate her calling HILLARY an f--king whore..and I wonder now if she's upset with obama..not removing troops from iraq and sending more to afghanistan?
I wish she were on in Sacramento again..and yes I understand that ink is not as easy to remove as pencil...my point was that writing in a progressive's name on ballot will not get that progressive elected..clue..you must have broadbased support to win an election..but good luck with your ink and all. I'm not a democrat after many years of being a party activist..I'm now a decline to state voter in California..which means neither major party can assume anything about me.. Can you name me one truly progressive candidate for major federal office who has a rat's ass chance in hell of getting elected..even if everyone uses ink?? that's right there is no one..no broad based support. no matter how much ink you choose.Ask Cindy Sheehan how the voters of San Francisco felt about her in her congressional bid.. What percentage of the vote did she garner in the most liberal , progressive city in the nation?? cINDY SHEEHAN'S TIMING WAS excellent during the bush years and I salute her initial forays in Crawford...but alienating the Crawford journalists and me and Raw Story...is not smart and shows her actual sense of timing is faulty and yes..tiring.3741

cindy sheehan and captain moroni fighting for gun rights..by golly roflmao

COMMENT #46 [Permalink]
... christine craft said on 6/7/2009 @ 1:06 pm PT...

Lora ..here's a little tiny hint..the man who said that her son had died for a noble cause.......big hint.......is no longer in power.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMENT #47 [Permalink]
... christine craft said on 6/7/2009 @ 1:09 pm PT...

AND lORA..ONE MORE THING. as a peace loving progressive..there are sides and aspects to cindy sheehan..that you might not find all that attractive.but believe as you must..don't dare think critically of your heroine.

Dear Christine,

Just because a person is no longer robbing, lying, murdering, or torturing, and isn't likely to do it again, we just let him slip into obscurity, eh? Forgive and forget.

Sorry, I can't do it. I don't want the message to the country and the world to read like this:

Our leaders will trample all over you and your people and our own rights and protections whenever and however they want. A few gasps of horror and fake posturing may occur from time to time, amid false promises never to do it again. Be warned. We can and will do as much or worse whenever we damn well please, and there is nothing we, you, or anyone else will ever do to change it.

Cindy's right. So was Kucinich. The rest are moral cravens.

As far as the "sides and aspects" of Cindy that are not all that attractive, why do you care, and why should I? I support what she stands for and what she is trying to do. If there are personal vendettas behind the scenes, that's exactly where they should stay --- behind the scenes. I don't see how they are relevant here.

Christine,

How can one get a progressive in office if very few people will campaign for them, vote for them or give them positive corporate media coverage? Instead, the corporate media coverage they get is pathetic (as was the case with Cindy Sheehan running against War Criminal and Bush-accomplice Pelosi in San Francisco). The corporate media---which you work for---are full of people who say, "you can't get a progressive in office, so don't even try." The sheep hear that and buy it.

We have 3.5 years to get progressives in office. You're not helping. You have a radio show on a corporate network. You could do something positive with your show about getting real progressives in. Instead, you choose to dump on progressives and now you're angry at the people on this blog for pointing this out to you. What exactly does progressive mean to you? Status quo? Lies? Deception? Propaganda? Supporting the corporations instead of progressives (like Cindy Sheehan).

As far as the ink thing is concerned, forget it. It's just way past you.

SO SAM..your argument is a bit weak..let me repeat..I gave Cindy Sheehan a forum on the biggest ..number one radio station in the western world..when she ran for Congress..yes, she came into the studio at ABC FOR A FULL HOUR.no other host did that..I did it. And when Brad wants to come on that same radio station...I'll always oblige..I think he's super...hmmmm..oh yes..when that group of architects and engineers challenging 911 presumptions..couldn't get on any mainstream media...guess where they cropped..up..SHOCK..on my show...on mainstream media..so don't tell me I'm not doing enough to highlight progressive views..that's a crock of dingoes' kidneys.

lORA..WHAT EXACTLY do you think cindy sheehan is trying to do to George Bush? We have an electoral system..the reeps lost..george bush is over..you can't expect the citizenry to DO anything..what are you suggesting...personal harm to an ex-prez?? as cool as you might think that is..it is utterly outrageous..HISTORY will judge George Bush..and there's absolutely nothing more you can do about him. You could protest Obama's continuing wars..but that might get you much less support..right??

lORA...SO it's your view that progressives(WHATEVER THE HELL THAT MEANS..I THINK LIBERALS WHO ARE AFRAID OF BEING CALLED LIBERALS) if they were in power ..would not use their power unwisely? have you studied any history? recently?

Uhm... if I might just interject here, with my own take, I think if you pay attention to the actions, especially relative to wars of choice and torture and wiretapping and rule of law --- The Constitution --- there has not been a change in administration at all. THAT ought to be where our attention is focussed.

Cindy has been through a lot, and put herself through a lot, done great things, not so great things, held the moral high ground and fudged it and climbed back up and fallen back down... the whole range. She's just struggling through and evidently keeps needing to try to use her notoriety toward something that could do some good out of Casey's death.

I just don't grok why there's so much venom about it... on either side... except I am beginning to feel outright terrified by the actions of our present administration, and I think everyone to the left of center is feeling the same terror as I am. Not everyone is able, yet, to process it, I don't think, and it's starting to show up as really heated fights over stuff that isn't so threatening.

Just in the last couple days we find that Obama is trying to make it legal to cover up war crimes, and to make it legal for Gitmo detainees to commit suicide by guilty plea. Just on Friday night Jeremy Scahill covered a lot of the other horrifying stuff on Moyers Journal [16 minute video]... all of this stuff is scary, scary, scary.

If you ask me, this administration is the same as the last one, on vitamins. Shouldn't we be using our energy on the perps?

COMMENT #56 [Permalink]
... christine craft said on 6/7/2009 @ 3:13 pm PT...

lORA..WHAT EXACTLY do you think cindy sheehan is trying to do to George Bush? We have an electoral system..the reeps lost..george bush is over..you can't expect the citizenry to DO anything..what are you suggesting...personal harm to an ex-prez?? as cool as you might think that is..it is utterly outrageous..HISTORY will judge George Bush..and there's absolutely nothing more you can do about him. You could protest Obama's continuing wars..but that might get you much less support..right??
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMENT #57 [Permalink]
... christine craft said on 6/7/2009 @ 3:16 pm PT...

lORA...SO it's your view that progressives(WHATEVER THE HELL THAT MEANS..I THINK LIBERALS WHO ARE AFRAID OF BEING CALLED LIBERALS) if they were in power ..would not use their power unwisely? have you studied any history? recently?

Whoa...assumptions-much?

What do I think Cindy is doing?

Well, from the 2nd and 3rd paragraphs of this very article (emphasis added to point out what I think she's doing):

RAW STORY covered Sheehan's plan to lead a "march on former President Bush's new home in the well-to-do Dallas suburb of Preston Hollow" on Monday, June 8th, in protest of what Dallas' NBC affiliate quotes her as describing as "crimes against humanity".

"We can't allow George Bush's crimes to be forgotten just because he is not in office anymore," she told the NBC affiliate via e-mail, as reported in their story which also quotes Bush's new neighbors chiding protesters to "Go away...Go back! Leave us alone!"

I think Cindy is leading a march to protest George Bush's crimes against humanity, lest they be forgotten because he is out of office. I hope that answers your question.

[Christine:]
"...you can't expect the citizenry to DO anything..."

That says a lot about you right there. Cindy IS doing something, whereas our elected leaders aren't doing squat!

[Christine:]
"what are you suggesting...personal harm to an ex-prez?? as cool as you might think that is..it is utterly outrageous"

Christine, are you out of your mind? So you just lay down some damn imflammatory assumptions about me based on....what? Where did I even suggest that? You made that shit up out of thin air.

I want Bush prosecuted for his crimes.

[Christine:]
"HISTORY will judge George Bush..and there's absolutely nothing more you can do about him."

Well, no, not if you and everyone else in the media squelch any attempts TO do something about him. With friends like you, who needs enemies? I prefer not to wait for History, thanks.

[Christine:]
"You could protest Obama's continuing wars..."

Great idea!

[Christine:]
"SO it's your view that progressives...if they were in power ..would not use their power unwisely?"

I'm not stupid. I'd just like to make it as hard for them as possible. By not prosecuting the Bush administration war criminals we are basically inviting them to do anything they like to us and the world without fear of consequences.

gosh..If I could just do somethng,anything, to get in the national spotlight...to be on Nightline, hell even Letterman...to be on the cover of a major magazine.... Whoops, that can't be a motivator..I did all that a quarter of a century ago(LIFE MAGAZINE)..challenging workplace inequities for American women in television. let's see, maybe if I give a truthful opinion about someone I've had on the air many times....I got it!! Eu-bleeping-reeka..Je l'ai trouve...REFUSE TO KISS UP TO CINDY SHEEHAN...YEAH..THAT'S THE TICKET.

OKAY..SO using what legal standard for prosecution do you intend to charge..much less convict george bush?

Agent wrote: "I think if you pay attention to the actions, especially relative to wars of choice and torture and wiretapping and rule of law --- The Constitution --- there has not been a change in administration at all.

-------------------------

Exactly. I was thinking the very same thing when I read that crock from Christine where she wrote: "george bush is over."

Ha! No Christine, George Bush and Dick Cheney et al are not over. By any means. You just want to believe that. I can only assume you haven't been paying close attention since January otherwise you wouldn't say that.

"george bush is over" couldn't be farther from the reality, but it tells me where's Christine's "mind" is.

Cheney and Bush are still in power, just under a different name. In my opinion, that's why there was a "peaceful transition of power." (Because there was no transition of power).

I'm beginning to think that Christine is very jealous of Cindy Sheehan and that's what this is really all about. Because Cindy Sheehan is a "national figure." Christine is not.

No, Sam, anyone who is paying attention can tell that Cindy is not always coming from the right place. She has many fine points, and certainly mostly altruistic motives, but she has erred in ways others who have backed her might find humiliating or hubristic, so I think you are being way too harsh on Christine.

Christine wrote this stuff:

"OKAY..SO using what legal standard for prosecution do you intend to charge..much less convict george bush?"

-------------------------

Sigh.

Ever heard of Constitutional expert and George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley? GOOGLE him and he will explain it to you. (And you call yourself an attorney?) Go to YouTube and search Jonathan Turley.

Well, this comment is possibly worth answering:

OKAY..SO using what legal standard for prosecution do you intend to charge..much less convict george bush?

Impeach his sorry ass. Yes, you can impeach an ex-president. Then bring criminal charges based on the evidence uncovered during impeachment.

Christine,

You might want to educate/update yourself by watching this video:

Thom Hartman on Obama
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxUO0fZUx1Y

I wanted Cindy to beat Nancy in a very big way, but it would have needed some very, very serious financial backing and expert help, which would have been clear to anyone. Did Cindy go there? No. She ran a ridiculously limp campaign, and would have known that's what she was doing, without the backers going in, so I'm pretty sure a lot of people became extremely angry with her for wasting their solidarity THAT way alone. Yes, yes, Pelosi probably did much to undermine her, but that too was something anyone would know going in.

She's dithering, and being pulled in too many directions, and not taking control of her objectives and letting what drives her get muddled in the fray. I suspect she just keeps finding the only thing that makes her want to get up in the morning is to have the positive impact that would compensate for her loss. People might get tired of that always coming to not much, especially her, and others might be filled with more sympathy for her because of it, but there is plenty of reason for decent people to feel betrayed or used or that their time has been wasted.

It's just so damn unseemly for everyone to be so inflamed over it, and so mean. The comment from eatbees made me want to barf... or maybe it did make me barf, just delayed until today.

I don't understand the perceived need to beat up on Christine or Cindy, here. It bothers me that we are fighting over comparatively trivial stuff while so much seriously horrifying stuff is getting away from us on the wings of President Charm Offensive.

Oh, right, and * and Fudd can be prosecuted for war crimes... if we can keep the current resident of the White House from changing the laws to prevent this, that is.

CLUE TO LORA..so charge him like you know like with like war crimes..and then just see.by golly..what sticks.. the lora theory of federal criminal prosecution..I appreciate the moral outrage ..but that's not sufficient for either federal charges or conviction...but you..go ahead..just keep believing that it does.
And you are all right...I'll think twice before offering mainstream media podiums again to those who apparently resent the effort. I've learned a lot.

agent ..and what particular point about obama do you think I need a primer from thom about?

Christine asked:

SO using what legal standard for prosecution do you intend to charge..much less convict george bush?

The U.S. Federal criminal code which outlaws the use of torture; the Geneva Conventions which outlaws the use of torture; the UN Torture Treaty (signed by Reagan in 1984, ratified by Congress and then signed by Clinton in the 90's) which requires prosecution or extradition of those commit war crimes/torture; the U.S. Constitution which bars cruel and unusual punishment, the suspension of habeaus corpus, etc.

I could, of course, go on, but there's just a few points in reply to Christine's question.

I live in San Francisco so I'm well aware of the campaign Cindy ran. It was pathetic and I said so at the time, although not on this blog. I only saw two "Cindy for Congress" campaign signs in the section of The City where I live. She should have saturated The City with them to let people know she's running. She didn't even have a sign at the #1 organic progressive grocery store here. I never saw Cindy in The Castro which is where she should have hung out. Her volunteers had a booth at the Castro Street Fair and some people were taking campaign info from them. She got virtually no coverage from the corporate media. War Criminal and Bush-accomplice Pelosi didn't even have to campaign here. She feels self-entitled. It was a given that she would be re-elected because the Democratic Party Machine in The City made sure of that. The San Francisco Bay Guardian endorsed Sheehan. The Harvey Milk DEMOCRATIC Club considered endorsing Cindy but the membership voted on it and kept their endorsement of Bush-accomplice Pelosi. Some people in the club were pissed with that decision. I knew she didn't have much chance of winning although she got about 11% of the vote, as I recall, which isn't too bad considering the pathetic campaign she ran. She's had some legal problems from the campaign since then and then her living son was recently in critical condition in one of the City's hospital due to an infection. But that's over I think, and he should be recovering at home. The one problem I have with Cindy is her voice. To inspire people, one's voice cannot sound timid or unemotional. She will say how she's angry at George Bush but her voice doesn't sound angry at all. There's no emotion in her voice. Maybe that's just the way she is. But anyway, I voted for her (and Nader/Gonzalez) and whatever she wants to do is her business. I don't know why anyone anywhere would care what she does or seem to have this agenda for her the way Christine Craft does. That's why I suspect there's some jealousy involved.

One's focus should be on the Bush-accomplice War Criminal in La Casa Blanca (The White House) now, as well as on War Criminals Bush, Cheney et al.

The US Constitution must be re-instated---and the Bush/Obama regime's USA Patriot Act shredded--- otherwise we don't have a nation.

but Brad..big problem with your legal theories..as you are no doubt aware..firstly you need a justice department with an interest in prosecuting..if the legal memos justifying torture and their authors will not be prosecuted (as the president has said)..you want to ''IMPEACH'' as in formally accuse an ex-president and convict based on the suspension of hc and violations of the 8th amendment...all this without the cooperation of the justice department...you know how far you'll get.. AS for the Geneva conventions..you really think this country will allow an ex-president to be prosecuted in a foreign court for not following the geneva conventions? what other countries don't follow the gc..who are signatories..can you think of any..bottom line..we'd all like to see bush and cheney get their comeuppance..but it's going to happen not be insistence on legal process while theyr'e alive ..but by history..whose judgment will be ..what it will be.

Hola everyone,

Christine Craft wrote this stuff:

"I appreciate the moral outrage ..but that's not sufficient for either federal charges or conviction."

----------------------------

Christine dear, how do you know that Bush and Cheney cannot be prosecuted or convicted? There has not been an investigation YET. In a court of law, one first does an investigation to gather evidence BEFORE the decision is made as to guilt.

Are you sure you are in the right field? Are you sure you are an attorney? Hmmmmm.

Since when is invading a nation not a prosecutable offense? Remember "shock & awe?" Some say as many as 300,000 people died during that terrorist attack on Iraq by War Criminals Bush/Cheney and the D and R congress. Then we have illegal wiretapping, torture, rendition, USA Patriot Act, FISA, shifting the wealth to the bankers. These are just for starters and you tell me as a so-called attorney there is no way to convict and prosecute these parasites?

Cheney has even admitted to using torture and tried to justify that.

Now again, you say you are an attorney/lawyer?

Incredible.

Christine

I have no opinion on your further education.

Everyone

Somehow I think this is darn pertinent.

Christine said, in reply to my very terse list of "legal standard[s] for prosecution" of Bush, as she'd requested:

but Brad..big problem with your legal theories..as you are no doubt aware..firstly you need a justice department with an interest in prosecuting..

That's a different question than your original one asking what "legal standard for prosecution". The legal standard is quite clear, in my opinion, and already sufficient for a prosecution, much less an investigation. The political issues are quite a different matter and one, I believe, that Sheehan's protest march is meant to highlight. As based on this conversation alone, I'd say she's already made quite a bit of headway in that regard...and she hasn't even showed up in Dallas yet!

if the legal memos justifying torture and their authors will not be prosecuted (as the president has said)..you want to ''IMPEACH'' as in formally accuse an ex-president and convict based on the suspension of hc and violations of the 8th amendment...all this without the cooperation of the justice department...

Well, I didn't say anything about IMPEACHment, though I think Lora presents another interesting idea. Moreover, the Justice Dept. is not needed, as I'm sure you know, in any part of an impeachment hearing. Further, impeachment is not a "formal accusation" as you suggest, but rather a formal inquiry to determine if accusations should be made which merit trial (by the Senate).

That said, no, I don't think impeachment is particularly viable, though formal Congressional investigations, hearings and commissions (not unlike those in impeachment procedures) would be perfectly appropriate, and are viable enough that the chairs of both chambers Judiciary committees as well as the Speaker of the House (Sheehan's former Congressional campaign adversary) have all called for in varying forms recently. So have many legal and Constitutional experts.

Congress could then, of course, forward a request for prosecution to the DoJ, the way they'd forward a request for prosecution to the Senate in an impeachment process.

you know how far you'll get..

If even the most progressive of Americans (which, frankly, I believe you to be) roll over to concur with "conventional wisdom" that nothing that can happen, and only history can offer a verdict, then yes, I agree, we'll not get far.

If progressives who believe in the Rule of Law and the Constitution (which, frankly, I know you to be) stood up to demand better, and that both the RoL and the Constitution be enforced and protected, I believe we could get rather far, in fact.

But if we eat each other alive --- particularly those who are at least trying to push for all of the above, no matter how effective or ineffective their volunteer strategies --- then we will, of course, get no where, and Bush/Cheney will be repeated all over again, ad nauseum, throughout the future history of the United States of America.

AS for the Geneva conventions..you really think this country will allow an ex-president to be prosecuted in a foreign court for not following the geneva conventions?

Will we allow it? I don't care. Is it the right thing to do? Absolutely. Will I continue to demand it, as is our country's legal obligation under the UN Torture Treaty? You bet.

From Ronald Reagan's signing statement upon his ratification of the 1984 UN Convention on Torture:

"The United States participated actively and effectively in the negotiation of the Convention . It marks a significant step in the development during this century of international measures against torture and other inhuman treatment or punishment. Ratification of the Convention by the United States will clearly express United States opposition to torture, an abhorrent practice unfortunately still prevalent in the world today.

The core provisions of the Convention establish a regime for international cooperation in the criminal prosecution of torturers relying on so-called 'universal jurisdiction.' Each State Party is required either to prosecute torturers who are found in its territory or to extradite them to other countries for prosecution."

From George W. Bush's video-taped statement just prior to the launch of the Iraq War:

War crimes will be prosecuted, war criminals will be punished and it will be no defense to say, “I was just following orders.”

Were Reagan and Bush lying in those statements? Perhaps. If so, I say we --- at the very least --- force their supporters to stand up, and call them liars. Out loud. Otherwise, I'll take both men at their word, in which case, let the Trials of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and/or their Henchmen begin.

Christine wrote:

firstly you need a justice department with an interest in prosecuting..

--------------------------

The Obama regime has ZERO interest in prosecuting the Bush regime, in part, because the Obama regime is continuing the Bush regime, and anyone paying attention during the campaign would have known that would be the case, as some of us did. That's why we didn't vote for Obama. We voted for Nader and McKinney who were the true progressives.

So assuming Christine knew what some of us knew, why did SHE vote for messiah Obama? Because SHE didn't want these war criminals prosecuted and the US Constitution re-instated?

Obama and the Dems served as accomplices to Bush/Cheney. Therefore, as I said during the campaign elsewhere, why would anyone think that the D accomplices would later do a 180 and investigate and prosecute the same people they served as accomplices to? Ain't going to happen.

That's why impeachment was "off the table." Because War Criminal Pelosi was an accomplice and she knows that any investigations/hearings would implicate her as well, and many of the other war criminal parasites who charade as "Dems."

During the campaign I kept hearing the Obamabots say, "we will hold his feet to the fire...and push him to the left" after he's elected. I thought at the time: Sure you will. Well where are they? I don't see them doing anything.

Christine,

I refer you to Dennis Kucinich's articles of impeachment. They're a good place to start.

Sam....

I got 17% of the vote which was 50,000 votes...we put out as many signs as we could. Did you ever think that your local store didn't want one...or you could have asked them and called the office and we would have brought one out to them.

Our campaign worked very hard with what we had and with the virtual black out of the media.

It was a true grassroots campaign that did not have 2.5 million dollars.

Agent 99...hey...it's great that I am "dithering."
Wonderful...I am very focused on what needs to be done and rarely "dither."

I am really sad for Christine...I really think she needs to get a life and wonder how she has time to post dozens of posts on one article? Maybe it's just because she is just so focused on hating me...like I said....so sad! It's also sad that Christine lied about me on her radio show saying that I "attacked" her...LOL...I haven't had any contact with her for months. Paranoid fantasies of being attacked by Cindy Sheehan! Maybe she's afraid we'll have a demo in front of her home now!

I am on my book tour and in the middle of writing 3 other books and would love to hang out for two days on a blog, but really just don't have the time.

Thanks Brad for this wonderfully balanced article and for always keeping the issue of accountability out there!

Peace
Cindy

#29 cann4ing
I am going to insert another name in your comment.
"One word sums up Webster's & Deibenow's and Craft's criticism of Cindy Sheehan --- petty!"

At first I thought it was Palin.

Hola Cindy,

I agree with you entirely regarding your comment about Christine Craft. Man, if she isn't a piece of work. I don't know why anyone would want to be on her show after what she has said here. How that woman got a job on KGO (with it's 50,000 Watts!) is beyond me! But then, most of that corporate station is a complete waste of air time. I no longer listen to it.

I'm glad you got 17% of the vote and not what I had said (about 11%). You should have gotten 80-90% if The City were at least paying attention just a little bit. But most people these days are too much into American Idol to even bother with politics, even though politics have a far greater bearing on people's lives than American Idol will. But that's the whole plan of the corporate-takeover of the nation. Keep the sheep dumb. As I said, I voted for you and will stand up for you especially when somebody who doesn't have anything else to do with their own time attempts to smear you. But some people are just pathetic, as you know.

Paz,

Sam

Ms Sheehan complains about media coverage?! The US media is owned and controlled by the top US military contractors. Do think that these very same companies will give any air time to someone who may harm their businesses?

As long as Cindy maintains the BIG LIE, or as congress calls it the BIG SECRET, she will be allowed to demonstrate and lead the opposition just like she has done. Never forget the motto....if you want to control dissention you lead it. After all these years of dissention what has she accomplished? Maintain the BIG LIE Cindy because that's what you have been doing this entire time.

Cindy,
Thanks for being a human being and not a media darling!
Love,
Ancient

ms. sheehan..did you not send me a cindy's soapbox about how the bart cop intentionally kill the young man on new year's eve? Did I not send back an email asking you how you knew the intent? if you were there? etc.? as you fanned the flames of racial angst? Did you or your sister not direct my email to one of the leaders of the race protests in oakland..telling this young may to "take care of me"'..FOR daring to ask the all-knowing cindy sheehan how she knew the intent..had she morphed from being pissed at george bush..into leading the charge in race wars?
take your faux sadness for me and shove it.YOU, MADAME..are a fraud.

Well Sam, I take you point..I won't have ms. sheehan on my little corner of the mainstream media...again..happy? good.

Here are enough reasons to impeach, charge, and prosecute the former president, George W. Bush:

These are the titles of the articles of impeachment, crafted by Dennis Kucinich, former candidate for president of this country (linked above in my comment, #78):

Article I
Creating a Secret Propaganda Campaign to Manufacture a False Case for War Against Iraq.
Article II
Falsely, Systematically, and with Criminal Intent Conflating the Attacks of September 11, 2001, With
Misrepresentation of Iraq as a Security Threat as Part of Fraudulent Justification for a War of
Aggression.
Article III
Misleading the American People and Members of Congress to Believe Iraq Possessed Weapons of
Mass Destruction, to Manufacture a False Case for War.
Article IV
Misleading the American People and Members of Congress to Believe Iraq Posed an Imminent Threat
to the United States.
Article V
Illegally Misspending Funds to Secretly Begin a War of Aggression.
Article VI
Invading Iraq in Violation of the Requirements of HJRes114.
Article VII
Invading Iraq Absent a Declaration of War.
Article VIII
Invading Iraq, A Sovereign Nation, in Violation of the UN Charter.
Article IX
Failing to Provide Troops With Body Armor and Vehicle Armor
Article X
Falsifying Accounts of US Troop Deaths and Injuries for Political Purposes
Article XI
Establishment of Permanent U.S. Military Bases in Iraq
Article XII
Initiating a War Against Iraq for Control of That Nation's Natural Resources
Article XIIII
Creating a Secret Task Force to Develop Energy and Military Policies With Respect to Iraq and Other
Countries
Article XIV
Misprision of a Felony, Misuse and Exposure of Classified Information And Obstruction of Justice in
the Matter of Valerie Plame Wilson, Clandestine Agent of the Central Intelligence Agency
Article XV
Providing Immunity from Prosecution for Criminal Contractors in Iraq
Article XVI
Reckless Misspending and Waste of U.S. Tax Dollars in Connection With Iraq and US Contractors
Article XVII
Illegal Detention: Detaining Indefinitely And Without Charge Persons Both U.S. Citizens and Foreign
Captives
Article XVIII
Torture: Secretly Authorizing, and Encouraging the Use of Torture Against Captives in Afghanistan,
Iraq, and Other Places, as a Matter of Official Policy
Article XIX
Rendition: Kidnapping People and Taking Them Against Their Will to "Black Sites" Located in Other
Nations, Including Nations Known to Practice Torture
Article XX
Imprisoning Children
Article XXI
Misleading Congress and the American People About Threats from Iran, and Supporting Terrorist
Organizations Within Iran, With the Goal of Overthrowing the Iranian Government
Article XXII
Creating Secret Laws
Article XXIII
Violation of the Posse Comitatus Act
Article XXIV
Spying on American Citizens, Without a Court-Ordered Warrant, in Violation of the Law and the
Fourth Amendment
Article XXV
Directing Telecommunications Companies to Create an Illegal and Unconstitutional Database of the
Private Telephone Numbers and Emails of American Citizens
Article XXVI
Announcing the Intent to Violate Laws with Signing Statements
Article XXVII
Failing to Comply with Congressional Subpoenas and Instructing Former Employees Not to Comply
Article XXVIII
Tampering with Free and Fair Elections, Corruption of the Administration of Justice
Article XXIX
Conspiracy to Violate the Voting Rights Act of 1965
Article XXX
Misleading Congress and the American People in an Attempt to Destroy Medicare
Article XXXI
Katrina: Failure to Plan for the Predicted Disaster of Hurricane Katrina, Failure to Respond to a Civil
Emergency
Article XXXII
Misleading Congress and the American People, Systematically Undermining Efforts to Address Global
Climate Change
Article XXXIII
Repeatedly Ignored and Failed to Respond to High Level Intelligence Warnings of Planned Terrorist
Attacks in the US, Prior to 911.
Article XXXIV
Obstruction of the Investigation into the Attacks of September 11, 2001
Article XXXV
Endangering the Health of 911 First Responders

Let us not forget.
GO CINDY!

yes..Lora...I read them on the air over a year ago..on the mainstream media...you'll notice the hoards of kucinich followers..perhaps he'll be in dallas today.

To the Brad Blog moderators:

Perhaps I bent the rules a bit in my comment above. I think they are relevant to the discussion and important to post. I wonder how many of your readers have ever read them. I hope you will allow them to stand. If you think they are too much, can we leave 10 of the most critical to this discussion?

TIA,
Lora

Christine,

Glad to hear it.

LORA.. dennis kucinich..better known as the man with utterly no sense of humor...can list his personal articles of impeachment until he is blue in the face..they will have no effect..can you count? as in the number of congressional supporters he has generated for this cause? don't you realize that even American who hate george bush..realize that our country has huge pressing problems to resolve..spanking george bush is not a luxury we have time or national, widespread passion to do.

IN ANY EVENT..I THINK I'll talk about this on the mainstream media this week.how about friday night at 10pm..
WE'LL SEE WHAT THE MAINSTREAM AUDIENCE THINKS.

WHEN YOU SEND a son or daughter off to serve in the U.S. Army..you are sending them into harm's way..that a reality..perhaps one ms. sheehan refuses to accept..she wanted her son to join the Army ..but not share the burdens it places on everyone in the Army..strange.and no..her son did not die for a noble cause.

Sorry, Christine, I'm not into spanking.

When Kucinich read his articles of impeachment, there was scarcely a blip in the Mouth Piece Media. I'm glad to know you covered it. The man read for 4 hours in Congress, introducing articles of impeachment against the man in the highest office in the land, and you'd scarecely know it happened. I'm sure most Americans are not even aware that he did so. (I dont' really see anything funny about them, so I can understand Dennis Kucinich's alleged lack of humor, if true.)

This is how the media kills movements and ideas before they are even given a chance.

It's easy for you to say "they will have no effect" when your colleagues are doing everything in their power to suppress any knowledge whatsoever of it, and/or make fun of it or belittle it when it leaks out anyway.

Rather than "spanking," impeachment and/or prosecution will cause our current and future leaders to be more careful and more mindful of what they do, and hopefully restore some of those famous checks and balances that have almost entirely gone missing of late.

The media shapes what Americans think.

If you ask your audience what they think, I hope you do it fairly, first supplying a bit of background in a nonjudgmental way. I'm in PA; can I follow it? Can you post a link?

wow,i have to admit i don't know who christine kraft is but she has summed up the problem,when she said,

"but Brad..big problem with your legal theories..as you are no doubt aware..firstly you need a justice department with an interest in prosecuting.."

the current justice department seems compliciate in covering up the illegalities of the former justice department,does that mean "we the people" should just roll over and pretend we don't know it happened?

cindy is doing the only thing she can,she is standing up and saying,"we know who you are,we saw what you did"

if she makes w and his neighbors uncomfortable,good for her

Christine Craft wrote this drivel:

"spanking george bush is not a luxury we have time or national, widespread passion to do."

--------------------------

Ugh.

So that's what you really think this is all about?
Why do we have the time to convict other people for crimes and we don't have time to convict politicians of crimes? Isn't that convenient.

Christine, this is not about "spanking George Bush." It is not about revenge or any of the excuses that nuts come up with.

It is about the rule of law and international law. It is about re-instating, defending, protecting and upholding the US Constitution. Without the US Constitution we do not have a nation. Period. Can you not get this through your thick head?

Murder is a crime in all nations. Invading other nations without a credible reason (Afghanistan, Iraq and now Pakistan) is also a crime. Wire tapping of US citizens is a crime. Torture and rendition are crimes. Stealing two US elections is a crime. Possibly being part of 911 is a crime.

This has nothing to do with simple-minded "luxury" or "spanking" Christine. These are death-penalty crimes if any other citizen were to do them. But because it's a politician, you say "we" don't have the "luxury or time."

Well if that's the case, then remove all laws from this nation because what is fair for some scum of the Earth politician is fair for other people.

We are a nation of laws. We are not a nation of what we have "luxury" or "time" for.

Politicians can multi-task just like the rest of us and do more than one thing at a time. A politician can appoint a special prosecutor. It doesn't take that long, Christine.

More intelligence from Christine Craft: "dennis kucinich..better known as the man with utterly no sense of humor..."

-----------------------------

So a sense of humor is more important to you than the US Constitution? You expected him to crack jokes in between each Article of Impeachment?

I could care less whether Kucinich has a sense of homor or not. His job is not to be funny. How many of these stale old politicians are funny? What I care about is that he does take his constitutional oath seriously, something which Christine Craft doesn't seem to give a damn about based on her "spanking george bush is not a luxury we have time or national, widespread passion to do" comment. This is not about George Bush, Christine. He was a puppet. This is about the US Constitution.

This is what happens when "we" don't have "time" to prosecute War Criminals Bush and Cheney for war crimes, because "we" consider it a "luxury," to prosecute, or at least that's the thinking of some rabid right-wing trash.

Torturing of US Citizen. Only a gullible, naive fool would think that this stuff is not continuing under messiah Obama. That's why Bush, Cheney et al will not be prosecuted for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Judge denies ACLU request to reveal US role in torture of American citizen
http://rawstory.com/08/n...dge-denies-aclu-torture/

Wow! what a great discussion, I've been down with a flu-thing and have just read this thread top to bottom and 'Wow' doesn't begin to cover it!

My 2cents:
The only thing that was relevant to me regarding Ms. Sheehan was that while the country stood silent in major part regarding the war of choice in Iraq Ms Sheehan stood up and took the battle to the doorstep of the President in a direct and personal way. I thought it would be futile to effect a change of the policy but I respected absolutely the audacity and correctness of it in a climate that cast all dissent as traitorous. She was (is) to me our Diogenes, and I will always have that respect for her.

That Ms. Craft gave her a media outlet was outstanding but she lost me with her first posting (#12) which was pretty ugly "hint to cindy..your time is sooooo over. clue...wrong president..why are you going after Obama...troops still in iraq..more in afghanistan"

I'm with Lora and Sam on this one; it's about the rule of law. Having the architects and enablers of the false war and torture on television everyday re-writing their history and the history of the last 8 years is an insult to America. Having a Justice Department that allows it makes them complicit in the crimes IMO.

The President and his administration are fair game as long as they are supporting the insults and violence the Bush administration did to the Constitution. Due to the construction of the posting I'm not sure weather I'm in agreement with Ms. Craft on that or not. I definitely disagree that we should move on without a full repudiation of the Bush administration's actions regarding the choice of this war and the rape of the constitution.

To address the non-requiter of Kucinich's lack of humor, all I can say is that he provided the single most funny- hysterically funny 7 minutes of the campaign. If you forgot this appearance on Colbert you were hitting the herb a little too hard that night

Funniest campaign appearance of 2008:

http://www.colbertnation...s-pockets?videoId=118571

[['99, sorry to hear you're ill and btw, remember those debates we had about Obama? He's beyond his probationary period (as I set it) on the war, torture, surveillance, Gitmo and other detainee issues and you were right. It makes me heartsick but you were right. Get well soon. ]]

Thanks, lotta. It makes me heartsick too.

I'm over whatever it was that threw my innards into such a wretched state, but not over this thread, which I found reprehensible from beginning to almost the end... until your comment.... But, well, as they say, I'm just weird.

xoxoxox

hint to lottakatz..I'm very glad you help the kitties. and get them spayed and neutered..
but just because I give ..or someone else gives a figure such as ms sheehan..msm radio time.does not mean that we then owe them lifelong adoration..an abandonment of critical thinking etc. did you think it did?

Go Cindy, keep the irons hot.

Christine, I've never heard of you before this thread, sorry I guess I don't get the 'biggest station in the world' in my area. From your bio which I tracked down I would have guessed you have a lot more to do than heckle prior guests of your show. Cindy is just a citizen trying to do what's right. If more people took action like she has done since her son's death, this country would be a far better place.

Oh, the media in Dallas isn't kissing the ring on Cindy's hand? Awwwww.

If I lived in the Dallas area, I would join whatever counter-protest will be taking place to let Cindy know that she does not speak for everybody in America. Not even close.

How would she like it if protestors start parading down whatever street in Berkeley she lives on?