| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
 Posted: Sat Aug 27, 2005 8:33 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| mithridates wrote: |
I'm back, and I read the speech. I see three possibilities:
1)That she was talking about Iraq as originally asserted. Where she mentions the 'this country isn't worth dying for' is right after she talks about the us and right before Iraq.
2)That she was talking about the US. It looks like that from the transcript but it's not certain. However, if she was talking about the US and still no-one seems to care, that speaks of a remarkably different political climate than a year back when democrats were quick to avoid anyone like the plague that seemed to be less than patriotic.
3)She was excited and wasn't really sure herself which country she was referring to. You can see that everything else she was talking about right before was all over the map, and her words certainly shouldn't be analyzed as closely as Bush's, who always repeats and stays on script as long as he isn't tricked by a wily reporter.
What would really help though is a video. |
True and I agree with you on all these points. But what I was asking is why are people jumping all over Fox News when (even if it was a wrong assumption, which is by no means certain) it seems like a perfectly logical assumption to make.
Granted people of one political stripe are going to see different interpretations of statements than another. But the point I was attempting to make was that maybe Fox News was not lying, but simply saw it one way. From the transcript (good point about the video) I'd also be inclined to call it their way. One further point. Someone who made those kind of statements she made about America, wouldn't be too afraid to say "this country isn't worth dying for" or something like that. Read the rest of the things she says about America. Doesn't sound she is worried about not sounding patriotic.
So maybe people shouldn't be so quick to judge. Sorry but I don't think Fox News deserved to be bashed on this. I'm sure there are plenty of other points where it deserves to be bashed...but then again I don't even watch it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mithridates
Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 27, 2005 9:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, maybe. Well then, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt this time - not that anybody at Fox was worried about what I was going to say. Maybe one day.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 27, 2005 9:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Alas, one media source I respect, the economist took Fox News' bit:
| Quote: |
| She [Cindy Sheehan] also rates America as "not worth dying for." |
The Economist August 27th pg. 24 (US edition)
Perhaps I should write a letter and say she meant Iraq. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 27, 2005 5:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
Alas, one media source I respect, the economist took Fox News' bit:
| Quote: |
| She [Cindy Sheehan] also rates America as "not worth dying for." |
The Economist August 27th pg. 24 (US edition)
Perhaps I should write a letter and say she meant Iraq. |
You sure she meant Iraq? The more I look at the transcript, the more I am convinced she meant America. She mentions Iraq once and only as an example of what America should do if attacked. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 27, 2005 6:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Urban Myth:
Here is the quote in context:
| Quote: |
| I'm going all over the country telling moms: "This country is not worth dying for. If we're attacked, we would all go out. We'd all take whatever we had. I'd take my rolling pin and I'd beat the attackers over the head with it. But we were not attacked by Iraq." |
If she doesn't think America is worth dying for, why would she say that she would go out and defend America with inadequate weaponry if it were attacked? That sounds like a course of action likely to result in one's own death. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 28, 2005 1:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| If she doesn't think America is worth dying for, why would she say that she would go out and defend America with inadequate weaponry if it were attacked? That sounds like a course of action likely to result in one's own death. |
This is exactly right. Only someone who has already bought into the distortions that Fox has perpetrated earlier would entertain the notion for a even a short while that the words quoted in the OP were referring to America rather than Iraq. The words were spoken at a rally to Stop The War - that is the context, and only the most mendacious would assume it was in reference to anything but Iraq.
And, no matter what TUM will ask you to believe, this is a conscious lie rather than merely a mistake. Bill O'Reilly was one of the first to make this charge back in the first week of Sheehan's protest, saying that many feel her actions "border on" treason.
The message is that Bush fibbed and now the people we brought up to believe that our country is good and just have been put in harm's way in the service of greed and evil, but sold to us on the continuing lie that we are protecting our country. The right-wing can't attack that message because by addressing it at all they call attantion to the moral poverty at the heart of all this.
Therefore, they smear the woman, and try to assert their owwn pretentions to a superior sense of patriotism by claiming that a grieving mother who has sacrificed a son does not love her country.
And since the war cannot be defended rationally, its supporters are reduced to telling more lies, and even going so far driving a pickup truck over a lot of small crosses bearing the names of the dead in order to somehow show they love their country more than the people who have not swallowed the untruths. And so great is their confusion over what is right and left and up and down or just plain wrong that they even attack each other in their hysterical frenzy to deny what is obvious.
The rally in Crawford has spurred counter-rallies, and this scuffle made me laugh a little :
At the pro-Bush rally, there were some heated moments when two members of Protest Warrior, a group that frequently holds counter protests to anti-war rallies, walked in with a sign that read "Say No to War - Unless a Democrat is President."
Many Bush supporters only saw the top of the sign and believed the men were war protesters, so they began shouting and chasing the pair out. One man tore up their signs. When Will Marean of Minneapolis kept repeating that he was on the Bush side and tried to explain Protest Warrior's mission, one Bush supporter shook his hand and apologized.
And the lies continue, even in the words of the sign described above : this is not partisan issue, and it is more tragic for that, as it seems there are NO major Democratic pols who have come out publicly and said what is increasing clear to large and growing numbers of Americans.
This has to end. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 28, 2005 1:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
I just read this thread. I didn't before because I'm not into Fox News except when I'm bored and want to laugh (not being sarcastic here), and I think it's a waste of time to prove what a shabby news service it is -- the people who are enamored of it aren't going to change their minds. Read something like Ollie North's memoirs (I must confess that I somehow made it through them) to see a Conservative-thinking person and his simplicity when it comes to anything and everything, and his intolerance for -- indeed, his inability to engage in -- complex analysis.
Fox is about a credible a news source as SNL's "Weekend Update." Wait. "Weekend Update" is probably more credible...
There must be left-wing news sources in the U.S., but I don't think they're widely read news sources.
You might be able to argue that New York Times is slanted to the left, but certainly not the left wing.
In fact, professional historians reguarly turn to the New York Times and several other papers as good sources for factual information to butress their research...and I don't think we're in danger of seeing historians citing facts from Fox News anytime in the near future... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 28, 2005 2:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
Urban Myth:
Here is the quote in context:
| Quote: |
| I'm going all over the country telling moms: "This country is not worth dying for. If we're attacked, we would all go out. We'd all take whatever we had. I'd take my rolling pin and I'd beat the attackers over the head with it. But we were not attacked by Iraq." |
If she doesn't think America is worth dying for, why would she say that she would go out and defend America with inadequate weaponry if it were attacked? That sounds like a course of action likely to result in one's own death. |
That is not the entire quote though. Read the entire speech. And she is NOT saying that she would go out and defend America with inadequate weaponry. She is saying "we'd all take whatever we had". So if she only had a rolling pin she'd use that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 28, 2005 6:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
On the other hand wrote:
Urban Myth:
Here is the quote in context:
Quote:
I'm going all over the country telling moms: "This country is not worth dying for. If we're attacked, we would all go out. We'd all take whatever we had. I'd take my rolling pin and I'd beat the attackers over the head with it. But we were not attacked by Iraq."
If she doesn't think America is worth dying for, why would she say that she would go out and defend America with inadequate weaponry if it were attacked? That sounds like a course of action likely to result in one's own death.
That is not the entire quote though. Read the entire speech. And she is NOT saying that she would go out and defend America with inadequate weaponry. She is saying "we'd all take whatever we had". So if she only had a rolling pin she'd use that.
|
Obviously, a rolling pin would not be anyone's weapon of choice, if more lethal equipment were available. But Sheehan is still expressing a willingness to defend America with inadequate weaponry, IF NEEDS BE. Which indicates pretty clearly to me that she would be willing to die for her country.
Re-reading the whole speech, I do agree with Mith that there is a certain lack of clarity in her phrasing. However, if her point was that America was not worth dying for, why would that statement be immediately followed by the "rolling pin" remark? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 28, 2005 9:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
According to Bill O'Reilly : Cindy Sheehan Controlled By Far Left Elements
O'Reilly decided to use the lecture/soliloquy technique.
Using his fatherly tone he told Dolores that he respected her opinion but didn't want to see her used like Cindy Sheehan.
"I think Cindy Sheehan is being used by far left elements who object to our way of life. Everyone knows. Hillary Clinton knows"
Another link :
Cindy Sheehan has a friend.
She is not the ony one, and no one with a brain would ever have imagined she was - it's why the Bush-supporters were always so afraid of her from the very beginning.
Last edited by The Bobster on Sun Aug 28, 2005 3:35 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 28, 2005 3:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If she is not being used by far left elements then that would imply she is fully aware of the things she says and does. That would be even worse.The kindest thing one can say about her political statements is that she doesn't have good political judgement.
Riley is wrong people like Lynne Stewart Who Cindy Sheehan seems to admire don't really do what they do cause they hate the American way of life they do what they do cause they have a geo politcal agenda and they need the US out of the way so they can get their way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
