• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Sheehan?

How do you feel about Mrs. Sheehans recent actions?

  • Sympathetic

    Votes: 8 18.6%
  • Proud

    Votes: 8 18.6%
  • Angry

    Votes: 17 39.5%
  • Other

    Votes: 13 30.2%

  • Total voters
    43
nefarious_plot said:
She is exercising here right as an American, Her freedom. Those supporting this war claim its for freedom, yet they consistantly show they want to take freedom away from AMERICAN's.

How? By doing exactly what she is doing? Expressing their feelings about a situation?

Does anyone else see the circular logic here?
Sheehan flexes her right to speak her mind.
People who disagree, exercise their right and respond to her.
Other people get angry at the repondents for exercising their rights and make accusations toward those who disagree of wanting to take away her rights.

So the people who disagree with Sheehan should have their rights violated by being accused of practising facsist principles?

Should the people who make such accusations not express their view about the people who disagree with Sheehan wanting to deprive her of her rights?

This can go on forever...

Once the focus is veered away from the subject at hand, e.g. is Sheehan right or wrong, and has shifted to something we already know the answer to - we all are protected by freedom of speech - it's evident that analytical debate has exhausted itself and frustration has become the fuel for debate.
 
Its not people disagreing with her. Its the peple tw=shing her dead Calling her anti-American. TTrying to slander her because of what she says. Theres a differece.
 
VTA said:
How? By doing exactly what she is doing? Expressing their feelings about a situation?

Does anyone else see the circular logic here?
Sheehan flexes her right to speak her mind.
People who disagree, exercise their right and respond to her.
Other people get angry at the repondents for exercising their rights and make accusations toward those who disagree of wanting to take away her rights.

So the people who disagree with Sheehan should have their rights violated by being accused of practising facsist principles?

Should the people who make such accusations not express their view about the people who disagree with Sheehan wanting to deprive her of her rights?

This can go on forever...

Once the focus is veered away from the subject at hand, e.g. is Sheehan right or wrong, and has shifted to something we already know the answer to - we all are protected by freedom of speech - it's evident that analytical debate has exhausted itself and frustration has become the fuel for debate.

Well said...I was going around and around on this the last few days in another thread...

From a post in Polls - Should the moderators exercise their ability to remove polls made to insult?...Post #51...

It goes even further than that....It's when you should censor your own THOUGHTS from coming out of your mouth that these kids can't get through their dome...None of which is a Free Speech issue...

You and your best friend get into an argument where you start to hate each other...Then he dies...

His mother, whose known you since diapers, asks you to say a few words at the funeral. Do you bite your tongue or start out by saying, "He was a rat bastard!"?

Daddy had a one night stand with the secretary, and Daddy knows you know...He begs you not to say anything because it was a "one time" mistake...Is this a "Free Speech" issue?

Your sister "comes out of the closet" to you and asks you to keep it on the down-low....Do you say, " F U!...Don't tell me I can't execise my First Amendment rights!!!!...then run out and tell all of her friends? You're legally correct you know...

See?...Just because you have a RIGHT to do it, doesn't mean it IS RIGHT to do it...

Everything you do and say has consequences....I am legally bound by my First Amendment rights to run through the streets of Harlem yelling "White Power"....Now is that the right thing to do? Even though I have a right to do it?
 
nefarious_plot said:
Its not people disagreing with her. Its the peple tw=shing her dead Calling her anti-American. TTrying to slander her because of what she says. Theres a differece.

One question for you.....Do you believe this country is worth fighting for?
 
One thing for sure, it should be interesting in Crawford on Saturday when all the "You don't speak for me Cindy" people arrive..........
 
Agaim people trying to slander her name are dosing so with intent to limit her right to speak her mind. Its attemted cenorship..period.
 
nefarious_plot said:
Agaim people trying to slander her name are dosing so with intent to limit her right to speak her mind. Its attemted cenorship..period.

You won't answer the question huh?
 
Originally posted by cnredd:
Well said...I was going around and around on this the last few days in another thread...

From a post in Polls - Should the moderators exercise their ability to remove polls made to insult?...Post #51...

It goes even further than that....It's when you should censor your own THOUGHTS from coming out of your mouth that these kids can't get through their dome...None of which is a Free Speech issue...
That's a pretty hypocritical statement coming from you.

Originally posted by cnredd:
You and your best friend get into an argument where you start to hate each other...Then he dies...

His mother, whose known you since diapers, asks you to say a few words at the funeral. Do you bite your tongue or start out by saying, "He was a rat bastard!"?
You can't answer that unless you have been in that position.

Originally posted by cnredd:
Daddy had a one night stand with the secretary, and Daddy knows you know...He begs you not to say anything because it was a "one time" mistake...Is this a "Free Speech" issue?
No.

Originally posted by cnredd:
Your sister "comes out of the closet" to you and asks you to keep it on the down-low....Do you say, " F U!...Don't tell me I can't execise my First Amendment rights!!!!...then run out and tell all of her friends? You're legally correct you know...
Yup. But you gotta be there...

Originally posted by cnredd:
See?...Just because you have a RIGHT to do it, doesn't mean it IS RIGHT to do it...
What it IS, is not your decision to decide for others.

Originally posted by cnredd:
Everything you do and say has consequences....I am legally bound by my First Amendment rights to run through the streets of Harlem yelling "White Power"....Now is that the right thing to do? Even though I have a right to do it?
That depends on how good your jump shot is.
 
nefarious_plot said:
Agaim people trying to slander her name are dosing so with intent to limit her right to speak her mind. Its attemted cenorship..period.

It's not nearly as unequivocal as that. You're using a wide brush to paint an opinion that you don't agree with as an attempting to censor.

I'll ask again, is it logical, in a country where free speech is practised/accepted/expected, to expect any who disagrees with her to accept your ideal of their motives and clam up?

By making such an accusation you're imposing conditions on their right to disagree. In turn doing what you're accusing them of doing. You're not addressing the logic, the substance of the disagreement, just that the fact that the disagreement exists and calling it wrong based on assumptions you've made of it, e.g. censorship.

When you excercise your right, you'd better be prepared for others to do the same.
 
Billo_Really said:
Originally Posted by VTA:
She's a woman who lost her son to the war in Iraq.
Last year, the President met with her and she said some very positive things about him and the meeting; it brought her family closer together.

As of recently, she has camped outside of his ranch, has said he terated her indifferently at their meeting and is demanding he speak to her again so she can tell him that this war is a lie and that Israel is not worth it.

In a nutshell...
That's bullshit, VTA!

I must have missed this...
How exactly is that bullshit?
She did lose her son.
She did meet with Bush.
She did say good things about him afterward.
She is camped outside of his ranch.
She is contradicting her initial story about their meeting.
She is demanding they speak again.
She is on record as having said this war is a lie and that Israel is not worth it.

Refute one point.
 
It's official. I am truly tired of this bi tch. I am tired of the constant bad mouthing of my country. I am tired of her calling us terrorist. I am tired of her calling the terorrist freedom fighters. I want this stupid ass to go home and complain in the mirror. NO you will not see the president. NO you should never be allowed to see him. Yousaw him once, you said he made you happy and felt good. Then you decided that blowing micheal moore and moveon.org was a better way to go. Screw her, screw her cause, screw her beliefs. Her son was a hero and deserves everyones respect. She however is not and never has been. She has sacrificed nothing except the name of her son for her 15 minutes of fame. I hope shiting on his memory was worth it
 
Everything you do and say has consequences....I am legally bound by my First Amendment rights to run through the streets of Harlem yelling "White Power"....Now is that the right thing to do? Even though I have a right to do it?[/I][/QUOTE]



Again. people that dont like what Sheehan is saying is trying to find excuses to stop her from saying it. Thats still attempting to cencor her.

Simply because you dont think its right doesnt mean much.

its not freedom to hear what you want to. Its freedom for anybody to speak there mind.
 
Billo_Really said:
Attacking a sovereign nation that did nothing to you and in violation of International Law, is illegal!

We have been over this before Billo. The invasion was NOT illegal. You did nothing to disprove my point last time we talked about 678 and 1441. Do I have to school on you this issue AGAIN!?!?!?
 
Billo_Really said:
That's bullshit, VTA!

What's BS? Actually, VTA was right. She DID have a meeting with Bush. She initially DID say positive things about the meeting. It was only when she became a tool of the anti-American Left that she changed her tune.
 
nefarious_plot said:
The pathetic and desperate attempts at slandering this women by Bush fanatics indicate how much an impact she is having.

She is exercising here right as an American, Her freedom. Those supporting this war claim its for freedom, yet they consistantly show they want to take freedom away from AMERICAN's.

WHat slander are you talking about???
 
nefarious_plot said:
Agaim people trying to slander her name are dosing so with intent to limit her right to speak her mind. Its attemted cenorship..period.

THat is a liberal's definition of censorship. The Left can do the same to a Republican in the name of free speech. As soon as a conservative wants to bring out the truth of a Leftist, be becomes censorship.

FACT: Cindy has the right to do what she is doing.
FACT: The Right has the right to bring out the truth about her.
FACT: The Right is NOT practicing censorship by doing so, but rather is exercising the same free speech rights that she is.
 
nefarious_plot said:
Again. people that dont like what Sheehan is saying is trying to find excuses to stop her from saying it. Thats still attempting to cencor her.

That is NOT the case. She is lying, she is a tool of the left, but no one is trying to stop her from spreading her filth. Please stop putting up your strawmen because they are so easy to blow over.
 
ludahai said:
THat is a liberal's definition of censorship. The Left can do the same to a Republican in the name of free speech. As soon as a conservative wants to bring out the truth of a Leftist, be becomes censorship.

No truth has been brought out about her. Cheep attemtpts to attack her personal life is patethic and merely meant to intimidate her into stopping protest.
 
nefarious_plot said:
No truth has been brought out about her. Cheep attemtpts to attack her personal life is patethic and merely meant to intimidate her into stopping protest.

TRUTH: Sheehan has met with President Bush already.
TRUTH: She initially said that it was a positive experience and she said good things about the President's sincerity.
TRUTH: She has taken a complete about face on the first meeting.

How is any of the above a cheap attempt to attack her personal life?
 
nefarious_plot said:
Again. people that dont like what Sheehan is saying is trying to find excuses to stop her from saying it. Thats still attempting to cencor her.

Simply because you dont think its right doesnt mean much.

its not freedom to hear what you want to. Its freedom for anybody to speak there mind.

When?...Who tried to censor her?

There are many people that WISH she would stop whining....

There are many people that think she SHOULD stop whining...

But where did anyone say that she HAD to stop whining?

Where is this attempt that you speak of? In your head?

When someone says, "brown", do you hear, "green"?

I try and make this clear...

This....is.....NOT....a....Freedom....of....speech.....issue.....

She....is.....within....her....rights....to....say....what....she....wants...

I.....and....others....feel....she....is.....a.....jackass....for saying....what....she....says....

Is....she...correct....legally?......YES

Is....she....correct....philosophically?......Some....believe......NO.....

Are we clear, skip?
 
she had no such meeting. She has returned to Bush ranch again. personall attacks on her have come from many places Talk radio and talkshows to individual citzens in forums like this one and interviewd on TV.
 
Perhaps the day you lose a loved one you will wish people had more humanity then you show in calling her a whinner. pathetic.
 
ludahai said:
TRUTH: Sheehan has met with President Bush already.
TRUTH: She initially said that it was a positive experience and she said good things about the President's sincerity.
TRUTH: She has taken a complete about face on the first meeting.

How is any of the above a cheap attempt to attack her personal life?

You know how it works, lud...

Some get offended by the truth...they consider it a "personal attack".

Wanna hear about personal attacks? Ask a Liberal how they felt about Linda Tripp...Nothing but talk about her appearance and weight...Even late night talk shows got into the act....

Try that with Cindy and you'll be breakin' the First Amendment, you bastards!
 
nefarious_plot said:
she had no such meeting. She has returned to Bush ranch again. personall attacks on her have come from many places Talk radio and talkshows to individual citzens in forums like this one and interviewd on TV.

I have shown this to be a false statement on another thread devoted to this subject. Read posts 563 and 565 on this thread: http://www.debatepolitics.com/showthread.php?t=3166&page=57.

She DID meet with President Bush. Everything else I said is true as well. READ it, if you dare!
 
cnredd said:
You know how it works, lud...

Some get offended by the truth...they consider it a "personal attack".

Wanna hear about personal attacks? Ask a Liberal how they felt about Linda Tripp...Nothing but talk about her appearance and weight...Even late night talk shows got into the act....

Try that with Cindy and you'll be breakin' the First Amendment, you bastards!

Remember the way they talked about Katherine Harris' makeup? I thought liberals were advocates of NOT focusing on a woman's appearance. I suppose I missed the codicil on that. It apparently includes the clause "...unless she is a Republican elected by the people of the State."
 
Back
Top Bottom