OT - Cindy Sheehan, "Thought Criminal"
 

[
George W. Bush: 'Cindy Sheehan is a Thought Criminal'

CRAWFORD, TX -- In what appears to be the preparatory phase of the
military campaign against Cindy Sheehan, President George W. Bush is
now saying that Cindy Sheehan is a "thought criminal." The President
is trying to rally the people behind his cause.
]
http://www.unconfirmedsources.com/?itemid=1135&catid=9

Did you miss this part, ignore it, or just trying to cause controversy?

"Unconfirmed Sources political satire and news story parodies as
represented above are written as satire or parody. They are, of course,
fictitious."

On 31 Aug 2005 12:45:16 -0700, "
wrote:

Did you miss this part, ignore it, or just trying to cause controversy?

"Unconfirmed Sources political satire and news story parodies as
represented above are written as satire or parody. They are, of course,
fictitious."

Gee, I'm just so relieved that someone spotted that BSEG.
--
Cliff

On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 15:32:50 -0400, Cliff wrote:

[
George W. Bush: 'Cindy Sheehan is a Thought Criminal'

CRAWFORD, TX -- In what appears to be the preparatory phase of the
military campaign against Cindy Sheehan, President George W. Bush is
now saying that Cindy Sheehan is a "thought criminal." The President
is trying to rally the people behind his cause.
]
http://www.unconfirmedsources.com/?itemid=1135&catid=9

I think this one is more interesting:

What is most interesting is that the press gives this little bunch of
people who are protesting with Cindy so much air time without
discussing Cindy's background. This is a case of more press bias. It
has been pointed out on just a couple of media outlets that Cindy
divorced her first husband and left her son with him to be raised
while she became a political activist for the Democrat Party. She had
very little to do with her son in his growing years. She remarried.
The 1st husband remarried. The original father raised the son with his
new wife. They miss their son and mourn the loss of his life. They
have stated that they are very proud of their son and that they agree
with the stance of Americain Iraq and on terror. They said that their
son was eager to serve and to go fight the terrorists in Iraq. He
volunteered. How many news stations carried their interview? Not
many. So the son dies in Iraq and then Cindy shows up to make a stink.
She gets an audience with Bush. That was not enough. She goes to
Crawford and demands another audience. How many news stations carry
the ongoing saga of Cindy? Practically all of them. Cindy didn't care
about her son. She let another woman raise him. Cindy doesn't care
about the other soldiers inI raq. Cindy cares about her liberal,
feminist agenda and about using the death of her son to lobby against
Republicans and Bush. And the press is helping her. Why? Then 2
days ago, Cindy's 2nd husband filed for a divorce from Cindy. Cindy
sounds like a feminist opportunist who did not have the sense of
responsibility to even raise her own son. It looks like her 2nd
husband is fed up with Cindy. We middle Americans should be fed up
with Cindy also. We should be fed up with the press. they manipulate
us into their "group think" and into the responses that they want on
their polls.

The saddest thing is that the left has embraced this as their best shot of
damaging the President. Don't they realize how pitiful they look? Don't
they realize that their best shot of getting into power is by not killing
their future voters by the millions?

"Tom" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 15:32:50 -0400, Cliff wrote:

[
George W. Bush: 'Cindy Sheehan is a Thought Criminal'

CRAWFORD, TX -- In what appears to be the preparatory phase of the
military campaign against Cindy Sheehan, President George W. Bush is
now saying that Cindy Sheehan is a "thought criminal." The President
is trying to rally the people behind his cause.
]
http://www.unconfirmedsources.com/?itemid=1135&catid=9

I think this one is more interesting:

What is most interesting is that the press gives this little bunch of
people who are protesting with Cindy so much air time without
discussing Cindy's background. This is a case of more press bias. It
has been pointed out on just a couple of media outlets that Cindy
divorced her first husband and left her son with him to be raised
while she became a political activist for the Democrat Party. She had
very little to do with her son in his growing years. She remarried.
The 1st husband remarried. The original father raised the son with his
new wife. They miss their son and mourn the loss of his life. They
have stated that they are very proud of their son and that they agree
with the stance of Americain Iraq and on terror. They said that their
son was eager to serve and to go fight the terrorists in Iraq. He
volunteered. How many news stations carried their interview? Not
many. So the son dies in Iraq and then Cindy shows up to make a stink.
She gets an audience with Bush. That was not enough. She goes to
Crawford and demands another audience. How many news stations carry
the ongoing saga of Cindy? Practically all of them. Cindy didn't care
about her son. She let another woman raise him. Cindy doesn't care
about the other soldiers inI raq. Cindy cares about her liberal,
feminist agenda and about using the death of her son to lobby against
Republicans and Bush. And the press is helping her. Why? Then 2
days ago, Cindy's 2nd husband filed for a divorce from Cindy. Cindy
sounds like a feminist opportunist who did not have the sense of
responsibility to even raise her own son. It looks like her 2nd
husband is fed up with Cindy. We middle Americans should be fed up
with Cindy also. We should be fed up with the press. they manipulate
us into their "group think" and into the responses that they want on
their polls.


Outstanding. Thanks for posting it.

"Group Think"? WTF do you think all those hypocritical
Fat-Assed "Christian Fundamentalist" flag waver wannab
ees
are? Why don't they volunteer to go to Iraq and put their
****ing money where their mouth is? At least Sheehan supported
her son volunteering to go to Iraq in the first place?
Why aren't all these Jesus war lovers flags doing the same
thing? Sheehan is whatever she is, but at least she put her
money where her mouth is. She might even be a deadbeat
Mom, who knows. She'll be tried and convicted in the
corporate crack-sucking media for that. How many of those
Fat-assed bureacrats in Washingon have been married,
divorced once, twice, three times, and ****ing their interns
on the side?

I heard that Cindy Sheehan was President of the Communist
Party of America from 1996 to 2004, and has been linked
to Al Qaeda, and the 9-11 attacks.

I also read that she and Hillary Clinton had a lesbian love
affair, and that Sheehan was a member of the Branch Davidian
cult fortwo years, and gave birth to 11 illegitimate children
sired by David Khoresh.

There are even rumors that she belonged to Greenpeace for
one year, and once was busted for prostitution and heroin
dealing in
LA County.

On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 15:46:43 GMT, "Tom Gardner"
wrote:

The saddest thing is that the left has embraced this as their best shot of
damaging the President. Don't they realize how pitiful they look? Don't
they realize that their best shot of getting into power is by not killing
their future voters by the millions?

The Left also forgets Bush is not up for re election.

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

wrote:
"Group Think"? WTF do you think all those hypocritical
Fat-Assed "Christian Fundamentalist" flag waver wannab
ees
are? Why don't they volunteer to go to Iraq and put their
****ing money where their mouth is?

Plenty have. I'd wager there are more offsping of conservative, if not
Republican, families serving in Iraq than those who came from liberal or
Democrat families. Something about learning values at home.

At least Sheehan supported
her son volunteering to go to Iraq in the first place?

What, she sent him a note? Did she even have his address?

Gunner wrote:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 15:46:43 GMT, "Tom Gardner"
wrote:


The saddest thing is that the left has embraced this as their best shot of
damaging the President. Don't they realize how pitiful they look? Don't
they realize that their best shot of getting into power is by not killing
their future voters by the millions?


The Left also forgets Bush is not up for re election.

Well, since they do not have a Plan, nor an agenda it is not possible
for them to rally the troops toward a positive goal. All they can do is
negative attacks on institutions or persons, and the presidency is the
most visible target. I don't know what they'd do if they actually got
their way. But they don't either.

Tom Gardner wrote:
The saddest thing is that the left has embraced this as their best shot of
damaging the President.


He has been doing a perfectly good job doing that all by himself.

Abrasha
http://www.abrasha.com

Tom wrote:
I think this one is more interesting:

What is most interesting is that the press gives this little bunch of
people who are protesting with Cindy so much air time without
discussing Cindy's background. This is a case of more press bias. It
has been pointed out on just a couple of media outlets that Cindy
divorced her first husband and left her son with him to be raised
while she became a political activist for the Democrat Party. She had
very little to do with her son in his growing years. She remarried.
The 1st husband remarried. The original father raised the son with his
new wife. They miss their son and mourn the loss of his life. They
have stated that they are very proud of their son and that they agree
with the stance of Americain Iraq and on terror. They said that their
son was eager to serve and to go fight the terrorists in Iraq.

Etc., etc...

I'm sorry, but this is a total fabrication. Cindy Sheehan was only
married once. Does it bother you that passed along a pack of lies?
In the future, will you think any less of the source that supplied
it to you?


--Mark
you passed it along?

On 7 Sep 2005 06:01:38 -0700, "Mark Schnitzius"
wrote:

Tom wrote:
I think this one is more interesting:

What is most interesting is that the press gives this little bunch of
people who are protesting with Cindy so much air time without
discussing Cindy's background. This is a case of more press bias. It
has been pointed out on just a couple of media outlets that Cindy
divorced her first husband and left her son with him to be raised
while she became a political activist for the Democrat Party. She had
very little to do with her son in his growing years. She remarried.
The 1st husband remarried. The original father raised the son with his
new wife. They miss their son and mourn the loss of his life. They
have stated that they are very proud of their son and that they agree
with the stance of Americain Iraq and on terror. They said that their
son was eager to serve and to go fight the terrorists in Iraq.

Etc., etc...

I'm sorry, but this is a total fabrication. Cindy Sheehan was only
married once. Does it bother you that passed along a pack of lies?
In the future, will you think any less of the source that supplied
it to you?


--Mark
you passed it along?

Tom,
Where are those "WMDs"?
Remember, the US had by far the most of them .... and the
shrubbie wants many, many more.

Put up about now ....
--
Cliff