No more coverage for Cindy? Shocking!!!

[mtlinscomb]

ABC's Charles Gibson to Cindy Sheehan: Thanks for your sacrifice. Now get lost.

By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
08/20/09 11:02 AM EDT

ABC's Charles Gibson to Cindy Sheehan: Thanks for your sacrifice. Now get lost. | Washington Examiner

In an appearance August 18 on WLS radio in Chicago, ABC News anchor Charles Gibson was asked about anti-war protester Cindy Sheehan's plans to travel to Martha's Vineyard next week, where she will protest the Iraq and Afghanistan wars while President Obama is vacationing there. Gibson, whose newscast and network featured Sheehan when she led anti-war protests outside President Bush's Texas ranch in 2005, answered, "Enough already."
That's a remarkably different stance from the one Gibson took four years ago. On August 9, 2005, the ABC anchor conducted an extensive on-air interview with Sheehan. "Cindy Sheehan is her name," Gibson began. "She says she's not moving until the president meets with her, and I had a chance to speak with her a few minutes ago. Cindy Sheehan, bottom line, what do you hope to accomplish with all this?" During the next week, Gibson and ABC continued to cover Sheehan. On August 17, 2005, when Sheehan left Crawford, Gibson reported, "We're going to turn next to the standoff that is playing out near President Bush's ranch in Crawford, Texas. Cindy Sheehan, you know, the mother who lost a son in Iraq, is now on the move, but she's still standing her ground. ABC's Geoff Morrell is in Crawford with the details?" The next day, Gibson reported, "All across the country last night, people held candlelight vigils in support of Cindy Sheehan?" Sheehan was mentioned in several other ABC newscasts, as well.
This week, after the Washington Examiner reported that Sheehan will be protesting on Martha's Vineyard (see here and here), WLS radio host Don Wade, noting all the coverage that Sheehan received in 2005, asked Gibson "whether we're going to see some coverage of Cindy Sheehan?do you suppose Cindy is going to make the news again?"
Gibson's answer was sympathetic but clear: No. "I gather she's going back to Martha's Vineyard," Gibson began.
It's such a sad story. Martha Raddatz [of ABC News] wrote a terrific book about one battle that took place in Iraq, and it was the battle in which Cindy's son was killed. And you look at somebody like that and you think here's somebody who's just trying to find some meaning in her son's death. And you have to be sympathetic to her. Anybody who has given a son to this country has made an enormous sacrifice, and you have to be sympathetic. But enough already.
You can listen to the entire interview here.
This week a number of observers have wondered whether the press will cover Sheehan now that she is protesting a war run by Barack Obama as opposed to George W. Bush. Gibson's interview strongly suggests it won't happen.



I've said it before and I'll say it again, the majority of the left and the left wing media will support a left run war. The disgusting nature in which the majority of the media treated our troops over the last 8 years purely based on their hate for the President is nothing short of treasonous - just my opinion.

 

[lerxst]

MSM is more propaganda for ideoligies than old fashioned reporting and it's a sham(e)
Last night on MSNBC the headline for the Tom Ridge story was "Conspiracy theory proved true" I thought the left was against conspiracy theories? no?

 

[CK1]

ABC's Charles Gibson to Cindy Sheehan: Thanks for your sacrifice. Now get lost.

By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
08/20/09 11:02 AM EDT

ABC's Charles Gibson to Cindy Sheehan: Thanks for your sacrifice. Now get lost. | Washington Examiner

In an appearance August 18 on WLS radio in Chicago, ABC News anchor Charles Gibson was asked about anti-war protester Cindy Sheehan's plans to travel to Martha's Vineyard next week, where she will protest the Iraq and Afghanistan wars while President Obama is vacationing there. Gibson, whose newscast and network featured Sheehan when she led anti-war protests outside President Bush's Texas ranch in 2005, answered, "Enough already."
That's a remarkably different stance from the one Gibson took four years ago. On August 9, 2005, the ABC anchor conducted an extensive on-air interview with Sheehan. "Cindy Sheehan is her name," Gibson began. "She says she's not moving until the president meets with her, and I had a chance to speak with her a few minutes ago. Cindy Sheehan, bottom line, what do you hope to accomplish with all this?" During the next week, Gibson and ABC continued to cover Sheehan. On August 17, 2005, when Sheehan left Crawford, Gibson reported, "We're going to turn next to the standoff that is playing out near President Bush's ranch in Crawford, Texas. Cindy Sheehan, you know, the mother who lost a son in Iraq, is now on the move, but she's still standing her ground. ABC's Geoff Morrell is in Crawford with the details?" The next day, Gibson reported, "All across the country last night, people held candlelight vigils in support of Cindy Sheehan?" Sheehan was mentioned in several other ABC newscasts, as well.
This week, after the Washington Examiner reported that Sheehan will be protesting on Martha's Vineyard (see here and here), WLS radio host Don Wade, noting all the coverage that Sheehan received in 2005, asked Gibson "whether we're going to see some coverage of Cindy Sheehan?do you suppose Cindy is going to make the news again?"
Gibson's answer was sympathetic but clear: No. "I gather she's going back to Martha's Vineyard," Gibson began.
It's such a sad story. Martha Raddatz [of ABC News] wrote a terrific book about one battle that took place in Iraq, and it was the battle in which Cindy's son was killed. And you look at somebody like that and you think here's somebody who's just trying to find some meaning in her son's death. And you have to be sympathetic to her. Anybody who has given a son to this country has made an enormous sacrifice, and you have to be sympathetic. But enough already.
You can listen to the entire interview here.
This week a number of observers have wondered whether the press will cover Sheehan now that she is protesting a war run by Barack Obama as opposed to George W. Bush. Gibson's interview strongly suggests it won't happen.



I've said it before and I'll say it again, the majority of the left and the left wing media will support a left run war. The disgusting nature in which the majority of the media treated our troops over the last 8 years purely based on their hate for the President is nothing short of treasonous - just my opinion.

When I heard that Cindy would be in Martha's Vineyard while the pres and family were there I was pretty sure it would not be covered.

Does not surprise me at all, being that the media is run by Obama.

 

[scooterbug44]

Is it that there is a left wing media conspiracy, OR is it that coverage of Sheehan repeatedly doing the same thing isn't a ratings winner?

Yes, Sheehan is an anti-war protestor and we're at war - but IMO that isn't enough for the rating hungry scandal mongers. Not enough sensationalism, nothing to scare folks about, no controversy.........until Gibson gave them a story. :roll:

 

[RayStar]

This mother is still in a lot of pain. I wish she could find another outlet for relief.
Just adding my two cents

 

[Bob]

pain and fame...needs talk therapy to vent her anger productively

 

[Geo]

She protested the war in Iraq where she sadly lost her son. Obama said he would get our troops out of there and so far he seems to be keeping promise to his timeline.

I thought she would be happy with this.

So why is she still putting herself through this???

 

[30A Skunkape]

She protested the war in Iraq where she sadly lost her son. Obama said he would get our troops out of there and so far he seems to be keeping promise to his timeline.

I thought she would be happy with this.

So why is she still putting herself through this???

I understand having celebrity status is intoxicating. The intoxicated don't enjoy the tumble from A-list to B, to C, etc.

 

[Blair]

She protested the war in Iraq where she sadly lost her son. Obama said he would get our troops out of there and so far he seems to be keeping promise to his timeline.

I thought she would be happy with this.

So why is she still putting herself through this???

herself?????

Why is she putting US through this?

 

[mtlinscomb]

We Have the Moral High Ground

By Cindy Sheehan

Sunday, August 23, 2009 at 01:14 PM

We Have the Moral High Ground

I remember back in the good ol' days of 2005 and 2006 when being against the wars was not only politically correct, but it was very popular. I remember receiving dozens of awards, uncountable accolades and even was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.

"Hate begets hate; violence begets violence; toughness begets a greater toughness. We must meet the forces of hate with the power of love ... " Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. 1958 "There comes a time when silence is betrayal ... " Dr. King, 1967
​

Those were the halcyon days of the anti-war movement before the Democrats took over the government (off of the backs of the anti-war movement) and it became anathema to be against the wars and I became unpopular on all sides. I guess at that point, I could have gone with the flow and pretended to support the violence so I could remain popular, but I think I have to fiercely hold on to my core values whether I am "liked" or not.
Killing is wrong no matter if it is state-sanction murder or otherwise. Period. Not too much more to say on that subject, except what I quote above from Dr. King.
However, while the so-called left is obsessed over supporting a very crappy Democratic health care plan, people in far away countries are being deprived of their health and very lives by the Obama Regime's continuation of Bush's ruinous foreign policy.
I was never dismayed when the so-called right attacked me and called me names for protesting Bush. However, something inside me gets a little sick when I hear people who claim to be peace activists supporting the Obama Administration's foreign policy, a policy that is not like Bush's in the fact that it's much worse.
I have been called a "racist" from the so-called left. In these people's opinion, I was totally justified in protesting Bush, but I am a racist for protesting the same policies under Obama. When I opposed Bush's policies, I was called traitor, anti-American, anti-Semitic, and other names I cannot print. Name-calling is a great way to shut down critical thinking and discussion. And, not to mention, I think the murder of innocent life in the Iraq-Af-Pak regions is racist and morally corrupt.
There are many people in this country who oppose Obama because they're racist, but I am not one of them. I oppose Obama's policies because they are wrong ... again, period!
One cannot obfuscate when innocent lives are being destroyed, here and abroad. We cannot allow "political reality" to get in the way of morality. Human sacrifice is not worth the political reality. Violence, killing, war and more war are NEVER the solution to any problem. Period.
If Obama has violent shadow forces around him pulling him in the direction of violence, which begets more violence and more resistance; then we, especially people in the peace or anti-war movements need to gather and organize to pull him in the direction towards peaceful conflict resolution and solutions that aren't based on exploiting people's fears, anxieties or ignorance.
I am going to Martha's Vineyard because we have the moral high ground. The war supporters aren't going to protest Obama's wars. They are strangely silent over his foreign policy, unless they are praising it.
I am going to Martha's Vineyard because someone has to speak for the babies of Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan that do not deserve the horrible fate that has been handed to them by the US Military Industrial Complex. The voiceless need a voice, and even if I am called every name in the book by all sides, I will speak up for them.
I am going to Martha's Vineyard because so many people have been blinded to the fact that the system has momentum that rolls on and over and around no matter who is the titular head of the system.
Let's just pretend that elections are fair in this country and my candidate, Cynthia McKinney, won for president. If she wasn't able to rein in the systemic violence, then I would be going wherever she vacationed to protest her policies, too. I guess at that point, I would not only be called "racist," but I would be called a "self-hating female."
In a recent conversation someone was trying to convince me that I should not be so stridently opposed to Obama's policies and I responded that today 75 people were killed and 300 people were wounded in a bomb blast in Iraq and 26 mostly women and children were killed in a wedding party in Afghanistan this week and she said: "Oh, that wouldn't be acceptable if it happened here."
And that's the problem: it's not acceptable if it happens anywhere, to anybody, no matter who is President of the USA.
Not only is the death toll mounting for innocent civilians but also is once again climbing for our troops.
While the "festivities" are occurring on Martha's Vineyard next week, there are families all over the world who will never again be able to fully feel festive. Ahhhh ... everyone should just stand down, relax and sip an Obamarita on the beach ... Hope reigns once again in The Empire.
And, yes, we are going to Martha's Vineyard to get attention. We vehemently want to call attention to all of the points I have made above.
Even though there is a small anti-war, peace movement in this country, there still is one and this movement has the moral high ground and punditry, personal attacks, glitzy marketing, or "political realities won't drown us out.
Members of Dr. King's own caucus tried to convince him not to publicly speak out against the Vietnam war, and that's when he delivered his brilliant Beyond Vietnam speech at the Riverside Church in NYC exactly one year before he was assassinated. That speech was in response to the critics. Dr. King took the moral high ground when he said: "There comes a time when silence is betrayal."
That time has now come, once again. By our silence we are betraying humanity. Love the President or hate him, or anywhere in between, but we must speak out loudly and without any timidity against the institutional violence of the US Empire.


She continues to prove my point. The left is pissed now. It wasn't about protesting the war, it was about hating Bush. Politicizing your support for the military is the lowest form of treason in my opinion, and those guilty of doing so should be ashamed of themselves. I am not accusing the entire left here, but it sure seems the left and the lib media sure got quiet on this topic all of a sudden back in January.