Thursday, July 12, 2007

The Cindy Sheehan Story Continues

I've been following the reactions to Cindy Sheehan's potential independent or third-party challenge to Speaker Nancy Pelosi over the last few days as time has permitted. Libertarian Justin Raimondo seems to think Sheehan should give it a go. Part of his enthusiasm no doubt stems from the apparent libertarian streak that Sheehan seems to possess. He also points out the difficulties that Sheehan will likely have in getting Pelosi to engage her in any sort of public debate - and Raimondo should know as he ran against her back in the mid-1990s and found that Pelosi is more adept at hiding from challengers than anything else. Raimondo also points out that Pelosi has never been an anti-war politician (no matter how much movement conservatives or for that matter establishment "progressives" might claim the contrary), having been a staunch supporter of the Clinton regime's "humanitarian" military interventions in the Balkans as well as the various US bombing raids against the Iraqis in 1993, 1996, and 1998. Of course the main impetus for a potential Sheehan challenge is Pelosi's failure to move on impeaching the current White House regime (recall that for Pelosi, impeachment is "off the table"). I can't help but wonder if Pelosi's willingness to spout off the same sorts of talking points regarding Iraq that Bu$hCo and assorted nuts have been using for ages. For example, here's Pelosi circa 1998:
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process. The responsibility of the United States in this conflict is to eliminate weapons of mass destruction, to minimize the danger to our troops, and to diminish the suffering of the Iraqi people."
We've seen just how well bombing Iraqis has diminished their suffering. I suppose if Bu$hCo were to be impeached, Pelosi and similarly-minded Dems would have some splainin' to do. Can't have that, now, can we.

As I noted previously, a lot of the folks over at DailyKos didn't take the news so well - mainly because she's proven to be impossible for the Dems to contain. The long knives came out almost immediately, and there has been no letting up, even though as one of that blog's more sensible members has acknowledged that Sheehan has managed to do more to get the issue of impeachment into the public eye in the last few days than practically anyone else. Even the occasional call for civility has proven an exercise in futility (see also here and here), and of course any diaries merely detailing Sheehan's current activism are subject to the goon squad. In some ways the Sheehan bashing has seemed reminiscent of a bunch of skinheads crashing a punk gig and ganging up to stomp one or two individuals who just happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time.

Again, the fallout was quite predictable. As too many others stated ad nauseum while doing their Sheehan-bashing, DailyKos is merely a cog in the Democrat Party machine. Anything else is not to be tolerated. Ask uncomfy questions about impeachment or outright advocate impeachment of the Lush/Zany gang (remember them? the ones we were all supposed to be against?), and one is accused of "impeachment porn." There are still folks out there in Kosland blaming Nader for everything from global warming to tooth decay. And one must wonder just what will happen to any anti-war stance assuming all of the "kossacks'" wet dreams come true. I'm guessing that whatever wars H. Clinton, Obama, Pelosi, and crew embark upon or extend will be just a-okay: they are Democrats after all, and that is all that matters. The bit about the hundreds of thousands murdered in the process? My guess is that most of that sorry lot will never even bother to notice, let alone care.

No comments:

Post a Comment