He was nice enough to go see her once, and now she’s not satisfied? Too bad!

When I was in the Army, my mother tried (unsuccessfully) to appeal my assignment to Viet Nam: I was disabled (said the Army), and she was blind due to Multiple Sclerosis… The closest she got to the President? A Major from the Pentagon, who told her why I had to go…

Yes, I went: I guess that means I can tell these anti – war jerks to go screw themselves, eh?

And what’s this evidence that he disagreed with his mother? Because he re-enlisted? Plenty of soldiers have re-enlisted not because they agree with the war, but because they feel it’s their duty. Plenty of soldiers have written home with stories of malaise and discontent, but they stay and fight and die because they feel it’s their duty. There’s a line between obligation and desire that you don’t seem to be grasping.

Hedley wasn’t talking about Casey, Hedley was saying that Cindy was “changing her story.”

Really, this all falls back on the idiotic “flip-flop” meme. There’s a difference between changing one’s mind based on new information and simple waffling, but that not-so-subtle difference got lost amid the rhetoric of the last election, and it’s never quite made its way back.

That s Casey.

EXACTLY. He’s gotten lost in all this quest for attention by his mom.

Cindy is trying to use her son’s death to promote an agenda, despite evidence that he, at least on some level, disagreed with it. Where are all the “Bush is exploiting 9/11″ crowd when it comes to Cindy Sheehan?

You’re still a chickenhawk, though. Donating to the VA (which I doubt) doesn’t make you “Pro-troops” if you’re the one putting them in the hospital through your vote anyway. Your “Support the Troops” ribbon doesn’t keep them safe from insurgents, either.

From a PR standpoint I agree that they should have opened the gates to the ranch and let her in (and only her), as I doubt she would be nearly as vitriolic in a face-to-face with the President as she is in public and it would have ended ths issue (of her, not Iraq), she did get a meeting with the National Security Adviser which goes hardly noticed.

Maybe calling Bush the “biggest terrorist in the world” isn’t the best way to request a meeting.

This disaster is evidence that the adminstration is incapable of accepting any blame for the failure of its people or policy and Bush is seen as uncaring about grieving families.

If Bush had gone to Sheehan the first day and offered personal condolences, invited her in for coffee, this entire fiasco would be over and Bush would have received a great boost in his poll numbers. Instead, he is hunkered down in denial.

The ad hominem arguments are brilliant…’how dare the mother of a dead soldier question the president?’ Heartless, selfish, disengaged…that is the perception of the Bush adminstration today.

The Sheehan problem is of his own creation.

What the hell kind of world do you live in where people aren’t allowed to change their mind with new information?

Someone who is unwilling to make the sacrifices, their opinion isn’t as valued because they won’t suffer any consequences if they are wrong. Is it really hard to figure out?

I can disagree with someone in the military about the validity of the war, and I do, but I respect their opinion, as they are trusting their life to their view.

A chickenhawk who thinks war is great, unless they are asked to sacrifice (war taxes, battle, etc.) for what they want isn’t someone to take seriously.

I’m not calling chickenhawks hypocrites, I’m dismissing their opinion because they aren’t willing to make any sacrifice. It’s all just a board game for them.

I’m making a sacrifice for Cindy Sheehan- I donated to the Crawford Peace House and have donated to other anti-war organizations. At the same time, Cindy Sheehan has made a much bigger sacrifice for peace than I. I would listen and respect her. You don’t have to agree with her, but you do have to respect her. Publicizing her divorce and calling her a traitor isn’t respect.

I guess that means my opinion is valid again, huh?

Funny, I thought Libs were for free speech. Why are you denying people the right to speak?

but your opinion has little value because you are unwilling to back it with actions.

Then if that’s the measure, isn’t your opinion just as invalid? After all, you’re not willing to back it with actions.

You’re just like a little brother who taunts a bully, knowing that your big brother will end up having to take the punches.

It would therefore be instructive to poll those who serve to see exactly what that opinion is and whether the Left would then accept the results.