August 27, 2005


Despite heavy coverage, nation's press strangely reluctant to report all she says (David Koppel, August 27, 2005, Rocky Mountain News)

Cindy Sheehan claims the media are "a propaganda tool for the government." A New York Post editorial (Aug. 16) argued that Sheehan's statement was self-evidently false, given the overwhelming and almost exclusively positive media attention paid to her in the last several weeks. But in a broader sense, Sheehan has a point: Almost all the news stories and columns in Denver dailies, like the vast majority of the rest of the mainstream media, have failed to inform their readers about what Sheehan really thinks.

The night before Sheehan began her Crawford, Texas, vigil, she spoke at the convention of Veterans for Peace (transcript at told the crowd about a sympathetic e-mailer who warned that her profanity offended "people on the fence."

In reply, she argued that anyone who supports the war should "get your a-- over to Iraq." Everyone against the war should "stand up and speak out. But whatever side you fall on, quit being on the fence . . . we have to get this country off their butts."

In other words, Sheehan's use of inflammatory rhetoric is an important part of her communication strategy. Yet even as the mainstream media has fawned over her campout, it has neutered her message, refusing to print her statements which are intended to get people off the fence.

For example, on Aug. 16, Sheehan held a media conference call during which she declared "The person who killed my son, I have no animosity for that person at all." Yet her statement was reported only in the National Review Online weblog. In an interview with Mark Knoller of CBS News, she explained that the foreigners who have to come to Iraq to battle the U.S. military are "freedom fighters." (Video at the anti-war Web site dc.indymedia. org/usermedia/video/2/cindyon Conversely, she described last January's vote in Iraq as a "sham election," in her Tuesday entry on her weblog on Michael Moore's Web site (http:// index.php?id=465).

Sheehan hopes that her strong words will get people off the fence, yet the mainstream media fails to report them.

In fairness, the media has to have something to entertain them in Crawford and when they report her views her 15 minutes are over.

Posted by Orrin Judd at August 27, 2005 4:24 PM

[Sheehan] argued that anyone who supports the war should "get your a-- over to Iraq."

Yes, everyone should personally attend to that which they support.

Anyone who supports good food should get into a kitchen.

Anyone who supports a quality education should get in front of a classroom.

Anyone who supports good medical care should get into medical school.

Adam Smith covered this idiotic argument about 230 years ago.

Posted by: Michael Herdegen [TypeKey Profile Page] at August 27, 2005 4:38 PM

All else having failed, the left's riposte du jour seems to be that if you support the WoT, you should get your posterior over to Iraq.

Oh the humanity!

The once proud liberal know-it-all reduced to the equivalent of and your mother wears combat boots. So sad.

Posted by: erp at August 28, 2005 8:27 AM