<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Sheehan Vindicated</title>
	<atom:link href="http://donklephant.com/2006/02/02/sheehan-vindicated/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://donklephant.com/2006/02/02/sheehan-vindicated/</link>
	<description>Big Teeth. Huge Ass. Surprisingly Reasonable.</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 08:35:01 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Beading Necklace</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2006/02/02/sheehan-vindicated/#comment-10393</link>
		<dc:creator>Beading Necklace</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2006 16:48:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/2006/02/02/sheehan-vindicated/#comment-10393</guid>
		<description>Introducing - Beading for Beginners an eBook that teaches you the
Quick &#38; Easy Steps to begin beading Like a veteran!
At Last, there's a fast, easy and convenient way for you to learn to bead!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Introducing - Beading for Beginners an eBook that teaches you the<br />
Quick &amp; Easy Steps to begin beading Like a veteran!<br />
At Last, there&#8217;s a fast, easy and convenient way for you to learn to bead!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Meredith</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2006/02/02/sheehan-vindicated/#comment-6105</link>
		<dc:creator>Meredith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2006 19:54:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/2006/02/02/sheehan-vindicated/#comment-6105</guid>
		<description>Chris, while I agree with some of what you stated about Sheehan (I don't really like her either, even though I'm a flaming liberal - surprise!), I am always concerned about constitutional issues, and an if the arrest was illegal, I don't care who it is, it needs to be remedied.  We have to follow these rules that our criminal justice system is based on, or it won't work.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Chris, while I agree with some of what you stated about Sheehan (I don&#8217;t really like her either, even though I&#8217;m a flaming liberal - surprise!), I am always concerned about constitutional issues, and an if the arrest was illegal, I don&#8217;t care who it is, it needs to be remedied.  We have to follow these rules that our criminal justice system is based on, or it won&#8217;t work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris P.</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2006/02/02/sheehan-vindicated/#comment-6040</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris P.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2006 22:57:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/2006/02/02/sheehan-vindicated/#comment-6040</guid>
		<description>I don't care *what* happens to Cindy Sheehan at this point, and I'll explain why because I don't feel as though this was ever portrayed accurately or fairly through media outlets.

Personally, I would never make the choice to enter the military. However, many thousands of individuals have voluntarily chosen to serve our country in this capacity, and based on my own experiences, they all share a powerful commonality. The thread that binds these people is that they feel very strongly about the stated goals of the military as well as the actions required to accomplish these goals. On more than one occasion, I've heard members speak with a certain tone of honor in their voice regarding time they spent in Iraq or on other military initiatives. While I personally may sit back and disagree with the operation as a whole, I cannot disagree with or question the conviction of these individuals.

Why do I mention all this? Cindy Sheehan's son was one of these individuals. Based on the history and socio-economic status of the Sheehan family (as well as Cindy's subsequent actions), I feel as though I can get a pretty good bead on Cindy's character and her emotions regarding her son's enrollment in the military. First, I think that she *absolutely* disagreed with her son's decision from the onset. Further, I think that her disagreement manifested itself in the form of fear - she feared (and obviously rightly so) that harm may come to her son as a result of his military involvement. Second, I believe that after her son's death, she adopted this attitude of "I *knew* it!" The resulting anti-Bush, anti-Iraq rampage was merely the result of her feeling both jilted and shortchanged thanks to her son's decision to join a cause that she simply did not support.

Frankly, I think it's embarrassingly selfish of Mrs. Sheehan to react in this way, and I am dismayed that the media ate it up like they did. Then again, that type of thing is to be expected when these outlets are so predominantly leftist by nature. Regardless, I encourage those of you who would rush to support Cindy Sheehan simply because you disagree with Bush, Iraq, or likely both, to rethink your position. I, for one, feel confident that Cindy's son would be embarrassed and angered at his mother's actions. Simply put, I think it's sad that she refused to support her son in life, and it's just that much worse that she refused to support him in death. I appreciate her son's commitment to this country, and I also appreciate the work that our military does - regardless of whether or not I agree with the specific initiatives.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t care *what* happens to Cindy Sheehan at this point, and I&#8217;ll explain why because I don&#8217;t feel as though this was ever portrayed accurately or fairly through media outlets.</p>
<p>Personally, I would never make the choice to enter the military. However, many thousands of individuals have voluntarily chosen to serve our country in this capacity, and based on my own experiences, they all share a powerful commonality. The thread that binds these people is that they feel very strongly about the stated goals of the military as well as the actions required to accomplish these goals. On more than one occasion, I&#8217;ve heard members speak with a certain tone of honor in their voice regarding time they spent in Iraq or on other military initiatives. While I personally may sit back and disagree with the operation as a whole, I cannot disagree with or question the conviction of these individuals.</p>
<p>Why do I mention all this? Cindy Sheehan&#8217;s son was one of these individuals. Based on the history and socio-economic status of the Sheehan family (as well as Cindy&#8217;s subsequent actions), I feel as though I can get a pretty good bead on Cindy&#8217;s character and her emotions regarding her son&#8217;s enrollment in the military. First, I think that she *absolutely* disagreed with her son&#8217;s decision from the onset. Further, I think that her disagreement manifested itself in the form of fear - she feared (and obviously rightly so) that harm may come to her son as a result of his military involvement. Second, I believe that after her son&#8217;s death, she adopted this attitude of &#8220;I *knew* it!&#8221; The resulting anti-Bush, anti-Iraq rampage was merely the result of her feeling both jilted and shortchanged thanks to her son&#8217;s decision to join a cause that she simply did not support.</p>
<p>Frankly, I think it&#8217;s embarrassingly selfish of Mrs. Sheehan to react in this way, and I am dismayed that the media ate it up like they did. Then again, that type of thing is to be expected when these outlets are so predominantly leftist by nature. Regardless, I encourage those of you who would rush to support Cindy Sheehan simply because you disagree with Bush, Iraq, or likely both, to rethink your position. I, for one, feel confident that Cindy&#8217;s son would be embarrassed and angered at his mother&#8217;s actions. Simply put, I think it&#8217;s sad that she refused to support her son in life, and it&#8217;s just that much worse that she refused to support him in death. I appreciate her son&#8217;s commitment to this country, and I also appreciate the work that our military does - regardless of whether or not I agree with the specific initiatives.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joshua</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2006/02/02/sheehan-vindicated/#comment-6005</link>
		<dc:creator>Joshua</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2006 21:54:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/2006/02/02/sheehan-vindicated/#comment-6005</guid>
		<description>Free speech aside, before the news that the arrests were mistaken, they both struck me as really odd. First, you'd think President Bush would &lt;b&gt;welcome&lt;/b&gt; this sort of thing from Sheehan. The more she makes a fool of herself, the more it helps Bush. And why on earth would they have the Capitol Police eject someone else for wearing a shirt &lt;b&gt;supporting&lt;/b&gt; the troops? I would have been surprised if it all &lt;b&gt;hadn't&lt;/b&gt; turned out to be a misunderstanding.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Free speech aside, before the news that the arrests were mistaken, they both struck me as really odd. First, you&#8217;d think President Bush would <b>welcome</b> this sort of thing from Sheehan. The more she makes a fool of herself, the more it helps Bush. And why on earth would they have the Capitol Police eject someone else for wearing a shirt <b>supporting</b> the troops? I would have been surprised if it all <b>hadn&#8217;t</b> turned out to be a misunderstanding.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Meredith</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2006/02/02/sheehan-vindicated/#comment-5989</link>
		<dc:creator>Meredith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2006 16:41:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/2006/02/02/sheehan-vindicated/#comment-5989</guid>
		<description>Oh, that's OK.  No need to apologize.  I was just wondering about the legality of the arrest.  The stuff you quoted is interesting because I bet you these gals are going to sue for false arrest and anything else they can - or at least CS will.  

Of course it was a good faith belief.  I'm sure that capitol police are confused about the laws pertaining to demonstrating at the capitol since that rarely ever happens.  So, it was an "old unwritten interpretation"?  Translation:  They made it up.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, that&#8217;s OK.  No need to apologize.  I was just wondering about the legality of the arrest.  The stuff you quoted is interesting because I bet you these gals are going to sue for false arrest and anything else they can - or at least CS will.  </p>
<p>Of course it was a good faith belief.  I&#8217;m sure that capitol police are confused about the laws pertaining to demonstrating at the capitol since that rarely ever happens.  So, it was an &#8220;old unwritten interpretation&#8221;?  Translation:  They made it up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.491 seconds -->
