Run, Cindy Sheehan, Run!

Monte Smith · February-8th-2006, 03:27 PM

Don't listen to the Democrats in power, Cindy. They're sellouts. You are the spark the universe has chosen. Run!

Boxer urges Sheehan to not challenge Feinstein
by Zachary Coile
San Francisco Chronicle
Tuesday, February 7, 2006

Washington -- California Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer today urged anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan not to challenge the state's senior senator, Dianne Feinstein, in the June Democratic primary.

Sheehan, whose son was killed in Iraq, has been actively considering a campaign after criticizing Feinstein for refusing to call for an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.

But Boxer, a liberal former Marin County supervisor who strongly opposed the war in Iraq, said Sheehan might actually hurt her anti-war cause by jumping into the race against her fellow Democrat who is entering her 14th year in the Senate.

"I don't think having her in the Senate election helps her at all," Boxer told a roundtable of California reporters this morning. "I think it might have the opposite effect."

"Maybe she's more valuable out there not as a candidate," Boxer said of Sheehan and her anti-war effort

Feinstein and Boxer were both elected to the U.S. Senate in 1992 - the "Year of the Woman" in national politics - but they have not always seen eye-to-eye on issues. Feinstein voted for the 2002 resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq if the country refused to comply with U.N. weapons inspectors, while Boxer was one of 23 senators who voted against it.

But Boxer defended her Senate colleague today, saying Feinstein has been a critic of the administration's war policies and favors withdrawing troops as soon as possible.

"Sen. Feinstein and I are very involved in trying to figure out a way to get the troops back," she said.

Sheehan, who was arrested and removed from President Bush's State of the Union speech last week for wearing an anti-war T-shirt, spent part of her time in Washington asking Democratic lawmakers, including Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Oakland, whether she should run for the Senate. A former Vacaville resident who now lives in Berkeley, she told the Chronicle she was leaning toward entering the race.

"What I hope to do with it would be to energize other anti-war candidates," Sheehan said in an interview before the State of the Union speech. "If I entered it, it would bring attention to the fact that there are many, many races where pro-peace, anti-war candidates are running."

Tanager · February-8th-2006, 03:35 PM

If you're going to run for an office with a six-year term, you should have serious positions about other issues as well. Maybe that's just me. I agree that she probably best serves her case by staying an activist, rather than running for office.

Monte Smith · February-8th-2006, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tanager

I agree that she probably best serves her case by staying an activist, rather than running for office.

Yeah, but think how smart her t-shirts will look in the well of the Senate.

groover · February-8th-2006, 03:47 PM

Would you place a bet on her to win, Monte?

Monte Smith · February-8th-2006, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by groover

Would you place a bet on her to win, Monte?

No.

groover · February-8th-2006, 03:52 PM

I don't think she really cares if she wins, as long as she keeps her cause in the media.

Tanager · February-8th-2006, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by groover

I don't think she really cares if she wins, as long as she keeps her cause in the media.

I'd like to think she's smart enough to know she has no chance in hell of winning.

Solo Jazz · February-8th-2006, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tanager

If you're going to run for an office with a six-year term, you should have serious positions about other issues as well. Maybe that's just me. I agree that she probably best serves her case by staying an activist, rather than running for office.

True DAT!

From what I know of Ms Sheehan she is rather one-demensional (albeit, one hell of a demension).

I won't speculate as to the reason(s) behind Ms. Sheehan's consideration of running for public office. I will venture to say, if she runs, there's a good chance she could WIN; stranger things have happened in politics!

...that is all...

patricia · February-8th-2006, 04:14 PM

Just throwing her hat in the ring is more than most of her critics will do.

No, I don't think she has a chance of winning, probably because her central cause is so dividing.

BUT how is her running different than Ralph Nader's running in '00 and in '04?
Nader knew he wouldn't win, said so many times, but ran because he actually had a radically different agenda than either of the front-runners.

I say good for her, on the one hand and oh dear on the other.

Monte Smith · February-8th-2006, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patricia

BUT how is her running from Ralph Nader's running in '00 and in '04?

Christ Almighty, I couldn't have said it better myself!

Nader '08!

patricia · February-8th-2006, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monte Smith

Christ Almighty, I couldn't have said it better myself!

Nader '08!

I actually meant to post "How is her running different from Ralph Nader's running in '00 and '04?"

I've edited to reflect that.

Somebody should tell Ralph Nader, so he will listen, that now is not the time to introduce a third party, which at this stage simply splits the vote as Monte so gleefully suggested.

Monte Smith · February-8th-2006, 04:39 PM

I didn't even notice your error, patricia, and assumed the meaning you intended.

Unfortunately, if Cindy Sheehan runs for Senate in California, she cannot be as direct a threat to the Democrats as Ralph Nader running nationally. And Ralph Nader is a pretty puny threat. She can only directly affect one state race. But I share the enthusiasm of Cindy's supporters--a Senate bid would allow Cindy Sheehan an unprecedented opportunity to thump her cause. That thumping would resound in the races nationally, with predictably good results for Republicans.

jesus marion joseph · February-8th-2006, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patricia

BUT how is her running different than Ralph Nader's running in '00 and in '04?

Nader actually has at least a modicum of political experience that is directly applicable to running a senate office. My suggestion would be for her to wait and run against Boxer. Feinstein is a thoughtful, smart senator whom I admire even though I don't always agree with her. Boxer strikes me as one of those oily, smarmy, career politicians. Maybe it's the Robert Mitchum eyelids.

Dr Dave · February-8th-2006, 05:54 PM

Ah, California. Government of the people, by media celebrities, for the monied classes...

Scott Dolan · February-8th-2006, 06:26 PM

I agree with partica and Monte. Nader should run again in '08.

Gordon B · February-8th-2006, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by groover

I don't think she really cares if she wins, as long as she keeps her cause in the media.

I don't think she really cares if she wins, as long as she keeps her name in the media.

Monte Smith · February-8th-2006, 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gordon B

I don't think she really cares if she wins, as long as she keeps her name in the media.

She's already won the highest office she will ever hold: Commander-in-Grief.

groover · February-8th-2006, 10:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Dolan

I agree with partica and Monte. Nader should run again in '08.

Great, if you can only get the Republicans to nominate him!

Scott Dolan · February-8th-2006, 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monte Smith

She's already won the highest office she will ever hold: Commander-in-Grief.

Hahahaha...........

bluenoter · February-8th-2006, 11:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monte Smith

She's already won the highest office she will ever hold: Commander-in-Grief.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Dolan

Hahahaha...........

I know there must be some reason to make fun of someone's response to having her son die in battle, but I don't know what it is.

patricia · February-8th-2006, 11:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluenoter

I know there must be some reason to make fun of someone's response to having her son die in battle, but I don't know what it is.

Exactly my feeling bn.
I don't know whether I think Sheehan has a chance to win, running for public office, but laughing at her is really cruel.

Considering Scott and Monte both have children I wonder why they can't relate to her pain.
I know that losing either one of my children, for nothing, would destroy me.
At least Cindy Sheehan chose to attempt to stop the slaughter of other mother's kids.
At least she did that, instead of grieving alone as I would probably have done, raging at the injustice of it.

Scott Dolan · February-9th-2006, 01:03 AM

Please..............

Reacting to pain?

Um........yeah.

Her lovefest in South America was all about the pain, baby.

If you lovely ladies want to buy into her horseshit, feel free.

The rest of us will accept it for what it is.

Scott Dolan · February-9th-2006, 01:06 AM

particia and Rita,

What was the point in her going down to huggypoo with Chavez?

RedJazz · February-9th-2006, 02:15 AM

Sheehan's decision to run is encouraging. Nevertheless, it is not unproblematic. For example, what happens after she loses (which frankly, will probably be the case)? Does she then end up supporting Feinstein in the general election? If that is the case how does that forward an antiwar, social justice agenda or move forward any attempts to reform the Democratic Party (which I think is unlikely in any event)?

Even if she wins the primary (which I think is unlikely in the extreme), how then does that advance an antiwar social justice agenda and also help to reform the Democratic Party? The Party at the Congressional level is not simply in total disarray, but it reveals day after day in vote after vote that it is entirely unresponsive to its own base.

Just look at one thing (I could pick several). The failure to filibuster the Ailito nomination. The whole issue of Supreme Court nominations was supposed to be the backbone and absolute bottom line of a so-called lesser evil strategy - the whole rationale for the Democratic Party left to support the Party rather than take an independent course. And what did the Party leaders do but thumb their nose at their own base. There is instance after instance of this.

Nevertheless, I am encouraged by Sheehan's efforts. This sort of thing and the so far effective organizing efforts of PDA are probably necessary preliminary efforts in creating a Party that truely represents the vast majority (which I don't think will be a reformed Democratic Party).

Gordon B · February-9th-2006, 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Dolan

particia and Rita,

What was the point in her going down to huggypoo with Chavez?

Patricia and Rita, suppose a member of the Worldwide Church of God lost a son in war and then went around the country calling John Kerry a sinner and anti-war folk traitors. Then this person challenged Arlen Spector in a primary. Would you defend her against attacks/ridicule from liberals?

My view is that every public figure it fair game. There are no exceptions. Rita you never gave your views on Sheehan when she said that Clinton was responsible for more deaths in Iraq than Bush and should have been thrown out of office.

Scott Dolan · February-9th-2006, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedJazz

Sheehan's decision to run is encouraging.

I agree. She will be trounced and humiliated thus bringing her Lunar World Tour to its disappointing conclusion.

Quote:

Even if she wins the primary (which I think is unlikely in the extreme), how then does that advance an antiwar social justice agenda and also help to reform the Democratic Party?

Well, what is likely in the extreme is that this loon would even have the slightest clue about how the Senate works, and how she will be able to work within it. She would eb dealing with some extremely established career politicians who would make her the laughing stock of the Senate floor.

But, it would definitely be a boon for C-SPAN2.

bluenoter · February-9th-2006, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gordon B

My view is that every public figure it fair game. There are no exceptions. Rita you never gave your views on Sheehan when she said that Clinton was responsible for more deaths in Iraq than Bush and should have been thrown out of office.

Of course she's "fair game," but that doesn't mean that making fun of her grieving itself will seem anything other than repugnant to me.

Without looking back through this thread (or any related thread), I don't believe I gave my views on anything about her.

moneyp · February-9th-2006, 01:01 PM

I don't know why she would want to push out Feinstein, who is one of the most outspoken Dems in the Senate. You would think this is the kind of person that Sheehan would want representing her.

Scott Dolan · February-9th-2006, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluenoter

Of course she's "fair game," but that doesn't mean that making fun of her grieving itself will seem anything other than repugnant to me.

I can see how you would have interpretted it that way, but when I say grief, I mean what she has bestowed upon the American public.

She has every right to grieve. But her Looner Showboat World Tour is a fucking disgrace and her recent stop south of the equator truly exposed her idiotic agenda. And it has little to do with the war in Iraq.

Scott Dolan · February-9th-2006, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mone peterson

I don't know why she would want to push out Feinstein, who is one of the most outspoken Dems in the Senate. You would think this is the kind of person that Sheehan would want representing her.

I'm rather ambiguous when it comes to Feinstein. She's not the brightest Senator out there, but she is outspoken, and does know her shit.

I'd love to see the Looner Rover run against her. Feinstein would fucking squash that little irritant.