|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cindy's single soon [message #56672 is a reply to message #56668] |
Tue, 16 August 2005 07:44   |
 |
Wayne Parham
Messages: 18738
Registered: January 2001
|
Illuminati (33rd Degree) |
|
|
Sorry, John, but I just don't buy it. The associations she has made aren't hard to follow. It isn't as if she were involved with CompassioanteFriends.org, or some other group that supports grieving parents. She's chosen to make her associations with those that are politically inclined. So one might observe that her actions aren't those of a grieving mother, but instead are politically motivated.If this were truly a grass roots effort, I think she could have started her own website, done her own thing. But that's not what happened. Liberally motivated journalists took the ball and ran with it, creating MeetWithCindy.org and probably everything else that's gotten recent attention in the press. You're smart enough to see this for what it is. Regardless of your political leanings, the actions and timeframe of this are pretty obvious. I'm sure she grieved the loss of her son, it's not like I think she's heartless. It's just that this is much more than a grieving parent, this is an organized political media event.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cindy's single soon [message #56673 is a reply to message #56672] |
Tue, 16 August 2005 09:27 |
Manualblock
Messages: 4973
Registered: May 2009
|
Illuminati (13th Degree) |
|
|
Well; thats the point and I never denied that. Of course it is a media event and that is how she wanted it. And the sacrifice of her son grants her the legitamicy to persue her opposition to the war in any way she chooses. If she chooses to shine a light on this to maybe help end the war that is an honest approach to fulfilling her responsibilities as a mother. I don't get the concept that there is a proper way to express your anger at the useless death of your child. You express that as forcefully and noticeably as possible. And if the media wants to join in and support her anger so much the better. She has every right to do this any way she chooses because she made the sacrifice that gives her that right.
Your contention that somehow she should behave in a special way that doesn't put light on the issue is just unbeleivable to me.Allow me an indiscrection;
I think if it was my son and people told me how I should act and who I should associate with so as not to violate some phanthom code of ethics they made up, I would explain to them firmly to shut the fuck up and stay out of my business. As apparently she has done.
I just don't get people thinking they have some standing that permitts them telling her how she should have treated his death and why she is behaving improperly. And that scares me that anyone would appropriate that right for themselves.
I say this forcefully because I am absolutely unable to understand where she loses her rights because cameras follow her and Micheal More takes an interest in her story. What does one have to do with the other??
It's almost the same principal invoked in the Schiavo case; that somehow the way people behave at death should be defined by others who know nothing of the situation and have no standing whatsoever.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cindy's single soon [message #56674 is a reply to message #56673] |
Tue, 16 August 2005 10:19 |
|
Wayne Parham
Messages: 18738
Registered: January 2001
|
Illuminati (33rd Degree) |
|
|
Ok, so but then that makes her a political activist who has exploited her fallen son to make her case. Her son wasn't forced into the service, he joined voluntarily. So there is reason to believe he wanted to be there. She has put her own interests, and those she's speaking for, in front of her son and the rest of her family. And making a political issue out of it gives political opponents reason to challenge her.You mentioned the Schiavo case, and I agree with you. That was a personal matter, best left to the families involved. No one else had intimate knowledge of the situation and probably shouldn't have offered their opinions about it. But the political pundits came in and used it for propoganda. When people bring these kinds of things out into the public, the tone of discussions always gets out of hand. The gossip columns take advantage of the situation to have something to talk about, and political propogandists try to find angles to exploit. The still silent voice is the only one that is reasonable, but it is always completely overwhelmed by the noise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Get a T-Shirt!
