This is just a short diary, nothing major really.
I wanted to put down my thoughts about what I feel towards Cindy Sheehan.
First, just to get it out of the way, I disagree with her most recent stance, both her view of the Democratic Party and her idea of running against Nancy Pelosi if impeachment is not put "back on the table." This is not to say I am happy with the Democratic Party -- I have stated here I was extremely unhappy with the capitulation on the Iraq supplemental, I thought it was a failure on the part of my party and the messaging on it was just plain awful. And I am also in strong disagreement with Pelosi's statement that impeachment was "off the table." I don't think there was any reason for her to say anything at all about impeachment at that time.
But whether Cindy was making her statement for shock value, to move the national conversation to the left, to garner more exposure for the notion of impeachment, or whatever other reason, I disagree with her characterization of my party and with her strategy.
That's all. I disagree. And I agree that if she does run against a Democrat as a third party candidate, it is a no-brainer that a Democratic blog like Daily Kos should not support her.
Okay, now I have that out of the way.
I strongly oppose, however, the personal characterizations made about Cindy Sheehan since she wrote that controversial diary. Calling her nuts, calling her an attention whore, smearing her personally, nope, I don't buy any of that. I don't care if she made a lot of folks angry. That anger did not have to be expressed as personal insults. There is simply no justification for that.
This woman lost a son to the War in Iraq. She managed to get attention paid to the anti-war movement when hundreds of thousands of us could not. Her accomplishment is a great one. And the very least we can do is honor that, and her.
What is gained by expressing anger in a manner which smears her character? Because I do understand the anger; just not the expression of that when it comes to name-calling.
What is gained by disrespecting another human being in this fashion? I'd really like to know.
I don't have a problem with disrespecting George Bush, Dick Cheney, Alberto Gonzales, that whole crew. They are in power, they are directly affecting all of our lives here in America and their policies are responsible for an unbearable number of deaths both in Iraq and around the world. Scorn and disrespect is, I feel, a natural consequence of their own actions. So I'm not always against the use of those destructive forms of anger.
But when it comes to Cindy Sheehan, I am very much against it. She is not in power. She has not killed anyone. She is no threat to any of us.
I also do not think she should be banned, although that may have already happened. If she has not been banned, she should be dealt with respectfully when she posts here. Not agreed with, but treated as a human being. It is possible to strongly disagree without smearing someone's character and making personal insults.
I cannot imagine what it is like to have lost a child to war. I won't even try. I am not going to sit in judgment on Cindy Sheehan insofar as her character, her sanity, or her virtue. I will strongly disagree with her positions. But I don't think anyone has the right to use their anger, justifiably or not, to insult her. She deserves at least that much.