The whole Cindy Sheehan phenomenon is one of the most blatant examples of liberal media bias to date. She was the darling of the MSM when she was a grieving mother attacking that horrible George W. Bush. However, once she began taking Dems to task as well, she became the red-headed step-child of the MSM. She actually took 17% of the votes in her bid to unseat Nancy Pelosi.

Please note: I ALWAYS acknowledged that Sheehan's criticisms of the evil Bush were driven primarilly by grief. I also pointed out that while I think she enjoyed the attention she received from the left - that her motivations went way beyond that.

I commented on her extensively, and if Hans was lurking about he could easily prove that I have consistently cut her a LOT of slack and my ultimate conclusion regarding her motivations was one of, ahem, integrity - she vehemently disagreed with decisions made; lost the child of her womb in the process, and then dedicated herself to 'righting the wrong' even to the extent of estranging herself from her family.

Her drawbacks are two-fold:

1. Hygiene - enough said

2. Her rhetoric - she's WAY too conspiratorial with her comments to be taken seriously.

Nevertheless - she took 17% of the votes in her senatorial bid against a politial machine (Pelosi) that SHOULD be untouchable in the SanFran area.

I point out my positive assessments of Cindy Sheehan for one reason - Lefties on this site practically orgasm when a hated conservative makes a public statement that they agree with. When it happens, it is plastered all over this blog.

"Newt Gingrich disagrees with Bush regarding x!!!!!"

I am NOT trying to play 'gotcha' with this thread.

I am hoping that a few of this site's honest lefties will chime-in.

Here's hoping...

"I point out my positive assessments of Cindy Sheehan for one reason - Lefties on this site practically orgasm when a hated conservative makes a public statement that they agree with. "

You should point out the positive assessment of any situation because it's the fair and honest thing to do.

What others think is immaterial. ; )

Sheehan is a goof ball but she did prove that the democrat party isn't as strong as they think.

If the democrat party continues like they have, doing nothing, they will be another short lived one term and out.

Congress will begin to swing the other way next term for their lack of caring and work to help the American worker.

Good I say, the democrat congress is a waste of our money.

MW - yes, she is a goofball. Nevertheless, her goofiness is no explanation for the media's about-face regarding her coverage.

Yes it is, the media is owned by a few elites and if they don't like you .......... you don't make the headlines.

Pelosi always helps those elites so she still gets the nod.

Yes it is, the media is owned by a few elites and if they don't like you .......... you don't make the headlines.

Pelosi always helps those elites so she still gets the nod.

#6 | Posted by moneywar

For the most part, I agree. However, how do you reconcile her lionization by the media when she was taking on one elite - Bush..with her non-existant coverage of taking on another elite - Pelosi?

It's bad enough this poor woman lost her son, but maybe the media were doing her a favor keeping her nuttiness out of the spotlight. I think she had the unintended effect of making the anti-war people (like me) seem like John and Yoko doing a bed-in for peace.

so cindy how you like the real world-you have jus realized that you were used as a antibush(rep) tool
you have outlived your usefulness and are now to be ignored
jasman

Nancy Pelosi wass one of the most powerful members of Congress and Cindy Sheehan was a one-issue mother of a deceased soldier. The media paid plenty of attention to her when her story was fresh and when it was relevant to events. She was never a serious candidate for Congress and she was treated as such. Now Jeff wants to pretend that it was somehow an obligation of the more liberal parts of the media to pay attention to her or else be called hypocrits....just nonsense. Contrived controversy.
I had great sympathy for Cindy Sheehan but she needs to realize her fifteen minutes expired a long time ago.

Now Jeff wants to pretend that it was somehow an obligation of the more liberal parts of the media to pay attention to her or else be called hypocrits....just nonsense.

LOL. The left gets Plumbered (as in "Joe the") and they don't like it.

Without a hand to turn it a screw driver is just a tool.

For the most part, I agree. However, how do you reconcile her lionization by the media when she was taking on one elite - Bush..with her non-existant coverage of taking on another elite - Pelosi?

With her attacking Dubya, there was little that she could do aside from raise a stink. Furthermore, she was a divisive character and the Elite always love someone who will divide.

However, the second she could potentially be given a platform to work as an agent for real change, she was pushed out into the dark. Pelosi is a gatekeeper for the elite just as much as Dubya was.

Now Jeff wants to pretend that it was somehow an obligation of the more liberal parts of the media to pay attention to her or else be called hypocrits....just nonsense. Contrived controversy.

What's nonsense is that Democrats had any intention of ever ending these wars in the Middle East. Cindy was a useful tool for pulling votes away from Republicans. Once she threatened the Democrat status quo, she had to go.

#10 - Well said, Danni.

#14 - Iraqi, I'm no blind partisan and am as frustrated as anyone that we really don't seem to be moving toward cessation of hostilities. The political/military/business machine doesn't just turn off when Washington switches parties, for sure. But Sheehan a threat to the Democrat status quo and "had to go?" I guess I'm just not that conspiracy-minded.

Cindy stopped getting coverage because she didn't warrant it.

2. Her rhetoric - she's WAY too conspiratorial with her comments to be taken seriously.

#1 | Posted by JeffJ

Exactly what I said about nancy.

Iraqi, I'm no blind partisan and am as frustrated as anyone that we really don't seem to be moving toward cessation of hostilities. The political/military/business machine doesn't just turn off when Washington switches parties, for sure. But Sheehan a threat to the Democrat status quo and "had to go?" I guess I'm just not that conspiracy-minded.

Cindy stopped getting coverage because she didn't warrant it.

Why doesn't someone who draws 20 percent from a supposed rock solid incumbent with zero media exposure warrant coverage? If Sheehan were given the coverage she should have been, she could have raised significantly more funds to conduct an aggressive campaign and could have pressured Pelosi into a debate, where she would have destroyed Pelosi on issues that resonate with her liberal constituency.

"Media shut me out for opposing (The LIAR) Polosi".

ISN'T THIS THE TYPICAL LIBERAL SCUM BAG DOUBLE STANDARD THAT WE HAVE TO LIVE WITH.

I like to hear you liberal ASSHOLES defend this, DANNI, SANOBAMA, DOCDICKHEAD, HERB etc.

It is indefensible Oozie. Simply indefensible. Now go back to sleep.

How much press did Sheehan deserve for a race she was so unlikely to win? Gadfly candidacies rarely get a lot of press attention unless they're running against an officeholder who is polling badly.

This interview makes Sheehan seem hopelessly naive. She didn't get a lot of press because she didn't mount a credible campaign against Pelosi. I know there's a Catch-22 here, where you can't mount a credible campaign unless you get more press, but that's how the game is played. The media has never taken low-polling outsiders seriously in Congressional races.

How much press did Sheehan deserve for a race she was so unlikely to win?

At least as much if not more than Joe the Plumber I would say. A gadly running for office deserves more coverage than a your common household gadfly, IMO.

What happened to "Fair Play" or "Equal Time"?

Yes I know it isn't in the LIBERAL PLAY BOOK.

PS: SANOBAMA are you still on welfare?

Who wudda thunk Oozie would be a fan of The Fairness Doctrine?

The liberal media rode the Sheehan horse until she shit in their living room and then they cut her loose.

Then they attacked a plumber from Ohio.

AH TOO BAD CINDY

welcome to the new american media

pravda revisited

How much press did Sheehan deserve for a race she was so unlikely to win? Gadfly candidacies rarely get a lot of press attention unless they're running against an officeholder who is polling badly.

She had 20 percent against an alleged bulletproof candidate. Congressional approval ratings at the time that Sheehan was mounting her campaign were in the low teens.

This interview makes Sheehan seem hopelessly naive. She didn't get a lot of press because she didn't mount a credible campaign against Pelosi. I know there's a Catch-22 here, where you can't mount a credible campaign unless you get more press, but that's how the game is played. The media has never taken low-polling outsiders seriously in Congressional races.

Sheehan raised 4X as much money as the previous opponent to Pelosi. Sheehan had a message that resonates with Pelosi's constituency better than Pelosi does. Had Sheehan been given a fraction of her deserved campaign publicity (or God forbid, were allowed by our masters to debate Pelosi), she would have easily given Pelosi a run for her money.

maybe she and nader can join forces.
he got fucked by dems too

of course these days ALL OF US are being fucked by dems..

oh...oh....what a great segue

We are only being fucked by the Dems now because we are tired of fighting after years of being raped by Repubs.

We are only being fucked by the Dems now because we are tired of fighting after years of being raped by Repubs.

DEMOCRATS IN 2008 - SAME HOLE, NEW DICK!

oh...oh....what a great segue

#27 | Posted by afkabl2

So SEGUE you actually spell right?

Anybody else ever wonder if Pelosi supporters were secretly behind Sheehan's run so Madame Pelosi would look like the lesser of two evils?

Cindy who?

Had Sheehan been given a fraction of her deserved campaign publicity (or God forbid, were allowed by our masters to debate Pelosi), she would have easily given Pelosi a run for her money.

I agree that she deserved a debate, and had I been the editor of the San Francisco papers I would've covered her more than it seems they did. I like gadfly candidacies and cover them here.

But I don't see Sheehan beating Pelosi even if she got Joe the Plumber-level press attention. She's an abrasive, unhappy and polarizing figure whose family woes would have made her a punching bag in a serious race. Democrats weren't going to kick out the House speaker in a historic Democratic election.

DEMOCRATS IN 2008 - SAME HOLE, NEW DICK!

#29 | Posted by IraqiBukkake at 2009-06-03 11:54

so why is it that I got a little scared when reading this...

Anybody else ever wonder if Pelosi supporters were secretly behind Sheehan's run so Madame Pelosi would look like the lesser of two evils?

#31 | Posted by Gimme_a_Scotch at 2009

VERRRRRRRRRYYY INTERESSSSSSSSSTING

cue the x files music

Pelousy never wants to appear as the lesser of anything.

Pelosi is part of the problem, like every Democrat and Republican that needs propaganda dollars for the worlds only totally privatized communication systems.

The whole Cindy Sheehan phenomenon is one of the most blatant examples of liberal media bias to date.

The evanjihadist Terri Schiavo freakshow made Cindi Sheehan's campaign look like a lamp post. I don't remember Congress or the President calling a special session just to say Cindi walks and sings show tunes when nobody is looking. I don't remember FOX interviewing little girls dragged to a vigil by thier parents who wanted to give Cindi a drink of water.

Cindi was a voice against the war that was superseded when Obama was nominated. The NOPpers were pro stay the course/ Bush is a genius and the elected Dems were trying to decide what the fuck they thought at a time when the reality of the Iraq clusterfuck was becoming clear to everybody outside a FOX studio.

IF the NOPppers have a brain fart and nominate the Newtster, Daddy Rush will no longer get the media coverage he gets now. The media is lazy, thye go where the soundbite is.

But I don't see Sheehan beating Pelosi even if she got Joe the Plumber-level press attention. She's an abrasive, unhappy and polarizing figure whose family woes would have made her a punching bag in a serious race. Democrats weren't going to kick out the House speaker in a historic Democratic election.

We see the way Pelosi has handled the torture business. She isn't very smart. Sheehan would have handled her easily. Personal attacks would look petty if Pelosi were confronted and she dodged on the issues.

Your last sentence is the important one. The party should not be the ones deciding who wins and loses. The media should not be deciding who wins and loses. That should be decided by the people of the 8th district. The "news" should report that information in an adequate manner that allows the people to make an informed decision.

M O R O N.. why anyone would continue to listen to her after about 30 seconds has always escaped me.

She represents no one..

Pelosi is as dirty as Tom Delay

Sheehan realized the liberals were simply using her --- anyone who opposes Bush is a friend of liberals. But the moment you turn against any Obama's follower, then the liberal media has no choice but to touch Obama's feet and do what is best for him.

"then the liberal media has no choice but to touch Obama's feet and do what is best for him."

You really should start reading something besides that sandwich board you carry around.

If this seat belonged to a republican, (I know it would be very very very very unlikely in San Fran,) Sheehan would've had all the coverage she wanted from the liberal media.

I mean really did she expect the media to do anything against their beloved Pelosi? The woman is a ruthless cunt bitch.

Goes to show that, any free thinking liberal that believes something based on personal values and not just conforming to the democrat's agenda, (which there are very few around here,) YOU DON'T BITE THE HAND THAT FEEDS YOU.

Somehow I don't think we'll be hearing much from Cindy Sheehan anymore, unless you watch Democracy NOW.

Funny, Joementum never complained about a lack of press coverage while he was running as an Independent in Connecticut. Maybe some people need a ride in the waahbulance to the quaalude store.

I would like to have seen Sheehan elected-more electedindependents is good and the righties would have blown their colons clear across the rooms.

If this seat belonged to a republican, (I know it would be very very very very unlikely in San Fran,) Sheehan would've had all the coverage she wanted from the liberal media

Wot Liberal Media?

The case of the missing Sheehan coverage is a prime indicator that the vast majority of MSM is corporate in nature, first and foremost.

Understanding that is key to understanding how the faux democratic duopoly continues to perpetuate itself.

Be Well.

Wow....the scourge of the right is could seemingly become their darling daughter.

So, when does she get her own FAUX News show??

Deth, you are far too conspiratorial. Sheehan just stopped being relevant. Everyone knows her opinion and what she's going to say. How is that newsworthy to begin with if she just drones on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on - infinity ????

I understand the duopoly and I'm sure it pays well. Murdoch, for example, is more interested in the gossip throughout his office then he is in politics. He is good at making money. I don't think he really picks and chooses what FOX covers or not covers, honestly or not. That is up to producers, anchors, ect... and you can't say the media is unbiased, liberal or otherwise.

The only time I would imagine any executives would get involved is if one of Pelosi's aids got them on the phone. Remember Dan Rather? Even if his Bush story was true he still got canned.

"We had events here and we had press conferences, and not one press outlet would come," Sheehan said.

Welcome to the real world of politics in the media. If you aren't one of their darlings, Sheehan, you should expect crappy treatment period. Her problem is that she expects people to treat her differently because her ego has been so blown up over the attention she received for her past shenanigans. Another rookie who thinks that the media only treats the right like shit. No. Every once in a while they gang up on one of their own and give them the treatment. I don't know what she's bitching about. She got further than most people and it was all because of her unorthodox ways of calling attention to herself. Cindy, the first thing that you should have learned is that not all publicity is good publicity. And with her track record, it's hard to attribute much good publicity for her campaign. Even the left thinks she's missing a few marbles.

MW - yes, she is a goofball. Nevertheless, her goofiness is no explanation for the media's about-face regarding her coverage.

#5 | Posted by JeffJ

It absolutely creates an excuse and an explanation as to why the media turned on her. She is an egotistical, self-centered, selfish human being. With her only main cause being her dead son. Even the left in the media will get tired of fake primadonnas and their one track minds that stay focused on her main concern. The death of her son. People get sick of people like her real quick and she's now finding that out. I say whatever happens to her in a negative light is just good news for the rest of us, because she may not stick around as long as she planned.

For the most part, I agree. However, how do you reconcile her lionization by the media when she was taking on one elite - Bush..with her non-existant coverage of taking on another elite - Pelosi?

#7 | Posted by JeffJ

That's simple. The MSM wanted any dirt or bad coverage that they could use on Bush. She provided that with her vigiles. When she became a candidate she lost all appeal. She had nothing else to offer, other than more Bush hatred and lord knows the media already has plenty of that to go on. Pelosi has many friends in the MSM and knows how to play the game much better than Cindy does. It only makes sense that Cindy couldn't pull the same sort of tricks with Pelosi. Pelosi doesn't have vultures in the media just waiting to get the next negative story about her out.

Face it. Sheehan is not very bright and she thought this would be a cake walk. When she realized not that many people in the MSM were ready to back her she should have gotten the picture. When you compare Bush to Pelosi to leftist crowds or orginaizations you just aren't going to get the same support as you would if Bush were still around to attack.

"But when it turned into being against the entire system - the Republicans, the Democrats and the war machine - those people stopped covering me."

And the left used her and then tossed her over.
--------

If she really wants to be a public servant and try to change things--she needs to start at the city council, or mayor of somewhere, or State legislature.

Get some experience. She claims to have passion--well go for it.

Just because you don't get it the first time doesn't mean you give up and blame others.

And why would she go to Air America--they won't hear of any criticism of the Dems--ever.

She could have tried Savage--he hates both parties--they could have got along.

Doesn't she know that we live in a country where having big boobs will get more press-coverage than having big ideas?

I would vote for her against nancy.

Illegal U.S.Media "Exclusionary Tactic" by Pro Israel Zionists

"Sheehan: Well, I can tell you one incident. We had, toward the end of the campaign, to hire a PR firm. And they'd been working in San Francisco for years, in the Bay area for years. They said they'd seen nothing like this where they couldn't get one interview for me, one story placed. And the women who ran the PR firm actually said that a few people contacted them and said that if they worked on my campaign they wouldn't get any work from them again"

So just who "controls" the American media if not Pro Israeli Zionists who have an abiding,dedicated interest in their willing Pro Zionist "puppets" like Nancy Pelosi!! In a very real way this media "exclusionary tactic" by Pro Israel Zionists against Nancy Sheehan is a "criminal corruption" of the U.S.Elections Act!!!

Get lost Sheehan. You have other kids. Why not take care of them and be a decent mom instead of an attention whore for a change. I'm sure Casey would have preferred you honor his life by being a good mom. Even though I disagree with the war Casey chose to fight in it. You should respect his decision Sheehan.

when sheehan was doing her circus act here in texas, rush said the media would throw her away like a used kleenex when they were done. right again.

Gosh dupe, do you really think that you were anything but a useful fool to be manipulated for political purposes? I suppose that you did. Well, you were wrong.

interested in the gossip throughout his office then he is in politics. He is good at making money. I don't think he really picks and chooses what FOX covers or not covers, honestly or not

And yet everyone of his global media outlets is about as different as a McDonald's franchise. Thye even go so far as to swap talking points.

See the UK Sun and NY Post.

She never had trouble attracting media attention when her target was Bush. It was only when she shifted her sights leftward that the media lost interest.

Had she run against an incumbent Republican, you can better believe Air America and 60 Minutes would have been following her with pompoms on.

Funny seeing all these "liberals" argue against fair media time for a non-corporately approved candidate.

Take Danni for example. She champions public campaign financing when it could benefit Democrats, but as soon as someone like Sheehan goes against one, her "15 minutes" are up.

I suppose having a principle or two is too much to ask.

so cindy how you like the real world-you have jus realized that you were used as a antibush(rep) tool
you have outlived your usefulness and are now to be ignored
jasman

#9 | Posted by newjasman
--------------
Truer words have never been spoken. When she was useful, MSNBC covered her. When she became irrelevant, they ignored her. No difference between her and General Petraeus. They called him General Betrayus once now everyone wants to agree with him when he talks about waterboarding.

The liberal media's goal is not to inform. If you think that, then your living in denial. They are the liberals propaganda machine. If what your saying falls in line with the lies they are spewing on that particular day, then they will shove a microphone in your face. When your saying something that they don't agree with you on, you'll get no microphone. She was used by the liberal media while she thought she was best of friends with them.

Lonnie