Comments on: No Rosa Parks http://www.mahablog.com/2006/01/30/no-rosa-parks/ Exposing the ugly truths about the Bush Administration. Sun, 06 Jul 2008 00:17:35 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1.3 by: selise http://www.mahablog.com/2006/01/30/no-rosa-parks/#comment-2548 Wed, 01 Feb 2006 18:12:36 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/01/30/no-rosa-parks/#comment-2548 <i> I support her only as far as she is useful to the antiwar movement. When she loses that usefulness, as I believe she is rapidly doing, I have absolutely no interest in her and will not hesitate to dump her.</i> this is where you really lose me. she is a mom who lost her son in a war we should never have started. i AM interested in her and everyone else who has lost what is most dear to them because we (americans) failed. she has suffered enough and i hate to see her treated as a non-person by anyone. as regards to her "usefulness" to the antiwar movement... she has contributed more, much more than most of us. and for that she should be thanked - not publicly ridiculed for her apparent lack of perfection. i hope you will understand that i write this in the spirit of great respect for your and your blog... but you don't speak for the anti-war movement any more than cindy sheehan does... if only perfect activists were allowed to participate, it would be a very small movement indeed. I support her only as far as she is useful to the antiwar movement. When she loses that usefulness, as I believe she is rapidly doing, I have absolutely no interest in her and will not hesitate to dump her.

this is where you really lose me. she is a mom who lost her son in a war we should never have started. i AM interested in her and everyone else who has lost what is most dear to them because we (americans) failed. she has suffered enough and i hate to see her treated as a non-person by anyone.

as regards to her “usefulness” to the antiwar movement… she has contributed more, much more than most of us. and for that she should be thanked - not publicly ridiculed for her apparent lack of perfection.

i hope you will understand that i write this in the spirit of great respect for your and your blog… but you don’t speak for the anti-war movement any more than cindy sheehan does… if only perfect activists were allowed to participate, it would be a very small movement indeed.

]]> by: maha http://www.mahablog.com/2006/01/30/no-rosa-parks/#comment-2509 Tue, 31 Jan 2006 19:35:30 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/01/30/no-rosa-parks/#comment-2509 <i>Don’t pick on Cindy Sheehan and do the GOP’s work for them by making fun of her.</i> Cindy Sheehan is not Queen of the Universe. I support her only as far as she is useful to the antiwar movement. When she loses that usefulness, as I believe she is rapidly doing, I have absolutely no interest in her and will not hesitate to dump her. Don’t pick on Cindy Sheehan and do the GOP’s work for them by making fun of her.

Cindy Sheehan is not Queen of the Universe. I support her only as far as she is useful to the antiwar movement. When she loses that usefulness, as I believe she is rapidly doing, I have absolutely no interest in her and will not hesitate to dump her.

]]> by: Peggy V. http://www.mahablog.com/2006/01/30/no-rosa-parks/#comment-2508 Tue, 31 Jan 2006 19:29:42 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/01/30/no-rosa-parks/#comment-2508 I'm not "picking a fight" to defend Hugo Chavez." I'm saying, "Don't pick on Cindy Sheehan and do the GOP's work for them by making fun of her." I’m not “picking a fight” to defend Hugo Chavez.” I’m saying, “Don’t pick on Cindy Sheehan and do the GOP’s work for them by making fun of her.”

]]> by: maha http://www.mahablog.com/2006/01/30/no-rosa-parks/#comment-2493 Tue, 31 Jan 2006 12:01:16 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/01/30/no-rosa-parks/#comment-2493 <i>Why are you so down on Chavez??</i> I'm neither up nor down on Chavez. I don't have a strong opinion about him, one way or another. My point is that Sheehan's association with him is an unnecessary distraction from what had been her message, and it's a distraction that compromises her effectiveness as a spokesperson for the antiwar movement. Why are you so down on Chavez??

I’m neither up nor down on Chavez. I don’t have a strong opinion about him, one way or another. My point is that Sheehan’s association with him is an unnecessary distraction from what had been her message, and it’s a distraction that compromises her effectiveness as a spokesperson for the antiwar movement.

]]> by: Steve Talbert http://www.mahablog.com/2006/01/30/no-rosa-parks/#comment-2490 Tue, 31 Jan 2006 04:19:31 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/01/30/no-rosa-parks/#comment-2490 Why are you so down on Chavez?? He was elected.. so was Bush,,, how can he be any worse as a friend than the Saudi's..? I don't know that much about him, but if Bush, Cheney and Condi don't like him, he is probably better than I think he is. Why are you so down on Chavez?? He was elected.. so was Bush,,, how can he be any worse as a friend than the Saudi’s..?

I don’t know that much about him, but if Bush, Cheney and Condi don’t like him, he is probably better than I think he is.

]]> by: Steve from Canukistan http://www.mahablog.com/2006/01/30/no-rosa-parks/#comment-2487 Tue, 31 Jan 2006 03:58:14 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/01/30/no-rosa-parks/#comment-2487 If Venezuela didn’t have any oil Chavez would have no significance at all to anyone. Bush hates him. That’s all that matters. Today Exxon Mobil announced fourth quarter profits of $7.86 billion bringing their total profit for 2005 to $67.6 Billion. From today’s Independent newspaper: “A record loss of sea ice in the Arctic this summer has convinced scientists that the northern hemisphere may have crossed a critical threshold beyond which the climate may never recover. Scientists fear that the Arctic has now entered an irreversible phase of warming which will accelerate the loss of the polar sea ice that has helped to keep the climate stable for thousands of years. They believe global warming is melting Arctic ice so rapidly that the region is beginning to absorb more heat from the sun, causing the ice to melt still further and so reinforcing a vicious cycle of melting and heating. The greatest fear is that the Arctic has reached a "tipping point" beyond which nothing can reverse the continual loss of sea ice and with it the massive land glaciers of Greenland, which will raise sea levels dramatically”. If Venezuela didn’t have any oil Chavez would have no significance at all to anyone. Bush hates him. That’s all that matters. Today Exxon Mobil announced fourth quarter profits of $7.86 billion bringing their total profit for 2005 to $67.6 Billion. From today’s Independent newspaper: “A record loss of sea ice in the Arctic this summer has convinced scientists that the northern hemisphere may have crossed a critical threshold beyond which the climate may never recover. Scientists fear that the Arctic has now entered an irreversible phase of warming which will accelerate the loss of the polar sea ice that has helped to keep the climate stable for thousands of years. They believe global warming is melting Arctic ice so rapidly that the region is beginning to absorb more heat from the sun, causing the ice to melt still further and so reinforcing a vicious cycle of melting and heating. The greatest fear is that the Arctic has reached a “tipping point” beyond which nothing can reverse the continual loss of sea ice and with it the massive land glaciers of Greenland, which will raise sea levels dramatically”.

]]> by: maha http://www.mahablog.com/2006/01/30/no-rosa-parks/#comment-2472 Mon, 30 Jan 2006 22:42:14 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/01/30/no-rosa-parks/#comment-2472 <i>If we run from Chavez and other elected leftists, then what the heck do we stand for?</i> What I stand for is liberalism and progressivism in the United States. And if we can turn this country around our foreign policy will also be more liberal and progressive, which will help the rest of the planet. But my focus is on THIS country, not Venezuela. If the people of Venezuela want Chavez to be their leader, that's fine by me. I think it is yet to be seen his policies are really helping the people of Venezuela, however, or whether he's a charismatic leader who is more talk than walk. I don't support all "leftists" out of tribal loyalty. Also, in the grand scheme of things everything is connected to everything else. But I don't see a direct connection between the war in Iraq and Chavez. If we run from Chavez and other elected leftists, then what the heck do we stand for?

What I stand for is liberalism and progressivism in the United States. And if we can turn this country around our foreign policy will also be more liberal and progressive, which will help the rest of the planet. But my focus is on THIS country, not Venezuela.

If the people of Venezuela want Chavez to be their leader, that’s fine by me. I think it is yet to be seen his policies are really helping the people of Venezuela, however, or whether he’s a charismatic leader who is more talk than walk. I don’t support all “leftists” out of tribal loyalty.

Also, in the grand scheme of things everything is connected to everything else. But I don’t see a direct connection between the war in Iraq and Chavez.

]]> by: Steve Nichols http://www.mahablog.com/2006/01/30/no-rosa-parks/#comment-2471 Mon, 30 Jan 2006 22:26:02 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/01/30/no-rosa-parks/#comment-2471 I completely agree with Peggy, that we should not buy into the demonizing of Chavez. They want to do the same thing to Morales in Bolivia, another elected leader who wants to use his nation's petrochemical resources for the benefit of his people. Casey Sheehan died in part because of Bush's lies, but also because of the motivations of various right wing players, including the military industrial complex. The U.S. can't produce a television profitably, but we are Number 1 in weapons systems. Cindy's meeting with diverse leftists like Chavez is natural. If we run from Chavez and other elected leftists, then what the heck do we stand for? I completely agree with Peggy, that we should not buy into the demonizing of Chavez. They want to do the same thing to Morales in Bolivia, another elected leader who wants to use his nation’s petrochemical resources for the benefit of his people.

Casey Sheehan died in part because of Bush’s lies, but also because of the motivations of various right wing players, including the military industrial complex. The U.S. can’t produce a television profitably, but we are Number 1 in weapons systems. Cindy’s meeting with diverse leftists like Chavez is natural.

If we run from Chavez and other elected leftists, then what the heck do we stand for?

]]> by: Steve M. http://www.mahablog.com/2006/01/30/no-rosa-parks/#comment-2470 Mon, 30 Jan 2006 22:05:06 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/01/30/no-rosa-parks/#comment-2470 I think the GOP has stopped fighting Cindy Sheehan (bloggers excepted) -- the anti-Sheehan campaign never got traction, so they gave up and started bashing Murtha (along with returning the old favorites, Hillary and Kerry and Kennedy and the media and so on). And as for Chavez, he has oil, and we're already pissing off one country that can send crude to $100 a barrel at will. I think the GOP will make sure Chavez doesn't get to the front page anytime soon. I think the GOP has stopped fighting Cindy Sheehan (bloggers excepted) — the anti-Sheehan campaign never got traction, so they gave up and started bashing Murtha (along with returning the old favorites, Hillary and Kerry and Kennedy and the media and so on).

And as for Chavez, he has oil, and we’re already pissing off one country that can send crude to $100 a barrel at will. I think the GOP will make sure Chavez doesn’t get to the front page anytime soon.

]]> by: maha http://www.mahablog.com/2006/01/30/no-rosa-parks/#comment-2469 Mon, 30 Jan 2006 18:38:46 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/01/30/no-rosa-parks/#comment-2469 Peggy, you've got to learn to pick your fights. Defending Hugo Chavez is not a fight I want to pick. He's not the totalitarian villain the Bushies claim he is, but he's not the working class saint some on the Left want him to be, either. Bottom line: With all the other stuff on our plates; with all the problems we have getting even simple messages heard over the Republican Noise Machine, why are we even talking about Hugo Chavez? As I said earlier, doing PR for Hugo Chavez is not exactly a priority right now. And when Cindy Sheehan allows her message to get muddied by association with Hugo Chavez, that is STUPID. I'm sorry; plain fact. This is not doing the right's work for them. It's understanding how to use symbolism to get your own message out. Sheehan was an effective symbol for the antiwar movement, but now she has compromised herself too much to be effective. She'll no longer be able to get the sympathetic treatment from the press that she got in the past, for example. \ And it was just stupid. Stupid, stupid, stupid. Rosa Parks was never that stupid. Peggy, you’ve got to learn to pick your fights. Defending Hugo Chavez is not a fight I want to pick. He’s not the totalitarian villain the Bushies claim he is, but he’s not the working class saint some on the Left want him to be, either.

Bottom line: With all the other stuff on our plates; with all the problems we have getting even simple messages heard over the Republican Noise Machine, why are we even talking about Hugo Chavez? As I said earlier, doing PR for Hugo Chavez is not exactly a priority right now.

And when Cindy Sheehan allows her message to get muddied by association with Hugo Chavez, that is STUPID. I’m sorry; plain fact. This is not doing the right’s work for them. It’s understanding how to use symbolism to get your own message out. Sheehan was an effective symbol for the antiwar movement, but now she has compromised herself too much to be effective. She’ll no longer be able to get the sympathetic treatment from the press that she got in the past, for example.
\
And it was just stupid. Stupid, stupid, stupid. Rosa Parks was never that stupid.

]]>