I'll repeat what I said in case you missed it.<br><br>Mothers rule in their love and grief for their children. <br><br><br><br>

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>No, the President read a prepared statement to the press today.<p><hr></blockquote><p>No, that wasn't part of the prepared statement. President Bush was taking questions from reporters. The President responded to Cindy Sheehan. <br><br>* * * * * * * * * * * * * *<br>I [censored] bigger than you.<br>

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>I'll repeat what I said in case you missed it.<br><br>Mothers rule in their love and grief for their children.<p><hr></blockquote><p>And I'll ask again: what the hell does "Mothers rule in their love and grief for their children" mean in the context of this thread? <br><br>How has Casey's other greiveing family member's email change, for one second, Cindy Sheehans "love and grief for her child"? <br><br>So again, what the hell are you talking about?<br><br>* * * * * * * * * * * * * *<br>I [censored] bigger than you.<br>

The president read a prepared & rehearsed statement responding to a reporters question. Don't kid yourself that he went out to meet the press corp without his statement briefed with his staff beforehand regarding Sheehan.<br><br><br><br><br><br>

Sheehan's actions are her own, actions taken because of the love and loss of her child. The other Gold Star mothers and fathers and spouses are their for their own personal reasons. <br><br>It's sad that her family is ashamed of her actions. But Cindy's protest is not about her in-laws or parents shame of her. <br><br>

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>How has Casey's other greiveing family member's email change, for one second, Cindy Sheehans "love and grief for her child"? <p><hr></blockquote><p>well, they haven't changed it at all. however, they have tried to change the way you perceive cindy's love by saying that it "appears" to them to be politically motivated, etc. in other words, they aren't sure, but their "love" of casey caused them to overlook their doubts and come to conclusion enough to speak out "for" casey. <br><br>here's how a normal, average family works: the parent's speak for their children when their children are young and when their unmarried children are dead. the grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, etc. never speak for the children as long as the parents are alive without the consent of the parents. this is a simple concept. mothers rule.<br><br>--<br>Straw-man rhetorical techniques are the practice of refuting weaker arguments than one's opponents offer. 2 "set up a straw man" or "set up a straw-man argument" is 2 create a position easily refuted, then attribute that position to your opponent.

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>the thing is gary, the in-laws have spoken out, but their story will go away. their love for bush created a small ripple, but sheehan's love for her son will create a much larger wave. the in-law story is something nice for drudge to promote and for conservatives to hang their hat on, but their story is small and nearly over. attention for cindy's cause is attention even if some of it comes with a negative slant. bush paid her attention today as well. the story grows larger with any and all attention and that's a good thing.<p><hr></blockquote><p>The thing is sean, that's some twisted logic. The story will be: a family torn apart, not by the tragic loss of a loved one in a time of war, but by the maniulative powers of outside sources trying to capitalize on an event and emotion for political motives. You are an associate.<br><br><br><br>got to let your eyes adjust

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>The president read a prepared & rehearsed statement responding to a reporters question.<p><hr></blockquote><p>Oh yes . . . conspiracy central again. Of course, Gary. Of course. <br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Don't kid yourself that he went out to meet the press corp without his statement briefed with his staff beforehand regarding Sheehan.<p><hr></blockquote><p>The President repsponded to the question regarding Cindy Sheehan. It was an off the cuf ... Oh but wait ... I know. The reporter was [/i]wired too[/i]! Oh OK Gary. I see where you're coming from. The reporter was wired! He whispered . . . <br><br><blockquote>Ok Mr. President. Here comes question 4-B. Cindy Sheehan. You just point to me and I'll direct the question toward Cindy, just like we rehearsed. Get ready . . . </blockquote><br><br><br><br>* * * * * * * * * * * * * *<br>I [censored] bigger than you.<br>

if drudge has his way, i wouldn't be surprised to see that story line win out. it certainly worked for the media quite well in the schaivo case . . . but, republicans in congress and the president played a huge role in that story growing wings. the media is alone on this one and the in-laws aren't going to speak out any more, so we'll see what drudge and a few other media outlets can do alone if they want this thread to gain traction. i wouldn't count on it.<br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p> You are an associate<p><hr></blockquote><p>gosh, um . . . okay???<br><br>--<br>Straw-man rhetorical techniques are the practice of refuting weaker arguments than one's opponents offer. 2 "set up a straw man" or "set up a straw-man argument" is 2 create a position easily refuted, then attribute that position to your opponent.

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>well, they haven't changed it at all<p><hr></blockquote><p>Yeah, that's what I thought too. <br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>however, they have tried to change the way you perceive cindy's love by saying that it "appears" to them to be politically motivated, etc. in other words, they aren't sure, but their "love" of casey caused them to overlook their doubts and come to conclusion enough to speak out "for" casey. <p><hr></blockquote><p>Well they are a hell of a lot closer than any of us are to either Casey Sheehan or Cindy Sheehan. And they certainly have known both a lot longer. However, since Cindy has decided to make this so open and public, they felt compelled to speak out *for* the rest of the family, not "for" Casey. They are allowed to do that. <br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>here's how a normal, average family works: the parent's speak for their children when their children are young and when their unmarried children are dead. the grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, etc. never speak for the children as long as the parents are alive without the consent of the parents.<p><hr></blockquote><p>Whoo boy, now you're making the rules for Casey's family and everyone else. Is there no end to your edu-mu-cation lectures? Now here's the biggest "rule" of all: They are part of his family and they have every right to say what they said, regardless of how many fits anti-war liberals throw. <br><br>* * * * * * * * * * * * * *<br>I [censored] bigger than you.<br>