CindyLew
October 20, 2006 2:12 AM Subscribe
All about Cindy Sheehan's affair [pdf, sorry] with libertarian anti-war icon Lew Rockwell. No, seriously. Small world.
This post was deleted for the following reason: eh, not that interesting of a story, comments barely on topic
You shouldn't. I just thought it was pretty weird. Two people I didn't expect to find out had shared a bed.
I'm more interested in Rockwell than in Sheehan, since I think the whole organized Reddit/Digg spamming effort was pretty crafty and evil.
posted by evariste at 2:17 AM on October 20, 2006
I'm more interested in Rockwell than in Sheehan, since I think the whole organized Reddit/Digg spamming effort was pretty crafty and evil.
posted by evariste at 2:17 AM on October 20, 2006
Oh, boy. A post about libertarians. This will end well.
posted by brundlefly at 2:19 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by brundlefly at 2:19 AM on October 20, 2006
Plus, the far-left/far-right convergence angle is kind of interesting.
posted by evariste at 2:19 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by evariste at 2:19 AM on October 20, 2006
(Sorry, I didn't realize that the description field would show up on the front page, or I wouldn't have put so many line breaks in.)
posted by evariste at 2:21 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by evariste at 2:21 AM on October 20, 2006
as an aside, it fascinates me that you've posted 9 comments on the blue (three in this thread), and 175 on the Grey. Obviously you're mostly an ask person, but still that's pretty strange :P
posted by delmoi at 2:25 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by delmoi at 2:25 AM on October 20, 2006
It is pretty funny, delmoi. I'm pretty intimidated by the Blue, even though I've been reading MetaFilter for years now. Back in the day I always used to cuss myself out when I missed one of the brief windows when mathowie opened the registration gates.
posted by evariste at 2:29 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by evariste at 2:29 AM on October 20, 2006
evariste, only in the US could Sheehan be regarded as far-left.
posted by imperium at 2:34 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by imperium at 2:34 AM on October 20, 2006
And here I thought I'd have to go to digg to find this story. Thanks for the pdf/sex novel rundown. Thanks also for the good summary of what digg said in the second link.
posted by bob sarabia at 2:38 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by bob sarabia at 2:38 AM on October 20, 2006
imperium-that only takes you so far, though. I could rejoinder that only in the EU could Tony Blair be considered a bloodthirsty warmonger. What's the point? In the domestic discourse, she is far-left. Arguably, she's also far-left on the global stage. She's best friends with people like Hugo Chavez, and she blames Israel for terrorism. That's pretty far-left if you ask me. Maybe in the rest of the world that's a moderate position.
posted by evariste at 2:38 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by evariste at 2:38 AM on October 20, 2006
Oh wait, maybe you should just stick to digg. My bad.
posted by bob sarabia at 2:39 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by bob sarabia at 2:39 AM on October 20, 2006
only in the EU could Tony Blair be considered a bloodthirsty warmonger.
no, this is incorrect. he's seen as the warmonger's butler, it's different. try reading more non-US press sources, it'll improve your blog, too
posted by matteo at 2:44 AM on October 20, 2006
no, this is incorrect. he's seen as the warmonger's butler, it's different. try reading more non-US press sources, it'll improve your blog, too
posted by matteo at 2:44 AM on October 20, 2006
Oh wait, maybe you should just stick to digg. My bad.
That's cute, bob sarabia. Sorry you need detailed instructions and handholding before clicking links. You might want to think about getting that crippling anxiety treated.
posted by evariste at 2:44 AM on October 20, 2006
That's cute, bob sarabia. Sorry you need detailed instructions and handholding before clicking links. You might want to think about getting that crippling anxiety treated.
posted by evariste at 2:44 AM on October 20, 2006
he's seen as the warmonger's butler,
Yeah. And he's the transatlantic poodle, and so on.
He still gets plenty of credit on his own for being a murderous warmonger. At least if far-leftists' artwork of him with bleeding fangs, killing babies, etc is anything to go by.
try reading more non-US press sources, it'll improve your blog, too
Thanks, I already do. I don't necessarily find much of it convincing, but neither do I find everything I read in the US media convincing. Do news sources gain credibility by being located outside of the United States? That seems to be a pretty poor basis for judgment.
posted by evariste at 2:51 AM on October 20, 2006 [1 favorite]
Yeah. And he's the transatlantic poodle, and so on.
He still gets plenty of credit on his own for being a murderous warmonger. At least if far-leftists' artwork of him with bleeding fangs, killing babies, etc is anything to go by.
try reading more non-US press sources, it'll improve your blog, too
Thanks, I already do. I don't necessarily find much of it convincing, but neither do I find everything I read in the US media convincing. Do news sources gain credibility by being located outside of the United States? That seems to be a pretty poor basis for judgment.
posted by evariste at 2:51 AM on October 20, 2006 [1 favorite]
Wow. I was right. This will not end well, but it has nothing to do with the libertarian thing.
posted by brundlefly at 3:03 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by brundlefly at 3:03 AM on October 20, 2006
Do news sources gain credibility by being located outside of the United States?
ah, lessons in journalistic credibility from a warblogger whose only MeFi post is a link to FrontPage Magazine...
let's talk about credibility, then. how many Americans think that WMDs have been found in Iraq? and how many think Saddam did 9/11? see, they must have read/watched that somewhere -- maybe LeMonde, so full of "far-leftists' artwork"?
posted by matteo at 3:04 AM on October 20, 2006
ah, lessons in journalistic credibility from a warblogger whose only MeFi post is a link to FrontPage Magazine...
let's talk about credibility, then. how many Americans think that WMDs have been found in Iraq? and how many think Saddam did 9/11? see, they must have read/watched that somewhere -- maybe LeMonde, so full of "far-leftists' artwork"?
posted by matteo at 3:04 AM on October 20, 2006
The libertarian gaming of digg is kind of interesting though.
posted by srboisvert at 3:10 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by srboisvert at 3:10 AM on October 20, 2006
how many Americans think that WMDs have been found in Iraq? and how many think Saddam did 9/11?
Gee, I have to defend ignorant people as if I shared their opinions, just because I'm a "warblogger"? Sheesh, this is retarded.
For the record, where there's smoke, there might well be fire. It may be that Saddam hid his WMDs really well, or spirited them out of country before the war. But I guess poor old Saddam was actually a harmless, toothless bunny wabbit. Too bad I don't read Le Monde where I can learn such fascinating things.
see, they must have read/watched that somewhere
Not necessarily. In fact, I can't think of a single place where I've read that "Saddam did 9/11" or "We found the WMDs"-let alone in the US media. Am I missing something, or are you hallucinating? Is your only source of information about the US media accounts in anti-American media of the ignorance of some Americans? Really, I'd like to see an example of this American media that's apparently been telling Americans that we found the WMDs and that Saddam did 9/11. Obviously it must exist since you're so opposed to it.
posted by evariste at 3:13 AM on October 20, 2006
Gee, I have to defend ignorant people as if I shared their opinions, just because I'm a "warblogger"? Sheesh, this is retarded.
For the record, where there's smoke, there might well be fire. It may be that Saddam hid his WMDs really well, or spirited them out of country before the war. But I guess poor old Saddam was actually a harmless, toothless bunny wabbit. Too bad I don't read Le Monde where I can learn such fascinating things.
see, they must have read/watched that somewhere
Not necessarily. In fact, I can't think of a single place where I've read that "Saddam did 9/11" or "We found the WMDs"-let alone in the US media. Am I missing something, or are you hallucinating? Is your only source of information about the US media accounts in anti-American media of the ignorance of some Americans? Really, I'd like to see an example of this American media that's apparently been telling Americans that we found the WMDs and that Saddam did 9/11. Obviously it must exist since you're so opposed to it.
posted by evariste at 3:13 AM on October 20, 2006
The libertarian gaming of digg is kind of interesting though.
I wasn't really surprised by it when I first read that. Digg almost seems to invite this kind of exploitation, much like an unlocked car invites your laptop getting stolen.
It was pretty blatant and shameless though. I can't believe so many people would be involved and no one would say "have we actually sunk to this? This is pretty pathetic right here."
posted by evariste at 3:17 AM on October 20, 2006
I wasn't really surprised by it when I first read that. Digg almost seems to invite this kind of exploitation, much like an unlocked car invites your laptop getting stolen.
It was pretty blatant and shameless though. I can't believe so many people would be involved and no one would say "have we actually sunk to this? This is pretty pathetic right here."
posted by evariste at 3:17 AM on October 20, 2006
For the record, where there's smoke, there might well be fire. It may be that Saddam hid his WMDs really well, or spirited them out of country before the war.
faith-based foreign policy: invisible WMDs!
spirited them out of the country? off to Iran now!
thankfully for America, the neocon delirium seems to be increasingly unpopular these days
But I guess poor old Saddam was actually a harmless, toothless bunny wabbit. Too bad I don't read Le Monde where I can learn such fascinating things.
no, it was Washington's valuable asset in the fight against the fundamentalist Iranians, that's why he received American weapons and American diplomatic support for his many crimes up until mid-1990.
I'd like to see an example of this American media that's apparently been telling Americans that we found the WMDs and that Saddam did 9/11
that's exactly why the right-wing whining against the phantom "liberal media" is so funny (well, watched from a safe distance of course) -- you dealt with a politely stenographical US media for at least three years after 9-11, that's why America bought the shameful lies about Saddam's evil weapons, some of them even nucular. any more recent signs of neurological life in the US are to be dealt with swiftly I guess. hence, a grieving mother's divorce and alleged affair seem to be such an interesting topic
bah. anyway good luck with the Iran mission, and kudos for the first post here
posted by matteo at 3:31 AM on October 20, 2006
faith-based foreign policy: invisible WMDs!
spirited them out of the country? off to Iran now!
thankfully for America, the neocon delirium seems to be increasingly unpopular these days
But I guess poor old Saddam was actually a harmless, toothless bunny wabbit. Too bad I don't read Le Monde where I can learn such fascinating things.
no, it was Washington's valuable asset in the fight against the fundamentalist Iranians, that's why he received American weapons and American diplomatic support for his many crimes up until mid-1990.
I'd like to see an example of this American media that's apparently been telling Americans that we found the WMDs and that Saddam did 9/11
that's exactly why the right-wing whining against the phantom "liberal media" is so funny (well, watched from a safe distance of course) -- you dealt with a politely stenographical US media for at least three years after 9-11, that's why America bought the shameful lies about Saddam's evil weapons, some of them even nucular. any more recent signs of neurological life in the US are to be dealt with swiftly I guess. hence, a grieving mother's divorce and alleged affair seem to be such an interesting topic
bah. anyway good luck with the Iran mission, and kudos for the first post here
posted by matteo at 3:31 AM on October 20, 2006
only in the US could Sheehan be regarded as far-left
even with her endorsement of Hugo Chavez?
posted by rxrfrx at 3:48 AM on October 20, 2006
even with her endorsement of Hugo Chavez?
posted by rxrfrx at 3:48 AM on October 20, 2006
I think a little bird might be hovering too close to her nest. Afraid your babies can't fly on their own?
posted by maryh at 3:49 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by maryh at 3:49 AM on October 20, 2006
I'd like to see an example of this American media that's apparently been telling Americans that we found the WMDs and that Saddam did 9/11.
posted by punilux at 4:02 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by punilux at 4:02 AM on October 20, 2006
Plus, the far-left/far-right convergence angle is kind of interesting.
...only in the US could Sheehan be regarded as far-left
And only in the US could a Libertarian be regarded as far-right. For God's sake man, Libertarians are far-anti-government and far-liberty - and the real alternative to the tyranny of governement offered by both the left and right in the US.
As for Sheehan, I wish she would disappear from the political scene. That broad is the worst possible poster-child for the anti-war movement. Jane Fonda without the brains - and Jane was never no Nobel laurate.
Perhaps that's why the "far right" keeps Sheehan in the spotlight. Endorsing Hugo Chavez.. that's not far left, it's just plain dumb.
posted by three blind mice at 4:10 AM on October 20, 2006 [1 favorite]
...only in the US could Sheehan be regarded as far-left
And only in the US could a Libertarian be regarded as far-right. For God's sake man, Libertarians are far-anti-government and far-liberty - and the real alternative to the tyranny of governement offered by both the left and right in the US.
As for Sheehan, I wish she would disappear from the political scene. That broad is the worst possible poster-child for the anti-war movement. Jane Fonda without the brains - and Jane was never no Nobel laurate.
Perhaps that's why the "far right" keeps Sheehan in the spotlight. Endorsing Hugo Chavez.. that's not far left, it's just plain dumb.
posted by three blind mice at 4:10 AM on October 20, 2006 [1 favorite]
dude, this is awesome juicy gossip, thanks!
Left-right relationships aren't that uncommon. Usually it is the girl who's the lefty, too. James Carville and Mary Matalin are one exception to this rule, though.
posted by By The Grace of God at 4:11 AM on October 20, 2006
Left-right relationships aren't that uncommon. Usually it is the girl who's the lefty, too. James Carville and Mary Matalin are one exception to this rule, though.
posted by By The Grace of God at 4:11 AM on October 20, 2006
even with her endorsement of Hugo Chavez?
Really? You think that constitutes far-left? Chavez clearly used her and her media circus to poke Bush in the eye, but I think that's pretty much the extent of any political association.
I put Sheehan more under the useful idiot rubric than I would assign unto her a political label. She's a simpleton, an aggrieved mom who has allowed herself and her agenda to be co-opted more times than Ellen James (any John Irving fans out there?).
Also, what three blind mice said. I'm sure she's a nice lady, and she means well, but provides more of a service for the pro-War crowd than she does for anyone else.
posted by psmealey at 4:19 AM on October 20, 2006
Really? You think that constitutes far-left? Chavez clearly used her and her media circus to poke Bush in the eye, but I think that's pretty much the extent of any political association.
I put Sheehan more under the useful idiot rubric than I would assign unto her a political label. She's a simpleton, an aggrieved mom who has allowed herself and her agenda to be co-opted more times than Ellen James (any John Irving fans out there?).
Also, what three blind mice said. I'm sure she's a nice lady, and she means well, but provides more of a service for the pro-War crowd than she does for anyone else.
posted by psmealey at 4:19 AM on October 20, 2006
Fair enough. It is more likely that she said nice things about Chavez because she has a stupidly simple perspective on politics (anyone who opposes Bush is automatically great) than that she's a fan of socialist dictatorships.
posted by rxrfrx at 4:31 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by rxrfrx at 4:31 AM on October 20, 2006
Lots (but not all) of progressives and folks on the left support Chavez. He's controversial, but not a pariah in the US by any means, particularly in the poor areas that he has helped out with low-cost heating oil.
He's not a dictator either. He's attempted a coup in the past, but has been elected twice.
posted by By The Grace of God at 4:41 AM on October 20, 2006
He's not a dictator either. He's attempted a coup in the past, but has been elected twice.
posted by By The Grace of God at 4:41 AM on October 20, 2006
>socialist dictatorships
I wanted to check on this. Most sources point out that Chavez won an Electoral vote, and he was overthrown in a coup and then later re-instated. Then he won a recall election, as well. How is that a dictatorship?
posted by gsb at 4:42 AM on October 20, 2006 [1 favorite]
I wanted to check on this. Most sources point out that Chavez won an Electoral vote, and he was overthrown in a coup and then later re-instated. Then he won a recall election, as well. How is that a dictatorship?
posted by gsb at 4:42 AM on October 20, 2006 [1 favorite]
Yeah, that's just an ugly smear, gsb.
Chavez has won far more elections than GWB has.
posted by prost at 4:55 AM on October 20, 2006
Chavez has won far more elections than GWB has.
posted by prost at 4:55 AM on October 20, 2006
she blames Israel for terrorism. That's pretty far-left if you ask me.
Here's where this thread could go seriously off the rails. Because pretty much everyone outside Israel and the US regards the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza as the root cause of terrorism in Israel.
posted by imperium at 4:58 AM on October 20, 2006 [1 favorite]
Here's where this thread could go seriously off the rails. Because pretty much everyone outside Israel and the US regards the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza as the root cause of terrorism in Israel.
posted by imperium at 4:58 AM on October 20, 2006 [1 favorite]
To be fair, just because someone was elected doesn't mean he's not a dictator. Saddam was nominally elected. So was you-know-who.
posted by EarBucket at 5:07 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by EarBucket at 5:07 AM on October 20, 2006
The root cause of terrorism in Israel is the fact that many arabs will not accept the UN mandated existence of the state of Israel. Any nation (or would-be nation) with Muslims that borders a non-muslim state always has problems. The world-wide terrorism goes well beyond the MiddleEast.
As for The post: many marriages are fucked up but that is a sidetrack to the issue: Cindy took a stand, perhaps for reasons that are mixed, but she has riveted some attention to a growing opposition to the war. Had her marriage been ok, would her activities be "acceptable"?
posted by Postroad at 5:07 AM on October 20, 2006
As for The post: many marriages are fucked up but that is a sidetrack to the issue: Cindy took a stand, perhaps for reasons that are mixed, but she has riveted some attention to a growing opposition to the war. Had her marriage been ok, would her activities be "acceptable"?
posted by Postroad at 5:07 AM on October 20, 2006
The root cause of terrorism in Israel is the fact that many arabs will not accept the UN mandated existence of the state of Israel.
Cherry picking UN proclaimations is a very dumb way to argue when it comes to Israel and you know it.
posted by srboisvert at 5:17 AM on October 20, 2006 [1 favorite]
Cherry picking UN proclaimations is a very dumb way to argue when it comes to Israel and you know it.
posted by srboisvert at 5:17 AM on October 20, 2006 [1 favorite]
Too bad I don't read Le Monde where I can learn such fascinating things.
Uh, the French bogeyman thing is kind of over.
In fact, I can't think of a single place where I've read that "Saddam did 9/11" or "We found the WMDs"-let alone in the US media. Am I missing something, or are you hallucinating?
Uh, try here for starters.
Seriously, have you been in a coma since late 2003 or so?
posted by Armitage Shanks at 6:16 AM on October 20, 2006
Uh, the French bogeyman thing is kind of over.
In fact, I can't think of a single place where I've read that "Saddam did 9/11" or "We found the WMDs"-let alone in the US media. Am I missing something, or are you hallucinating?
Uh, try here for starters.
Seriously, have you been in a coma since late 2003 or so?
posted by Armitage Shanks at 6:16 AM on October 20, 2006
The politics of personal destruction . . . the warmongers invented it.
posted by fourcheesemac at 6:21 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by fourcheesemac at 6:21 AM on October 20, 2006
I don't think that this story passes the "who gives a fuck" test. But, you know, that's just me.
posted by clevershark at 6:37 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by clevershark at 6:37 AM on October 20, 2006
No, clevershark, I agree, although the "how to game digg" thing was of interest to me. As for the whole Israel/Palestine thing, everyone knows we don't get enough webspace to discuss that as we'd like.
I know I share responsibility for that in this thread.
posted by imperium at 7:24 AM on October 20, 2006
I know I share responsibility for that in this thread.
posted by imperium at 7:24 AM on October 20, 2006
You're not alone, clevershark.
I do like the formatting on the PDF though. Makes it look like a literary classic. If only all tabloid stories came out in fancy PDF's, we could read about the sex life of celebrities with no shame.
posted by pleeker at 7:33 AM on October 20, 2006
I do like the formatting on the PDF though. Makes it look like a literary classic. If only all tabloid stories came out in fancy PDF's, we could read about the sex life of celebrities with no shame.
posted by pleeker at 7:33 AM on October 20, 2006
« Older Double Curse of '86 | Ask A Man? Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by delmoi at 2:15 AM on October 20, 2006