Okay, it doesn't start out to bad with "When nuts from the left get vocal...", because you at least seem to account for that fact that Sheehan doesn't speak for the left in general.

But then you follow up with "post by Hero of the Left--Cindy Sheehan, who showcases the intelligence and logic of that side so well", which is just plain nutty. Hero of the left? C'mon! And the `showcases' crack is just plain insulting. That would be comparable to me saying that all conservatives are whackjobs, based on what I hear Pat Robertson say.

The world is just not as black and white as you'd like it to be, Woody. Maybe you nned to get out more.

Posted by jim hitchcock at September 16, 2005 08:36 PM

Good grief. The Braves have lost 4 out of their last 5 games and now I get told off on top of that. Well, Jim, some of the comments are a little dramatic, I'll admit; but, surely, you've watched every left-wing site and the media rooting for Sheehan for months. They have been her cheering section. Sheehan is, in fact, a hero to the left, and her views are more ignorant than radical. Basically, she's plain stupid whereas Robertson is just dogmatic.

I sincerely thought of you when I was writing that and thought how sad that a sensible person like Jim gets identified with nuts like Sheehan. Honest. I don't blame you for distinguishing regular liberals from high octane liberals. I admit there is a difference, especially in expression, but they share the common thread of being wrong most of the time.

I'm going to start getting out tomorrow.

Posted by Woody at September 16, 2005 08:57 PM

Okay, I'm somewhat mollified.

To be honest, I knew what you meant, but you gave me an opening, and I took it.

As you know, I pretty much stay clear of the left wing sites (as well as the hard right sites). It's just healthier.

It's a matter of perspective, but I don't see the media as cheering Sheehan on. Their just doing wat they do, reporting on a strange and entertaining story.If they report on Robertson saying that prayer helps steer hurricanes away, is that cheering him on, or just reporting?

(twisting the knife in further). Shut out by Pedro? What's up with that? The Dodgers scores 7 runs off him last time. The freackin' Dodgers!

Posted by jim hitchcock at September 16, 2005 09:17 PM

...They're just doing what...

Posted by jim hitchcock at September 16, 2005 09:18 PM

Jim, I wonder how you can honestly say you don't see the media cheering Sheehan on. They have been all over this lady with coverage of everything she has said REGARDLESS of how stupid it sounds. They call on her again, and again, and again. The left (and some of us on the right) rants (justifibly in my humble opinion) about the amount of Aruba coverage but don't see anything wrong with the Sheehan coverage. Come on, even you aren't that radicalized a liberal.

Updated: James Taranto writing at Best of The Web Today said:

Mrs. Sheehan, originally a sympathetic figure, is now merely a pathetic one, and we're inclined to ignore her totally, except that we keep remembering all those Angry Left types who, a few short weeks ago, were declaring that she had "absolute moral authority" and was going to transform American politics. If thinking about that doesn't give you a good, deep, soul-cleansing laugh, nothing will."

Posted by GM Roper at September 16, 2005 10:10 PM

That's a pretty good comparison, actually. I view the Sheehan coverage a lot like the Aruba coverage...piffle.

It's kind of like the Heidelberg Principle, isn't it? The act of observing changes the results.

Posted by jim hitchcock at September 16, 2005 10:24 PM

Shame on the media and a portion of the left for exploiting Cindy, a women who obviously is suffering from mental illness. The ACLU and the ADA should be out there defending her against the left media exploiting her disabilities like they are...

Posted by Carla at September 16, 2005 11:21 PM

Its actually kind of sad the way she is struggling to hold on to the spotlight. Honestly though, Michael Moore is about the only person in America who still cares about this woman. HuffPo and some others let her post still, but only MM is really promoting her, even encouraging people to give not to the Red Cross, but to the sham organization (VFP) Cindy's affiliated with instead.

Good to see she's just getting wackier as her 15 minutes runs out.

Posted by Scott at September 17, 2005 10:12 AM

Scott, Michael Moore doesn't care about anyone but himself. Casey Sheehan's mother is just another person for him to use until he gets what he wants.

Posted by Don Miguel at September 17, 2005 01:55 PM

Thanks for the birthday greetings George and I am also looking forward to working with the Wide Awakes.

When I was reposting my monthly FULL MOON calendar, I noticed it was in the midst of a cluster of Muther Sheehan stories.

Coincidence?

Better stock up on garlic, holy water and silver bullets. Apparently crosses have no effect on the monster.

http://mikesamerica.blogspot.com/#112443496448758284

Posted by Mike's America at September 17, 2005 03:03 PM

I've looked up Cindy's full post and other commentary on the web. It looks like she may be getting into deep water over this (no pun intended). Start Here (and check the articles on the right side too).

My reaction to all this, though, is not anger but sorrow. Instead of finding healing, Cindy's interactions with her "supporters" seem to be only intensifying her anger. Instead of finding solace in helping people in New Orleans, it only seems to be another launching point for her to lash out. She needs our prayers.

Posted by civil truth at September 17, 2005 05:25 PM

BTW Jim, I think you meant the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. On the other hand, with due respect to Cindy, perhaps you were thinking of the Hindenberg disaster?

Posted by civil truth at September 17, 2005 11:05 PM

OK, I won't comment on the KOS kids or the Air America gushing. I won't even talk about the creative editing that was done while covering Mother Cindy to attempt to make her look more rational. I just want to address one thing, the effect you were attempting to name was not the Heidelburg Principle, it was not a principle at all it was as stated an effect. While you were close on the city it wasn't Heidelburg although the town outside Chicago does start with an H.

Go back and check your psych book from freshman year.

Oh what the heck do I know anyway, I am just one of those uneducated, baby killing soldiers that Miss Cindy loves to hate...

Posted by SSG_K at September 17, 2005 11:16 PM

Civil, it is the Hawthorne Effect.

Posted by SSG_K at September 17, 2005 11:18 PM

I was interested in how observing something changes it. I have read about this in physics, which is what CT covered and Jim meant with the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. It is interesting that just observing or measuring the action of a particle can change it.

However, I looked up the Hawthorne Effect that SSG_K mentioned in human studies, which shows employees increasing productivity by wanting to please those watching.

I don't have a name for what is influencing Sheehan, but I suspect that it is something other than those two ideas. She loves attention and likes to feel important. She does what she does because of the attention she receives--wanting to please herself rather than someone else. If the press goes away and the attention goes away, she crawls back into her hole. That need for this level of attention shows a personality disorder (as someone untrained in the field sees it.) I don't give Sheehan any more credit than that.

Going further, people's actions are influenced by praise or pain that go along with it. We see this every time the left praises someone from the right who takes a "courageous" action--meaning that they do something for the left and against the right. It is a cowardly or treasonous action if someone from the left moves to the right. Compare how Colin Powell gets treated when he criticizes Bush vs. how Zell Miller gets treated when he criticizes the Democrats. If someone lacks principles or courage, he can let the press influence him futher than he would normally go. I don't have a fancy name for that.

However, in most of these cases, what I see is that the press no longer reports news but manufactures it--in even greater quantities. That to me no longer makes them reporters but makes them the stories--and that deserves coverage for which they are too dishonest or too cowardly to present.

Posted by Woody at September 18, 2005 04:22 PM

Sorry, guys, I stand by what I stated: the Heidelberg Principle.

But it was a joke. Geez...:)

Posted by jim hitchcock at September 18, 2005 05:32 PM

Jim, I hate to sound dense, but I still don't get it. I know that it has to be funny, but can you help me?

Posted by Woody at September 18, 2005 07:41 PM

Jim, are you sure you didn't mean Hindenberg instead of Heidelberg?

Posted by civil truth at September 18, 2005 08:10 PM

Oh, hell. Civil was right the first time. Heisenberg.

Woody, it was a rotten joke. I think I better stop now.

Posted by jim hitchcock at September 18, 2005 08:24 PM