« Interesting Omissions/Additions on SCOTUS Pick | Main | It's All About Cindy--What About Lynndie? »
September 27, 2005
Update on story about Sheehan jealousy
Journalist Jennifer Harper of The Washington Times has called into question the authorship of that controversial "Cindy Sheehan" post at DailyKos.
Harper writes the following:
The someone called "Cindy Sheehan" wrote at the DailyKos.com Web site early Saturday evening: "I am watching CNN and it is 100 percent [Hurricane] Rita. Even though it is a little wind and a little rain, it is bad, but there are other things going on in this country today ... and in the world."
The comment was one of a dozen entries, including speech transcripts and press releases, credited to Mrs. Sheehan at the site, which says 79 percent of the "page viewers" are Democrats. Bush-bashing is the daily ritual.
But was "Cindy Sheehan" actually Cindy Sheehan?
"I am very certain she did not post it," says Morrigan Phillips, a spokesman (Mrs. Sheehan has three) who has taken questions for Mrs. Sheehan on her cross-country protest tour. "She was pretty busy on Saturday."
So is the "Cindy Sheehan" who wrote the controversial post the real Cindy Sheehan?
Here are some observations.
#1 Ms. Harper states, "The comment was one of a dozen entries, including speech transcripts and press releases, credited to Mrs. Sheehan at the site."
If DailyKos credits other entries as being from the real Cindy Sheehan, then why not credit this latest, controversial entry as being from the real Cindy Sheehan? Didn't DailyKos verify that the person with the user name "Cindy Sheehan" was really Cindy Sheehan?
#2 Sheehan spokesman Morrigan Phillips stated, "I am very certain she did not post it."
Well, Sheehan is very certain that President Bush lied about there being WMDs in Iraq. Being certain isn't the same thing as being right.
#3 Sheehan denied writing anti-Semitic remarks in e-mail that she sent to others. Yet, the recipients of her e-mail confirm that Sheehan did write those remarks. It wouldn't be out of character for Sheehan to say something controversial and then deny saying it.
#4 Sheehan got herself arrested in order to draw media attention to herself, which explains why she was smiling while being arrested. If Sheehan is that starved for media attention, then it wouldn't be surprising if Sheehan did post that controversial statement at DailyKos.
For its own good, DailyKos needs to investigate the authorship of the controversial "Sheehan" post.
If the real Cindy Sheehan didn't write it, then all other DailyKos entries credited to Cindy Sheehan are also questionable.
If Ms. Sheehan didn't write the post, then out of fairness to Ms. Sheehan, the real author needs to be outed.
Even if Ms. Sheehan isn't popular with conservatives, it would still be wrong for someone to impersonate her.
That's a fact that both Ms. Sheehan and President Bush would agree on.
Posted by Dodo David at September 27, 2005 07:32 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.lifelikepundits.com/cgi-bin/mt3/mt-tb.cgi/1536
Comments
Excellent, David! Will the real Cindy Sheehan please stand up?
Posted by: Pam at September 27, 2005 09:41 PM
Fake, but accurate?
Posted by: Robbie at September 27, 2005 09:42 PM
If Cindy Sheehan didn't write the post, then why did she apologize for the comments??? If you read the comments from angry KOS readers, you will find one from Cindy Sheehan saying she was sorry for the insensitive remarks. If it was a false posting, then the imposter would not feel a need to apologize. Only someone who cared about their reputation would do such a thing. An imposter is as good as an anonomous poster. No way would they apologize.
Posted by: MagicalPat at September 27, 2005 09:52 PM
?? Where was Cindy that day? Where is the IP address of the post from?
She has three spokesmen?
Posted by: DoubleU at September 27, 2005 10:35 PM
Here's an interesting tidbit of reverse-psychology for ya...
I bet if 'alternative' media - which I quite prefer, btw - were to drop sheehan like a hot potato (which she rather deserves - which all extremists deserve), she would disappear from the 'mainstream' media quite a bit more quickly than seems likely now.
It's almost as if those that hate her and her poltical supporters are giving her more attention than she otherwise might.
I don't care which version of the media or punditry does it, or what their message is - unless an extremist is directly threatening the lives or livelihood of others - and sheehan, while extremist in her stated views, hasn't really come to that, yet - ignore them as they rightly deserve.
Leave the extremists to the extremists - not only would news reports be more sane (or at least taking shorter dips into the coverage of 'harmless' extremists), they'd likely enjoy their segmented protestor lives that much more...
Just a thought...
Posted by: tj at September 28, 2005 01:09 AM