This Woman Is Insane

Cindy Sheehan is in the news again. And brother, has she made her thoughts known.

"We are not waging a war on terror in this country. We’re waging a war of terror. The biggest terrorist in the world is George W. Bush!"

So declared Cindy Sheehan earlier this year during a rally at San Francisco State University.

Sheehan, who is demanding a second meeting with Bush, stated: "We are waging a nuclear war in Iraq right now. That country is contaminated. It will be contaminated for practically eternity now."

Sheehan unleashed a foul-mouth tirade on April 27, 2005:

"They’re a bunch of f*cking hypocrites! And we need to, we just need to rise up..." Sheehan said of the Bush administration.
"If George Bush believes his rhetoric and his bullsh*t, that this is a war for freedom and democracy, that he is spreading freedom and democracy, does he think every person he kills makes Iraq more free?"

"The whole world is damaged. Our humanity is damaged. If he thinks that it’s so important for Iraq to have a U.S.-imposed sense of freedom and democracy, then he needs to sign up his two little party-animal girls. They need to go to this war."

"We want our country back and, if we have to impeach everybody from George Bush down to the person who picks up dog sh*t in Washington, we will impeach all those people."

OK. I had really hoped we at the Asylum wouldn’t have to go back to this loony moonbat. But this latest diatribe should finally show the world that this woman is clearly and completely off of her rocker.

Let me lay this out for all the other idiots of the world that are shaking their heads in agreement. We were attacked on 11 Sept. by Islamo-fascists. We went to war in Afghanistan, and crushed the Taliban. We scattered al-Qaeda. Further, when we connected the dots to Iraq, we took the fight to Saddam Hussein. Round Two, and this time, we weren’t stopping at the gates of Baghdad. And for the moonbats out there, this isn’t a war for oil. This was a PHASE of the overall global war in terror. He had ties to al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups. He had WMD programs. And now—over the last week or so—German intelligence is confirming that Iraqi intelligence operatives were in Germany for a meeting with al-Qaeda operatives.
We had the moral and legal justification for both Afghanistan and Iraq.

But this woman is plain nuts. A nuclear war in Iraq? It’s contaminated? Does anyone remember a mushroom cloud that’s gone up recently over there? I haven’t seen one. A nuclear detonation would register on Richter Scales across the globe. No one’s registered that. There’s no devastation over there on a nuclear scale.

Does the president think everyone he kills makes Iraq more free? First of all, the president isn’t killing anyone. He is the commander-in-chief of the US armed forces. He gives the orders, the troops do the killing. And yes, the more terrorists we kill today, the less we face tomorrow, and the less the Iraqi people have to worry about. You can’t hug a terrorist, and sing Kumbayah with them. They want us dead. They want Cindy Sheehan dead. They want the president dead. We’re infidels, dumbass.

And, need I remind her that her son signed his name on Uncle Sugar’s dotted line of his own free will. It’s a volunteer military, lady. There’s no draft. No parent is forcing their child to enlist. You bring up the president’s daughters. I’m sure that if either one wanted to enlist, he wouldn’t stand in their way. But, as with all of the arguments perpetrated by the wacky Left, the diatribe eventually gets personal. And demanding the president sign up his two "party-animal" daughters is just another sign of how stupid this woman is. Who’s having the bigger party right now? The president, in DC as he runs this war, or Cindy Sheehan and her three-ring circus in Crawford.

The media and MoveOn.org have given this woman a makeover. The nuts on Air America practically want this woman sainted. She’s got her supporters down there. And she’s also on record stating that a second meeting with the president would be bad because it will break her focus; it will slow her agenda. There you have it. This woman never wanted to meet him. She wanted her fifteen minutes of fame.

In 2004, her family supported the president—that would be the family that has publicly disavowed her. She cut ties to them. Her husband, earlier this year, tried to get her to move on. Baby steps, one day at a time. She withdrew from him to the point where they separated in June, and he has filed for divorce. She has another son and a daughter that are pleading that she return home, and help them with their grief. She’s turned her back on them. This isn’t about her grief. This isn’t about her son. This is all about her, and her mean, nasty, selfish agenda. That agenda is one where she gives the president the biggest black-eye possible. The political cartoonists have had their fun with this, claiming he’s avoiding her. I guess these schmucks have never had a working vacation in their lives.

But what’s going to happen to this mentally unstable woman when the president heads back home, Congress goes back into session, and all the focus returns to issues like John Roberts? She’s going back into the shadows. She’ll fall back into irrelevance, where she belongs. This woman has no legitimate gripes. She has ranting diatribes, MoveOn.org talking points and lies, and a filthy mouth worthy of making a sailor blush. When the media heads back to New York and LA, they’ll finally pull the plug on this woman, and she can go back to obscurity. But if it’s any consolation, she could always join the Berkley nuts, and protest there. There’s plenty of people that would support her. Hell, UC-Berkley might even offer her a teaching position for Moonbats 101.

Publius II