Reply #30: Hey H2O Man

[ruggerson]

Very interesting, thoughtful post which on first read requires more time to digest.

Since you chose to address my words in particular, I will simply repost what I wrote to another thread, as it has some bearing on your words, which to my mind, in part, overly simplified and distorted SOME of the legitimate reaction to Ms. Sheehan:

I read with amusement the "Cindy does NOT speak for me" threads -- as if Ms. Sheehan has ever claimed to speak for anyone but herself --

-----------------------------------------

Cindy Sheehan herself has chosen to continue her courageous leap into the public eye. Therefore what she does and says is magnified, distorted, and sometimes accurately represented in the media. Our side (progressives) does not benefit from knee jerk, hostile defense of the various and sundry positions on extraneous issues that she randomly offers the press, any more than it benefits from disparaging her mission or her humanity.

I would proffer the usual disclaimer that I think she performed an invaluable service as a symbolic embodiment of, and hopeful antidote to, what George W Bush has done to this country, but having to repeat that in every post to avoid offending her more aggressive acolytes becomes trite and tiring.

No, she does not speak for me, and it is self evident to anyone with a brainstem (or anyone not toting personal baggage) that by saying that, I do not mean that she ever claimed to speak for anyone but herself. What it means is that I disagree with her on a whole host of remarks she has made about a wide range of issues, most of which have nothing to do with Iraq or the loss of her son. I disagree with some of the tactical decisions she has made in her ongoing journey in front of the relentless, non blinking public eye. And, yes, it is necessary for us to speak up, when and if we disagree with her AND when we agree with her, as the press has turned her into one of the symbols for the anti war movement, a conduit, a vessel for millions, and as we know, the press likes to build up, canonize and then swiftly caricature, simplify, mock and finally destroy the icons they create. And, most importantly, in so doing, they attempt to destroy the movements the symbols represent.

When all is said and done, she is just a mother who lost her child in a useless war. A mother who spoke truth to power to an unjust, ignorant, vicious leader. That is the mission she chose for herself and it is a powerful and utterly human one.


I agree with you, H2O Man, that Cindy's power lies in her humanity and her painful search for meaning from her son's tragic death. But nothing in this world occurs in a vacuum and her words and actions, magnified through the lens of the public eye, affect, perhaps unintentionally at times, perhaps both positively and negatively, the efforts of those who are trying to unseat the bloody regime that has held us captive for six years.

The media in this country is perverse and unpredictable and the course it takes, often a random series of events compounding upon one another is, unfortunately, often just as powerful a force for the bad as one individual attempting to find meaning in the world is for the good.

Perhaps Cindy has the potential to highlight and symbolize the rational alternative to the unhealthy narcissistic, disconnected society that Bush propogates. One hopes if she can't be a symbol of that antidote, she can at least be a conduit for partial American self- discovery, knowing or not, witless or self aware.

Thanks for your very thought provoking post.