The Story of Cindy
Following up on this post from JimK, a reader named Frankie sends in this interesting tidbit.
Dear Moorewatch people,
I’m not a member, but I try to stop by as much as I can. I’ve been following the Cindy Sheehan story fairly closely and I cannot get behind how arrogant this woman is. She’s obviously using the death of a family member for prestige and to espouse her political views. Like Jeremy Glick.
Hearing her say all the usual leftist talking points, watching her act as if she’s speaking for all the mothers of those who have fallen, listening to her demoralize our troops and their families. This all pissed me off. But then I noticed that her son’s name was Casey. I was reminded of this little item some months back…
“Dear Friends
26 years ago today, Casey was 6 hours and 49 minutes old. What a joyful day that day was. The birth of our firstborn. He was so wanted and his birth was so highly anticipated. A true bundle of joy. ..”
It was a letter, attributed to a woman named Cindy, that appeared on Moore’s site. JimK’s wife made a very convincing case that it was probably forged, and I showed it to my parents and they thought it was likely a forgery on Mikey’s part.
Okay, it’s too coincidental that there could be two women named Cindy who lost sons named Casey in Iraq and who are both ass-to-face with Michael Moore. These people were real, so Mikey couldn’t have pulled it DIRECTLY out of his ass.
And with this letter, Sheehan’s earlier praising of Bush, her present bleating, and her relationship with Moore, there are three scenarios here.
1) Cindy’s later account of Bush was true, and she only said what she said for the sake of other mothers of dead Iraq troops, but that the typical Mooreon talking points are just how she feels and Michael Moore is just taking advantage of her. She also simply has a similar writing style to Michael Moore and, if her son was a cop who died on a drug bust that turned out to be a false tip, would talk about the mayor, chief of police, etc. the same way. This means that she suddenly doesn’t care about the mothers of other dead troops and that she cares more about name calling than grieving.
2) She really did feel, about a year ago, that Bush was right and did the right thing, but somehow Michael Moore took her under his wing, as she believed him to be a kindly, concerned citizen. Helping her write her letter, he made her go out and say these things. It is possible. I mean, there are plenty of people who think Michael Moore is just a saintly elf who only wants to do good on this Earth.
3) She really doesn’t give a swimming shit about her son and when Bush grieved with her, she said all this warm and fuzzy stuff cuz--well--Bush is her celebrity connection. Later on, Moore either comes to her, or puts the word out that he’s looking for someone like her and they collaborate on said letter (actually, seeing this Sheehan on TV… I believe she could write something like this) and since her celebrity connection to Moore is bound to prove to be so much more fruitful, she dives head first into his pool of Bush bashing and anti-War Mongering.
Incidentally, her original account makes it seem, to me anyway, as if she and her husband were among many families at the gathering… her later statement makes it seem like it was just her, Bush, and if you remember her husband, him too. It could be significant, but maybe not.
What is significant is this: moorewatch.com was appearantly off in its analysis of the letter. There really is a Cindy and there really is a Casey. On the other hand, Cindy either has a similar writing style to Michael Moore and is just as obsessed with name calling and the political aspect of the war as Moore is; or gave Michael Moore permission to write a politically-charged, vitriolic letter on her behalf and is now merrily on her way to a new life as a media darling.
Interesting insight. I think he makes some excellent points.
RSS (Subscribe)