WH thinks Sheehan story bored reporters' silly obsession during slow Aug.

[DeepModem Mom]

Is Sheehan a Spark or a Flicker?
By Dan Froomkin
Special to washingtonpost.com
Thursday, August 18, 2005; 11:45 AM

Is Cindy Sheehan the spark igniting an antiwar movement that threatens the Bush presidency? Or is she just an over-hyped flicker that will be extinguished with the next turn of the news cycle?

The White House is counting on it being the latter. As the Washington Post's Jim VandeHei explained in a Live Online discussion yesterday: "The White House thinks this whole story is a silly obsession of bored reporters with nothing better to do during the slow August."

But with more than a thousand Sheehan-inspired vigils all over the country last night -- and a national conversation unleashed -- there are reasons to think the White House may be wrong.


A Conversation

Joe Garofoli writes in the San Francisco Chronicle: "Vacaville resident Cindy Sheehan camped out near President Bush's vacation ranch in Crawford, Texas, in the hope of inspiring a national conversation about the war.

"Her plea for Bush to explain what 'noble cause' her son Casey died for in Iraq last year also has inspired a national conversation about Sheehan. And her name has become shorthand for what people think of the war....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/04/11/LI2005041100879.html

[tridim]

1. What are they going to say the day BushCo is frog marched?

That ought to be good.

[peacetalksforall]

2. They are transparent and predictable. You can finish all their

sentences. Boring. Really boring rationale. Rove and the whig gang are not up to par. Maybe they should hire someone new.

[aquart]

3. This White House has been correct WHEN?