Google search: site:democraticunderground.com + "attention whore" + sheehan

[Renew Deal]

Here is the search. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=site%3Ademocraticunderground.com+%2B+%22attention+whore%22+%2B+sheehan&btnG=Search

The 1 and only comment that says Cindy Sheehan is an attention whore:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2977436&mesg_id=2980293

Nothing to do with Sheehan
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=484115&mesg_id=484123

Jane Fonda is an attention whore
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x983254#989420

Kucinich is an attention whore
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3197664&mesg_id=3198616

There's exactly 1 comment that says that Cindy Sheehan is an attention whore. Cindy Sheehan should apologize to DU.

[flvegan]

1. What if the comment was deleted before Google "saw" it?

[Renew Deal]

3. Then Cindy probably never saw it.

Because Google moves very fast.

[flvegan]

4. I don't think

that's how Google works. But, tbh, I'm not an expert and don't have anything to back that up.

[Renew Deal]

7. Click on my google link

You'll see posts from last night have already been scanned by google. I've noticed that they hit popular sites in under 12 hours.

[Tom Joad]

14. I don't think it moves all that fast. When i put something on my site,

and then do a search for it, it won't show up for like 12 hours or so.
And for all we know, she saw something 3 minutes after it was posted.

the point i think she was making is that some very negative comments were posted about her. I suspect worse was being said by the Dem leadership. I am sure they see her as a thorn in their side. They had no intention of even pretending to want to defund this war when they took office this year. Look at the much talked about 100 hour agenda, and Iraq was NOT even on the list. Look at the way the candidates were recruited... the strong anti-war people were passed over in favor of the more "flexible" (McNerney won anyway, so a big rasberry to Rahm & Co.)

The Dem party is as much a part of the empire's war machine as the Republican Party.

Perhaps Cindy had unrealistic expectations of the Dems.

[Renew Deal]

17. She may have

seen something 3 minutes after it's posted, but if she's such an avid DU reader she knows that people on this site overwhelmingly support her.

[proud2BlibKansan]

60. She saw it

I know for a fact she saw it.

[Clovis Sangrail]

118. google doesn't move that fast

the crawl rate is adaptive (IIRC)

[LoZoccolo]

2. No kidding she should apologize. n/t

[Tom Joad]

5. I don't think she owes DU an apology. I think we owe it to her to leave her alone

god... probably way too many people trying to make too many demands and expectations of her, little wonder they burn out.

[MadBadger]

56. Nobody owes her an apology, and certainly not us

When you put yourself out there like she does, you have to expect the criticism and take it. That is the life of people in the public eye.

[Renew Deal]

112. I disagree

Those that have personally attacked her or tried to hurt her personally owe her more than an apology.

[Skidmore]

6. Go read Skinner's letter at the top of the GD forum.

Then you might know what you are talking about. She owes no one an apology for speaking truth.

[Renew Deal]

10. I read it.

And if Skinner deleted 1 post, then he forgot 1 (or didn't see it). Either way, Cindy's attack on DU was uncalled for and she should apologize.

[proud2BlibKansan]

63. Cindy told the truth

No reason for her to apologize. It is insulting to expect her to do so.

[LeftCoast]

8. According to Skinner's post the post did exist, but was deleted by the mods

Just an FYI

[Renew Deal]

11. Then he missed the 1 I found.

Which makes it 2 posts. Either way, Cindy should apologize to DU.

[Dhalgren]

9. Get a life and leave Cindy alone. Jesus!

[Renew Deal]

13. Why?

[proud2BlibKansan]

64. Amen

This obsession with her from those who don't like her words is repulsive. They all need to shut the fuck up. Click on another thread. Sheesh. It's like they are just determined to get the last word in on this subject.

I have known 3rd graders who weren't this immature.

[Renew Deal]

111. I don't think you get the point of the internet or message boards

Why do you feel that we have to agree or STFU? This is a political forum and she is a public figure. I agree that personal attacks on her or (almost) anyone else are inappropriate. She posted an open letter and I am posting an open reply. I think that was the point.

[JuniperLea]

114. If you want to make yourself look

really bad... go for it.

I think all the Cindy bashing is a huge waste of time, and a horribly pathetic tell...

[Renew Deal]

116. I think it's a waste of time as well.

I think she's done much more good than bad and is clearly on the side of those that want to end this war.

[MrPrax]

12. Why would someone google search?

You can look at the Lobby just as easily from today

...give it a couple of days and that thread will be on the Google tubes as well just like yours. ;-)

[Puglover]

15. Um doe's this help you out?

Not the only link where the poster called her that. The other was deleted.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=986803#988938


The other called her that twice. I know as I alerted on the thing. Any other questions? Equivocations?

[Renew Deal]

16. That's a new post.

I'm talking about anything older than her letter.

[Puglover]

18. Well, the orig post was up all day yesterday. As I said

I and others alerted on it. Oh and sorry. This was posted a whole hour after her letter. :eyes: I'm not sure what bullshit you are trying to pull here but it's not flying.

[Renew Deal]

19. If you're not sure

You should not comment.

[Puglover]

20. I alerted.

Since your thread makes us all look like idiots. That work for you?

[Renew Deal]

22. Works fine

:thumbsup:

My thread had nothing to do with how you look.

[flvegan]

21. If the poster is not sure of "what bullshit you are trying to pull here"

they they shouldn't comment? :rofl:

Okay, whatever. Fact is, the shit was posted, Cindy obviously saw it. She doesn't owe DU a fucking apology.

Your Google-ology ain't gonna work.

[Renew Deal]

24. Lots of stuff is posted at DU

99.5% absolutely positive about her. So why should she single out DU? The only difference between DU and other sites is that we are allowed to disagree with each other. Not everyone in the world is going to like her. She's a public figure that has had much more thrown at her than a few comments on DU. Maybe she should have reacted this harshly to Bill O'Reilly.

[BuyingThyme]

23. What if you were to take the time to read what she wrote?

[Renew Deal]

25. I did.

Now what?

[BuyingThyme]

26. Now try to explain this thread without making a fool of yourself.

[Renew Deal]

27. Based on the search results

Cindy's attack on DU was unwarranted and she should apologize.

[BuyingThyme]

28. How is what she said unwarranted, Bleachers7?

Do you have any logical argument at all? Or are you just attacking ad hominem.

[Renew Deal]

29. Ad hominem?

Look at your last post. "Now try to explain this thread without making a fool of yourself."

That's ad hominem.

The logic is that there may have been a negative comment or two on DU about Cindy Sheehan. DU has been overwhelmingly supportive of her and it's wrong of her to single out DU the way she did. Bill O'Reilly did more damage to her than DU ever could have, yet she singles us out. It's wrong and she should apologize.

[BuyingThyme]

30. Bill O'Reilly is not a Democrat.

Again, what you need to do is read what she wrote; otherwise you will only keep making a fool of yourself.

[Renew Deal]

31. Would calling you a hypocrite

be ad hominem?

I did read what she said. You attack me personally instead of my argument. You're the type of person Cindy is talking about.

[BuyingThyme]

32. I attacked you with your lack of logic, understanding, and information.

That's not ad hominem, no matter how bad it makes you look.

Now, would you like to offer any logical argument to back up what you're saying here?

[Renew Deal]

33. You're lack of comprehension

reflects on you solely. You're attacking a fellow dem. Cindy Sheehan would be ashamed of your post.

[BuyingThyme]

34. Again, do you have any logic to back up your post?

Your tendency to completely misrepresent what Cindy said, now coupled with nothing but silliness, has worn thin.

[Renew Deal]

36. Now we're getting somewhere

Please show me how I misrepresented her.

[BuyingThyme]

40. You just made up some nonsense about her having a problem

with people attacking Dems for the right reason. Before that you totally misrepresented her letter by indicating that Bill O'Reilly would be a more appropriate target. Before that you concocted a specious argument about how many times the phase attention whore appears on DU.

At no point have you represented her words accurately.

Thanks for asking.

[Renew Deal]

43. Huh?

You didn't answer the question. So how did I misrepresent her letter?

[BuyingThyme]

46. So, now you're going to pretend that you don't understand?

Is that all you've got left?

[Renew Deal]

50. I'm not pretending.

Your post didn't answer the question. The question was "How did I misrepresent what she said in the letter."

There's a funny thing that happens on the internet all the time. People disagree with an argument and/or don't comprehend it. So instead of attempting to discuss it, they try to start a flame war and get it locked. It's quite common.

[BuyingThyme]

67. You stated that she should apologize because the phrase only

appears once, thus giving the misrepresentation that she said otherwise.

You stated that she should have singled out Bill O'Reilly, thus giving the misrepresentation that she was referring to something other than the progressive community.

But you know this; you just need to keep misrepresenting in order to back up your misrepresentation.

What if you were to finally offer that logical argument for which I have repeatedly asked? You won't, because it would cause you to accurately reflect what Cindy said in that letter and the truth does not serve your OP. You might even be inclined to apologize for misrepresenting what Cindy said.

[northzax]

105. someone should calculate how many millions of posts

there have been on this board since day 1. 50 million? There are 100,000 members, one calls her a name and that's justification for writing a public letter denouncing an entire community?

by the way. this message board was cited by a hero of yours (I am assuming here) as a reason that she cannot continue what she saw as her life's work, as a reason that her son died for nothing. Why are you still here?

[Renew Deal]

110. Posting at 50,000 feet

Please reread your first point and clarify. It makes no sense as written.

I'm not saying that she should have singled out Bill O'Reilly and that wasn't in the original post. Here's what O'Reilly said in front of millions and Bill Donahue. What was said on DU is nothing compared to that. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ctlmholr45c

I never implied that she was referring to anything other than the Democratic community. I just said that others have done more to harm her than DU ever could have.

"you just need to keep misrepresenting in order to back up your misrepresentation." You're just arguing in circles with yourself. I have repeatedly posted the "logical argument." It's not my fault that you are incapable of comprehending it. But that's OK. You are not required to discuss things that are over your head. You might want to apologize to me for misrepresenting my words. Especially when you ultimately agree with my point: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=993032&mesg_id=994018

[Lone_Star_Dem]

35. You're assuming the person spelled attention correctly

FWIW I've seen things here said like, "Anyone who thinks Cindy Sheehan has an IQ above 80 hasn't paid attention. Her only cause is herself."

And, "it will also always be a shame that she threw that good will away by becoming a shrill harpy for ANSWER and Hugo Chavez."

And, "I think she has a martyr complex going. She needs to sit down, grieve her son and get on with her life.

I had a lot of sympathy for her at first, but not anymore. It's time for Cindy to get a job and deal with things."


None of the above was said by the same person nor in the same thread.

Would it have been better for you if Ms. Sheehan had listed all the derogatory things said about her on DU? If there's anything DU owes her it's our thanks, she could have exposed worse than she did.

[Renew Deal]

38. I'm sure those things are posted.

And people have a right to criticize her. DU (including myself) has been overwhelmingly supportive of her. It's unfair for her to attack DU the way she did.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

48. I see

Ideally since there's been more good said than bad, she should ignore whatever pain the bad has caused her. Funny how that never seems to be how human nature works though, isn't it?

[Renew Deal]

52. I agree in general.

It depends on the person. Still, Cindy should know who her friends are and we are her friends.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

66. It hurts more to think that your friends are the ones betraying you

I know that it wasn't most of us, but if someone was singling out the worst of us to show Cindy how would she know? There have been some horrible things said here about her and if those were the threads she saw imagine how painful that could be.

[BuyingThyme]

44. As her letter said, "attention whore" is among

the milder rebukes.

The really sick stuff has to do with the references made in regards to her relationship with her son, and none of this crap is limited to DU.

[Renew Deal]

47. That's my point exactly.

It's not limited to DU is DU is such a mild offender; especially when you consider how supportive we have been.

[BuyingThyme]

49. DU is not a mild offender.

Your reading comprehension is again revealed.

[Renew Deal]

53. Ad hominem

lol

[BuyingThyme]

59. Again, you do not understand the concept.

Do you have any logic or information to back your OP? Anything at all?

[Renew Deal]

113. Here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=993032&mesg_id=993643

and many subsequent posts.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

62. I didn't see where she was attributing the comments made about her and her son to DU

I have, however, seen several post on DU which were not simply disagreeing with her but were childish attacks instead.

Also, I remember arguing with posters (here on DU) until I was blue in the face over imagined financial improprieties regarding the Crawford Peace House.

[BuyingThyme]

77. I'm saying that the stuff about her son is probably among the

less-mild stuff that she did not bother to mention.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

94. I understand now.

I thought I had missed or misread something, but now I understand what you meant.

[High Plains]

37. Okay, we hear you.

Your opinion is duly noted and filed where it belongs.

[Renew Deal]

41. Thanks

:thumbsup:

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Renew Deal]

45. I think I agree.

DU takes more shit than almost any Democratic site on the web. That's probably because of the forum style of DU vs. the blog style of other sites. We have more people posting a broad spectrum of thoughts. That makes us an easy target. In this case I feel that DU has taken a hit that it didn't deserve.

[ComerPerro]

42. But, but, Cindy said it, so it must be the God's honest truth!

[BuyingThyme]

51. She didn't say "it." The OP fabricated whatever "it" is.

[Renew Deal]

54. Please post the specific fabrication.

:shrug:

[BuyingThyme]

55. Well, apparently you are trying to make the case that

Cindy Sheehan indicated that DUers used the phrase attention whore more than once.

But because you are afraid to enter any realm of logic or reason, it's difficult to be sure. And because you have been unable to comprehend what she actually wrote, it really doesn't matter anyways.

[ComerPerro]

57. as much as I love a good flame war, I am not getting into this pathetic line of crap you are spewing

I've seen your thoughts on this, and it is just sad.

[BuyingThyme]

61. What thoughts are those?

What's sad?

[ComerPerro]

69. as much as I love a good flame war, I am not getting into this pathetic line of crap you are spewing

I've seen your thoughts on this, and it is just sad.

[BuyingThyme]

73. Let me know what "flame war" you're referring to.

Are you just making it up in order to entertain yourself?

[ComerPerro]

76. as much as I love a good flame war, I am not getting into this pathetic line of crap you are spewing

I've seen your thoughts on this, and it is just sad.

[BuyingThyme]

78. Well, it looks like you're a child who has nothing better to do

than fabricate flame wars to entertain yourself. Funny how that's the exact opposite of the way you choose to describe yourself.

[ComerPerro]

80. as much as I love a good flame war, I am not getting into this pathetic line of crap you are spewing

You can't help yourself, can you?

[BuyingThyme]

82. I can't help but ask you to tell me what you're repeatedly referring to?

That's correct; particularly in light of the fact that you are making things up about me. What if you were to have a minimal regard for the truth?

[ComerPerro]

87. as much as I love a good flame war, I am not getting into this pathetic line of crap you are spewing

If you can't see what I am referring to, then you won't see it. Probably because you are refusing to

[BuyingThyme]

88. Come on. DU isn't a place for intellectual cowards or

outright liars. Let's have it.

[ComerPerro]

91. I agree. So stop calling me a liar and do some self-analysis.

[BuyingThyme]

92. There must be something you can come up with

to put a little truth to all of your nonsense. Please, post it now. Let me know what you were referring to as a "pathetic line of crap."

If you don't have anything, just make up something else.

[proud2BlibKansan]

68. It is true; I remember the threads

Cindy also talked to me about this when I saw her in April. I assured her it was only a few trolls. Unfortunately, since then, I have realized there were also long time DUers involved.

[ComerPerro]

70. If she wants to cripple and dismantle the Democratic party, she can do whatever she wants

but I would prefer she didn't do it here.

Moreover, if she does insist on going after Democrats, she better not be suprised when Republicans win again.

[proud2BlibKansan]

72. She is not doing anything here!!

She is not a DUer. Blame those who posted her blogs, not her. Sheesh. Seems fairly simple to me.

[ComerPerro]

75. well, for one, she namechecked this site.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

84. That's how it goes

You say things on the internet and someone calls you out for saying them. Such is life.

It's the same thing as the DUers that have called out Cindy. It's their right, even if I don't like it nor agree with it, there's nothing I can do to stop them.

[proud2BlibKansan]

89. Because she was called names and cruelly criticized here

I know that you know this happened. :)

[ComerPerro]

90. John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Dick Durbin

John Edwards, Wes Clark, Michael Moore, Bill Maher, Bill Clinton, Joe Lieberman, Jimmy Carter, Dennis Kucinich, Howard Dean, Keith Olberman, Jon Stewart

They have all been called names and attacked and cruelly criticized here. Some more than others, but I assure you many have been criticized (quite cruelly) much more than Cindy Sheehan here.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

93. When Camp Casey was beginning DU was a vital cog

We've dealt with Cindy on a more personal level than any of those you've mentioned. The first big organized Camp Casey event had a great deal of help from MANY of us DUers here. Many of us have shared our time, conversation and tears standing alongside Cindy while we protested this war.

You're examples are not the same.

[proud2BlibKansan]

95. DU led me to Cindy

I went down to meet her in August 2005 with a DU friend.

I have started to check when DUers criticize Cindy to see when they joined here. Many were not here 2 years ago. So I guess they don't have a sense of the history of our support.

[rinsd]

99. Some DUers went, out of a community of thousands.

I can understand why DUers here(especially thos ethat went) would be very upset with negative comments about Cindy.

What I am unsure of is why Cindy cares that a few DUers do not like her.

[rinsd]

97. I'm sorry but why does Cindy give a shit what people post about her here?

[proud2BlibKansan]

102. Because she got so much support here in 2005

Were you not around here then?

[rinsd]

104. Yes she got support from quite a few here.

And I certainly can understand why DUers who met with Cindy or went to Camp Casey would be very upset about the remarks.

But again, why does she herself care what a few people on a message board of thousands say about her?

[proud2BlibKansan]

106. You would have to ask her that

[proud2BlibKansan]

58. I saw it way more than once

I would imagine the majority of the posts calling her this have been deleted. I know if this was my site, I would have deleted them immediately after reading Cindy's blog yesterday.

[AWESOM-O]

65. Here's another one of those posts.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2369372&mesg_id=2370030

Notice any similarities between this and that first linked post?

[proud2BlibKansan]

71. Good find

Thanks.

Yes, I see the similarities.

[ComerPerro]

79. not sure what point you were trying to make, whether it was that she was called that in a different

thread, or that it was the same poster who called her that.

Either way

:shrug:

BTW, did you name yourself after Cartman's robot? I usually despise South Park when they try to preach, but episodes that are just strictly comedy, like that one, are hilarious. Especially when they go out of there way to make Cartman look like an even bigger jackass.

[AWESOM-O]

83. I was looking for other missed posts out of curiousity. I didn't expect

it to be the from same guy though.

Anyway, that's one of my favorite episodes, that and Make Love, Not Warcraft.

[ComerPerro]

86. ehh, I didn't really like that one, mostly because it wasn't well thought out.

I think they just went with the stereotypes of gamers and of games. I really just think they could have done a lot more with it. But I am picky, and happen to love Warcraft. (There are still people, to this day, who spam trade channels with "WTB Sword of 1000 Truths" and say things in groups like "We are going to go into the woods, and kill boars"). Would be funny, but everyone says it like they are the first person to think of it.

[Renew Deal]

115. Nice find

Yep, and that one wouldn't come up in my search terms. Was this the person that posted the comment the other night?

[tkmorris]

74. Try to search Google for THIS thread

Use any keywords you like. Unless the stars align you aint gonna find it.

The thread DID exist Bleacher, I saw it. It was posted at approximately 1:00 AM EST Monday morning, or late Sunday night depending on perspective. When viewed later the majority of the worst comments had been deleted but they were there, and for quite awhile.

Me? I don't care. I empathize with Cindy, but don't really connect with her. The premise behind this thread was just outlandish enough that I had to comment on it. You really don't know what you're talking about, or how Google works, and I suspect the internet too. Don't be so bold about advertising that fact.

[Mutineer]

81. I'm not sure why just a couple of negative posts

would outweigh all the very complimentary and positive and supportive posts of her through the last couple of years in her mind. But it was her decision to make and we should respect it. I wish she wouldn't leave the movement and I wish she wouldn't have named DU by name but what's done is done. Maybe she wanted to quit anyway and this was as good a reason as any. But in a community as large as DU there is always going to be a lot of diverse opinions and as an apparently regular reader of DU, she should know that better than anyone. The "attention whore" comment was just one negative comment out of thousands that were overwhelmingly positive. I do agree it was unfair of her to single us out. But I still think she's entitled to her opinion and if she wants to go, well, there's not much we can do apparently to convince her otherwise no matter how many positive statements many of us make.

[BuyingThyme]

85. Threads like this one have proven Cindy to be correct.

[proud2BlibKansan]

96. Very true.

[northzax]

107. hey, check the name of this site!

I do believe it is "democratic underground" when you start attacking the democrats, it is reasonable for a place dedicated to democrats to be upset by that. this is not a one issue board, there is not litmus test on the war to be a member or even in posts. THIS IS NOT AN ANTI-WAR SITE, per se. it is a democratic site, and you know what? not all democrats are opposed to the war. there is room for flexibility there. not all democrats think the war was 'illegal' even if they don't support it. so yes, anytime a one-issue person says, publically and loudly, that their issue is the only important one, to the detriment of other issues that people might find important as well, it tends to annoy people.

if ending the war is the most important thing, the only issue to you, fabulous. doesn't mean it is to others.

[CabalPowered]

100. Good post

and welcome to DU!

:toast:

[Hissyspit]

98. Sorry. I saw the comment on Saturday. And it was in a thread with a lot of negativity toward her.

The first comment started out with by calling her "Toots." I would have been very upset if I was her. I was upset and posted one comment, but not in response to the "attention whore" comment.

[Cleita]

101. Cindy and her son Casey were victims of the George W. Bush

administration. I really don't think that beating up on victims like some people are doing here is ever appropriate even though you don't agree with them. She owes no one an apology but many here owe her one.

[Bluebear]

103. Yes, it's all about search results, not feelings. nt

[blogslut]

108. First

Cindy does not make reference to when she saw the post with the epithet.

Second, I really don't think teh Google picks up every single keyword from DU.

Third, you have no idea what kind of robots.txt files Skinner and Co. use for this site.

Fourth, she mentions a whole lot of people. Does she owe them apologies as well, or just us?

Fifth, You go give up a couple three years of your life for a cause and face nothing but wrath and then discover that some of the very people that appear to support you are instead, slinging cruel slurs at you.

[Bluebear]

109. Indeed. nt

[Renew Deal]

117. I can only speak for my small share of this community.

And as a member of this community I feel that her attack was uncalled for in light of how supportive we have been.

Edit: Hi Blogslut, I didn't realize that we had talked about this in the other post. You know how I feel. I don't feel the same way in regards to the Democratic Party. I think the entities are different and their treatment of Cindy have been different. DU has been very good to her.