Hey you're not black.
You can't talk about Rosa Parks
That's racist.

Okay I'll quit being a silly cracker and shut up.

Rosa Parks... was the figurehead of a cause that fought to free an entire race who were being oppressed in their own country.
Cindy Sheehan... was the figurehead of a cause that fights to defeat one man./was the figurehead of a cause that fought to keep an entire nation enslaved and oppressed in their own country.

Rosa Parks... was the figurehead of a cause that fought to free an entire race who were being oppressed in their own country.
Cindy Sheehan... was the figurehead of a cause that fights to defeat one man.

--To begin, Cindy is the figurehead of a cause to end a war that has caused 1,900 American deaths thus far. Also, please explain how she is attempting to "defeat" Bush. He was, after all, already re-elected.

Rosa Parks... fought the system to obtain constitutional rights.
Cindy Sheehan... says our constitution isn't worth fighting for.

--What, precisely, does a war in the Middle East have to do with our constitution?

Rosa Parks... was "tired of giving in."
Cindy Sheehan... wants for nothing more than for the United States to give in.

--Or she wants for the United States to focus on something other than Iraq. But you say tomayto, I say tomahto.

Rosa Parks... inspired freedom-loving people around the world.
Cindy Sheehan... inspires freedom-loathing people including neo-Nazis, Klansmen, and Islamic terrorists.

--Please cite one Klansman or neo-Nazi inspired by Sheehan. And methinks the terrorists may be inspired by photos of Iraqi citizens having their genitals hooked to electrodes rather than middle aged suburbanites.

Rosa Parks... to fight against the bigots of the Democratic Party to achieve her agenda.
Cindy Sheehan... firmly supported from bigoted anti-Semitic elements within the Democratic Party.

--I didn't know Zell Miller was a fan.

Rosa Parks... When she was successful, the cause of freedom was advanced.
Cindy Sheehan... If successful tomorrow and U.S. troops were immediately withdrawn, the freedom of 56 million people would be jeopardized.

--Because the 100,000 already dead haven't had their liberty jeapordized.

Rosa Parks... is nearly universally described as having a quiet dignity and grace, was proud to be an American.
Cindy Sheehan... has the mouth of a sailor, and calls America a "cancer."

--Rosa was most assuredly NOT described as a woman of quiet dignity and grace in the 1960's. And it is doubtful that a woman who considers the whole of America and her ideals a "cancer" could raise an Eagle scout who joined the Marines.

Tom:
>Rosa Parks... fought the system to obtain constitutional rights.
>Cindy Sheehan... says our constitution isn't worth fighting for.
>--What, precisely, does a war in the Middle East have to do with our constitution?

Interesting non-denial of what she said. But, to be completely accurate, she said "This country is not worth dying for." source: Chicago Sun-Times. It's a reasonable leap from "this country" to "our constitution." To me, anyway.

>Rosa Parks... inspired freedom-loving people around the world.
>Cindy Sheehan... inspires freedom-loathing people including neo-Nazis, Klansmen, and Islamic terrorists.
>--Please cite one Klansman or neo-Nazi inspired by Sheehan.

Uh, David Duke. source: DavidDuke.com

>And methinks the terrorists may be inspired by photos of Iraqi citizens having their genitals hooked to electrodes rather than middle aged suburbanites.

So, illegal actions -- by a few part-time soldiers and condemned by the US military -- is more inspiring than your middle-aged suburbanite who is the poster-child of the anti-US movement? Hmmm.

> Rosa Parks... to fight against the bigots of the Democratic Party to achieve her agenda.
>Cindy Sheehan... firmly supported from bigoted anti-Semitic elements within the Democratic Party.
>--I didn't know Zell Miller was a fan.

While I can't confirm that you are from Texas, that statement alone confirms you aren't from Georgia. If so, you'd know better that to make such an obviously silly statement about Governor Miller. Cite one anti-semetic statement, remark, action by Gov. Miller.

>Rosa Parks... When she was successful, the cause of freedom was advanced.
>Cindy Sheehan... If successful tomorrow and U.S. troops were immediately withdrawn, the freedom of 56 million people would be jeopardized.
>--Because the 100,000 already dead haven't had their liberty jeapordized.

First of all, it was 500,000 died under Saddam. source: Stanford. Unless you're perpetuating the lie of "100,000 killed by Bush" that was debunked months ago. source: Slate.

I know, Tom. Facts are bothersome things, especially when they are not in line with your statements. Maybe you'll find a support group that can help you over this rough time.

We're here for you. Our arms are open. Just open your eyes and ears. Things will be alright.

Basil,

It is not nice to whip up on the mentally handicapped.

That said, while you mentioned that former Grand Dragon David Duke enthusiastically supports "Mother Sheehan," you forgot to mention that neo-Nazi group Stormfront.org joined Cindy Sheehan in Crawford, TX, and that Code Pink, who gave $600,000 to the "other side" in Fallujah, has also been with Cindy from the beginning.

It isn't that Cindy & Co. are just anti-war, Tom, they are quite literally anti-American.

There may be a similarity. Parks was an NAACP plant in a well planned maneuver, her action was not spontaneous. Cindy may be the same.

David, I didn't say they had nothing in common - they are both female, too - but they are far, far more dissimilar in the causes they represent than they are similar.

Cindy Sheehan has more in common politically with David Duke than Rosa Parks, and we don't hear the press trumpeting that similarity.

I doubt we will, either.

It's more accurate to say conservatives opposed Rosa Parks' right, rather than Democrats. The liberal wings of the Republicans and Democrats were supportive, while the conservative wings weren't. Interestingly, the liberals included Richard Nixon, who due to his positions set in 1960 what is still the GOP record for black support in a presidential race, something like 33%. Bush can boast that he went from 9% to 11%, but until he knows how to actually listen to a constituency, instead of telling them what they "should" believe, he and the rest of the GOP will never get black votes. Despite what you think, blacks are dumb sheep being led around by the nose by Democrats; they don't vote for conservatives for good reasons.

Let's face it: conservatives just have a blind spot when it comes to racism. When will you people get over your fetishism for discrimination? You condemn some poor woman who lost her son; let's hear you condemn Jesse Helms. That is, if you really do have "moral clarity." Otherwise, you're much worse than anything Cindy Sheehan did.

How‘d the jump get made from Cindy Sheehan to Uncle Jesse?

I didn't even see the ramp getting built and to cover a stretch like that it's got to be at least a mile long.

If all else fails change topics.

Did anybody see the game on Sunday?

Do you really want to dance with me, Joe?

Jesse Helms was a racist, as was fellow Dixiecrat-turned-Republican Strom Thurmond. No question.

All other Democrats (and these men both were at the time. "Left" that out, didn't you?) turned Dixiecrats rejoined their Klan, er, clan in the Democratic Party once the Dixecrats dissolved. This includes of course Robert Byrd, John C. Stennis, Jamoes O. Eastland, Sam Ervin, Herman Talmadge, and on and on, and on...

All of these men, however (with the notable exception of “Sheets” Byrd), were in the past.

Care to talk about the present?

Bush has appointed more minorities to major positions of power than all presidents before him, combined. Call me when anything Democrats actually do (as opposed to your lip service) comes close.

Now back to your hero, Saint Cindy.

Cindy Sheehan does not think it was worthwhile to depose the Taliban over 9/11. She has no ill will for the terrorists who killed her son, and socializes with convicted terrorist supporters, and Baathist supporters of Saddam Hussein.

Your "poor woman" Cindy Sheehan says that our nation is a "cancer" and that if we believe that we have a valid constitution that we are fascists. She has said “This country is not worth dying for.” She said she considers our form of government “repugnant.”

She is an American-hater, tarred only by her own words. That you support her Joe, says a whole lot about who you are, and has little to do with the politics of the past.

The "ramp" is from you conservatives acting like you have always been so pro-black rights, when as my post explained, you haven't. So holding up Rosa Parks as your saint is a tad disingenuous.

And the point of my post was to note the distinction between "Democrat/Republican" and "Liberal/Conservative." Southern Democrats = conservatives, just as Northeastern republicans = liberals. So saying the Democratic party opposed civil rights is not quite precise. The best way to keep track of who supported civil rights is by looking at who was conservative and who was liberal. Liberals were right; conservatives were wrong. And by the way, since you love criticizing Democratic southerners so much, how about showing the same level of vitriol for republican southerners? But you don't. I bet if Robert Byrd had converted to the GOP, you'd think he had show admirable character.

As for Cindy Sheehan, I never said I supported her; frankly I just don't care about protesters in general. Besides, the beauty of America is you get to say "America sucks." Try that in Turkey. All I said was an expression of sympathy for her losing her son, which obviously affects her deeply. I also wondered about the mean-spiritedness of conservatives on this issue. It doesn't seem enough for you to just dismiss her as some distraught lefty mom; she must be torn limb-from-limb. The whole thing smacks of a fascist "don't criticize the State or else" attitude. But i guess that's why you guys like people like Pinochet so much, huh?

Joe,

I get the feeling you are reading a different site and responding here. You obviously didn't read the part about the daily news column that motivated the post. Confederate Yankee was not so much " holding up Rosa Parks as your saint" as responding to a column comparing her to Rosa Parks.

You also missed the part where he called two republican senator racists, so I don't see why you would assume he would automatically defend Byrd if he switched parties.

Tom in Texas and Joe (wherever you are),

To quote LTG Honore, "You're stuck on stupid!" You word things well..., it's just that you lose so much perspective when you have to look through your distorted plexiglass navel.

>--Bush has appointed more minorities to major positions of power than all presidents before him, combined. Call me when anything Democrats actually do (as opposed to your lip service) comes close.

Number of Black Democrats in Congress? 43 of 209
Number of Black Republicans in Congress? Zero of 232

Democrats have brought blacks to elected positions. While I applaud GWB for nominating minorities to his cabinet (not simply because they are minorities, but because they are for the most part imminently qualified) as well as for his supporting Hispanic Congressional leaders such as Martinez in FL, the fact remains that the Republican party has a long way to go before minorities are adequately represented within its rank and file. I am not attempting to claim that the party is racist, understand. Im simply stating, in response to your request for proof the D's did something that the Democrats have done at least as much as the Republicans in reaching out to people of color.

As for my first post:
>Rosa Parks... fought the system to obtain constitutional rights.
>Cindy Sheehan... says our constitution isn't worth fighting for.
>--What, precisely, does a war in the Middle East have to do with our constitution?
>--Interesting non-denial of what she said. But, to be completely accurate, she said "This country is not worth dying for." source: Chicago Sun-Times. It's a reasonable leap from "this country" to "our constitution." To me, anyway.

People can have moral objections to this country's actions, and consider it not worth dying for. See Ali, Muhammad for details. 40 Years ago he was antiAmerican. In 1996 He lit the Olympic flame. And objecting to our country's actions is not an objection to the ideals espoused in the constitution. They are very different.

>--First of all, it was 500,000 died under Saddam. source: Stanford.

And how did Saddam come across the weaponry to slaughter his own people like that? Gosh I hope we didn't give it to him. It would be extremely embarassing if we sold him the ability to make the very chemical weapons we later deposed him for using, wouldn't it?

>--Unless you're perpetuating the lie of "100,000 killed by Bush" that was debunked months ago. source: Slate.
I understand that "only" 25-30,000 Iraqi civilians have died as a result of Operation Iraqi Freedom. (My HTML skills are sadly lacking, so go to http://www.iraqbodycount.net/ for sourcing). I guess its okay then. Just another day for them.

>--Please cite one Klansman or neo-Nazi inspired by Sheehan.
>--Uh, David Duke. source: DavidDuke.com

David Duke and racist/antiIsraeli groups latched on to the media brouhaha concerning Sheehan. They have also latched on to many Republicans over the years. This does not make the Republicans or Sheehan racist. It makes Duke a media whore. Very different.

>--So, illegal actions -- by a few part-time soldiers and condemned by the US military -- is more inspiring than your middle-aged suburbanite who is the poster-child of the anti-US movement? Hmmm.

Part time soldiers on full time duty in a war zone? Just because they are receiving part time pay does not make them part time soldiers. And yes, I do believe that Jihadist elements within the Sunni population are able to use those pictures to stir Anti-American sentiment in the region. Call me naive (or "mentally handicapped") for thinking we might have a better shot at ending the civil strife there if things like that didn't happen.

>--While I can't confirm that you are from Texas, that statement alone confirms you aren't from Georgia. If so, you'd know better that to make such an obviously silly statement about Governor Miller. Cite one anti-semetic statement, remark, action by Gov. Miller.

My remark about Miller was flippant, I admit. Touche. On a side note: Semitic is an adjective referring to the peoples who have traditionally spoken Semitic languages such as Amharic, Arabic, Aramaic, Assyrian (Syriac), Babylonian (Akkadian), Hebrew, Maltese, and Tigrigna or to things pertaining to them. Genetic analysis suggests that the Semitic peoples share a significant common ancestry, despite important differences and contributions from other groups. Therefore
anti-semitic = anti anybody who speaks Amharic, Arabic, Aramaic, Assyrian (Syriac), Babylonian (Akkadian), Hebrew, Maltese, and Tigrigna. While the popular meaning has evolved (apologies to any ID fans out there), I doubt that anyone would call Sheehan anti-semetic as it applies to someone speaking Arabic. In fact much of your arguments seem to suggest the opposite.

I would like to point out that I am not a fan of Cindy Sheehan. I think her statements are extreme and embarassing to reasonable people on both sides. But she did lose a child to this war. What's the excuse of those who make such extremist claims on the R's side?

I don't recall anyone ever calling Rosa Parks a Saint, joe, she just looks like on in comparison to Cindy Sheehan and her cornicopia of "hate America first" supporters, including former Klansman Duke, Code Pink, Michael Moore, Move-on.org, and the neo-Nazis of Stormfront.

I despise all racists (and called Hlems and thurmond as such), as do most of todays "conservatives." We want people to get what they deserve based upon their merits, and are largely color blind. Only today's liberals still seem mired in the politics of skin color, and childish cries of "Fascism!"

The comparison between Parks and Sheehan was pretty extensive and totally fair game.

And he only criticized the senators after my comment; again, conservatives throw the book at Southern Democrats, apparently chiefly because they are Democrats, and need to be prompted to criticize their own, and then do so grudgingly.

it was conservatives like you who were the ones opposing civil rights (still are when it comes to gays). I bet Rosa Parks would spit in your faces if she knew you were using her for your agenda.

Let's put your statements to the test: read some reviews of Helms' new book, and see how conservatives really treat racists - hint: they are worse than the Soviet apologists.

As for confirmation I am from Texas, I can only offer this, though I admit it is unverifiable. I have to leave and help my grandmother prepare her home for Rita's onslaught. Rest assured I will return to continue this fascinating discussion later this afternoon.

Other forms of confirmation:

I eat Tex-Mex or barbecue at least one meal a day.
I own every Lyle Lovett, Willie Nelson, and Joe Ely record recorded (I think).
I drive a Ford F150.
Go Horns/Astros!

Tex-Mex? Wife's fixing that right now.
Country music? Wife has every country station within reach on the radio presets in the truck.
Ford F-150? That's the truck.
Horns/Astros? Ah! That clinches it! You're from Texas!

Oh, go Braves!

Texas Rangers fan, myself...I love to see the longball, and they do that better than anyone in the league.

If a gun is pointed at my head and I'm forced to pick an AL team, it would be the Rangers (or the Red Sox because I hate the Yankees that much -- well that and they gave us Baggy). I think its hilarious that Texas dumped ARod off on Steinbrenner and have a better shortstop now. I hope you can understand if I'm not a huge Braves fan, Basil. Last year did exorcise quite a few demons, though.

Lord Jesus, PLEASE don't let ANYONE compare Mother Parks with "mother?????" Cindy. Mother Parks was a REAL American, and you know I am not black and I was born in the South but Mother Parks and DR. Martin Luther King, Jr were and ARE real Americans

Let's see,

I think I would rather have Rosa Parks as a Mother than Cindy Sheehan.

....But that's just me.

AMEN. Me too, I am a disabled vet and a white SOUTH BORNED GUY but I would take Mother Parks for a MOTHER anytime as I feel a Black person has JUST as much right to drink from a water fountain as I do.

Rosa Parks is a women who should be honored for life. Rosa Parks is my role modle she is a women of her word and stands up for what she believes in!!! All blacks should have the same rights as whites thats the way it should have been. To me no one is white or black we are all people!! any comments on anything I said reply to me!! thanks!!

Rosa Parks was just a convenient cause celebre for a political movement - as is Cindy Sheehan.

Rosa was chosen because the other candidates for canonization by the local NAACP had 'character flaws': http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/database/article_display.cfm?HHID=359

Cindy has several character flaws, too. Like being a nutcase anti-American publicity hound.

The problem with the civil rights movement is that it has devolved into quotas and the supposed 'right' to equal or better results without equal effort or demonstrated ability. Ask another minority if they want to give up their academic slots they earned for less qualified 'real' minorities - yes, Asians.

Racism is holding an entire race hostage to supposed advocay groups - the Dems, the NAACP, Jesse Jackson, et al - and refusing to force them to face that poverty and illegitmacy are curable only by changing your own behavior - not by continuing to hate whitey and aspire to being a roundball player or a rap thug as the penultimate social position of your 'culture'.

Cindy Sheehan is a surrender monkey who wants to whine and moan in public for a choice made by her son - a real hero. She is only a heel attempting to sponge off his death and her inability to handle her grief like an adult. Yes, I know whereof I speak having some experience in the matter.

The civil rights movement was strategic, as is any movement, liberal or conservative. Rosa Parks was chosen to make a spectacle of the brutality of American laws towards blacks, but I don't think that understanding goes to discredit or dismantle her impact. Rosa Parks was fed up with our system and that day Rosa Parks was probably genuinely tired. The most interesting thing about this debate has been the understanding that the American government was capable of oppressing its own people beyond reason or humanity, but not taking that idea futher to understand how that might manifest itself in present day. Rosa Parks was not a popular person in her day, but her concern was with the equal treatment of all persons and because of that was able to withstand all sorts of persecution and abuse by her fellow Americans and by her government. How can we begin to understand that there are people now who are subjected to the same abuse whose motivation is sincerely in making this country, this world a more humane place. This is not to credit Sheehan, whose statements I don't know well enough, but to say that there is a different way of thinking about what is presently un-American behavior.

Also, we've got to understand how subversive injustices have become in this country and our own investments in that. The courts struck down separate but equal, because separate is never equal, but can we say that things have changed? And why not? Our schools are still heavily segregated and people of color still attend schools that are far inferior to schools of their white counterparts. Why? Because white people have historically held the money and power in this country and have figured out zoning rules and segregated communities to the point where they only have to give money to the schools in their communities. This keeps predominantly white schools good, gives better opportunities to white kids who live in better neighborhoods, who go to better colleges and get better jobs, who control the government. If that's not subversive affirmative action I don't know what is. People of color and poor whites do not have equal opportunities. They don't have to make a law that says no blacks. The people in power make it so that they never have a fair shot. Don't take your opportunities for granted.