A Quote by Cindy Sheehan

We mean business, George Bush, ... and we're going to go to Congress and we're going to ask them, 'How many more of other people's children are you willing to sacrifice for the lies' And we're going to say, Shame on you. Shame on you for giving him the authority to invade Iraq.
We need a people's movement to end this war, ... We're going to ask them How many more of other people's children are you willing to sacrifice for the lies
If you're going to have a kid who engages in critical thinking, you're not going to shut them down when they ask a question. You're not going to settle for "because." You're going to encourage them to ask more. And you want them to understand how other people think.
It's easy to say, and a lot of people pay lip service, saying, 'I want to win.' But, well, everybody wants to win. What are you willing to sacrifice to be able to win? Are you going to sacrifice money? Are you going to sacrifice playing time? You gotta sacrifice something.
Students are up to their eyeballs in loans, and it's going to get even worse. It's going to be hideous, actually. Students are going to be saddled for life. It's going to put a lot of people off going to college, which is a shame.
I should have voted for the first Iraq war. George Bush did that one very well. I had been skeptical. I was afraid that George Bush was going to treat the first Iraq war the way his son treated the second.
There were more people against going into Iraq than there were going into the Falklands... but the shame I carry as a British resident, was that it was a war handled in the media as if it were a World Cup summer. Like when England go into the World Cup, there are Union Jacks on the papers, and you can look at headlines from the time and it sounded just like that. Ultimately, I was privy to footage from ITN archives - that wasn't shown on television - of the people we were fighting, and it was shameful. It was bullying. It was really horrible. How could we have been proud of winning that?
You see it is important to understand how damaged people don't always know how to say yes, or to choose the big thing, even when it is right in front of them. It's a shame we carry. The shame of wanting something good. The shame of feeling something good. The shame of not believing we deserve to stand in the same room in the same way as all those we admire. Big red As on our chests.
The perfect tools aren't going to help us if we can't face each other and give and receive fearlessly, but more important, to ask without shame.
I never want to be that guy spouting off my political views. I mean, they're pretty well known, and it certainly comes out. If something's bugging my ass on any particular day, I'm probably going to say something about it, but I'm not going to go on a tirade. I dislike George Bush as much as probably anybody on earth could, but having said that...I've said it, you know? It's not like I'm going to change anybody's mind.
When George W. Bush decided to save the American position in Iraq by going against the advice of all of his wise men, of Jim Baker and the whole Iraq Study Group, and 90% of his administration, that was George W. Bush's decision. So we have to bear in mind that this isn't an administration we're electing. It's a person that we are electing.
I'm not a college graduate, but I don't know how George W.Bush could have truly believed that the flower of democracy was going to blossom in that part of the world, I mean Iraq - at least in part because the governments there are so tied to religion .
If George W. Bush had gone into Iraq for cynical reasons, we could cut our losses now. What's frightening is that he did it for ideological reasons, and therefore he's not going to get out. So it isn't ultimately about oil or about Israel, it's about a belief. I don't know whether God talks to him or whether he's trying to undo what his father did. But he believes in the mission. The body bags aren't going to deter him. Public dissent isn't going to deter him.
Few knew in 2000 that George W. Bush was going to end up with neoconservatives all over the place. Once 9/11 happened, I think it's fair to say that some neocons have had an enormous influence. The whole solution to every problem was to go after Iraq. This had been a neoconservative mantra for ten years. Bush certainly sees himself as having been given an endorsement. He was asked why Donald Rumsfeld,Condoleezza Rice, and Paul Wolfowitz have been promoted, these people who led us into the debacle in Iraq. Bush said there was accountability-it was the election. So there we are.
I'm worried about people who say George W. Bush is lying. It's much more frightening that he's not lying, that he believes what he believes: that it's his mission to change the Middle East into a democracy. That's more unnerving. We'd be better off if the whole purpose of the adventure in Iraq was, say, to protect Israel or to protect the flow of oil to America and keep it at a reasonable price and try to get some more control. If it was about oil, going into Iraq, I guess, could have made sense.
There was no such thing as Al Qaeda in Iraq, until George Bush and John McCain decided to invade Iraq.
Nobody wants a job where they don't have authority to go along with the responsibility. Quite the contrary. The more authority you give people, the better people you can attract, and the harder they're going to work, and the more loyal they are going to be.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!