Quote Originally Posted by KafirChobee
Absolutely agreed with everything you said, Red. Right up to the last statement. I agree, that she maybe being used now for the agenda of others, but it didn't start out that way. She was simply a distressed Mother that wanted to ask her President a question about her dead boy. Had Bush met her demand early on, this would be over - and remember he has refused to talk to anyone that's son or daughter died that doesnot fully agree with his agenda. Are a growing number of "gold star" Moms (and Dads) that have questions about the war - that Bush43 gleefully ignores.

Also, if the rancher lived in Florida, he could have said he felt threatened by the protestors and shot them all - Jeb just signed that into law. So now it is legal for one neighbor to kill another if he can show that he felt threatened. Cute, huh?

Like I said Kafir - if it is a noble cause because of her son - why the professional handlers? She could of camped out at the front gate and gotten a lot more support from people like me - if she did it on her own as a mother.

However she did not show up in Crawford as a distress mother seeking answers - she showed up as a distressed mother with professional handlers looking to make a political statement.

There is more - but that gets into the politics of everything she has stated and done in the last several months. Explain the professional handlers away if you can - but having them speaks volumnes to me about her motives - that its not just about wanting answers about why her son died.

A son who volunteer for duty, re-up, and from all accounts volunteered to leave his assigned post to go on a mission to rescue some of his fellow soldiers. She more then entitled to question the President about the war - its the right that was futher guarnteed (SP) by her son - but I have the same equal right to question her motives when I see the information and evidence of other agenda's by her own actions.