Cindy Sheehan Says Goodbye

By: Brian Montopoli
Topics: In The News

(AP Photo/Gerald Herbert)

Journalism is about strong storylines and personalities, a fact that goes a long way towards explaining why journalists loved Cindy Sheehan. At least at first.

Hollywood couldn't have cast someone better for her particular niche in the debate over the war, after all: She was a grieving mother whose son had died in Iraq. An articulate woman who had been driven to speak out as a result of her pain. A figurehead who gave a semblance of coherence to an anti-war movement too heterogeneous for journalists to get their hands around. A character who brought a flesh-and-blood presence to what had previously been only an idea.

But Sheehan, who says she is stepping down as the unofficial "face" of the antiwar movement, didn't turn out to be quite the person that members of the media wanted her to be. She went further to the left than most journalists were comfortable with, publicly embracing Hugo Chavez and endorsing Harry Belafonte's characterization of President Bush as "the greatest terrorist in the world." She also wasn't subtle in her rhetoric, opting for phrases like "fell in lockstep behind his F?hrer" that didn't help her image among those who were not already literally in her camp.

And so the press, as is its way, gradually stopped paying much attention. Sheehan's controversial rhetoric and stunts may have helped get her and her movement more attention in the short term, but they also led members of the press corps to conclude that she was becoming increasingly irrelevant to the average American. (Her son, she said at one point, "was killed for lies and for a PNAC Neo-Con agenda to benefit Israel.")

And then there's the fact that as American public opinion moved against the war, journalists had less and less use for Sheehan from a narrative perspective. Her decision to step down may be getting decent play in the press, but the truth is that Sheehan hasn't been particularly relevant in the debate over the war for a long time.

This isn't to say that Sheehan didn't make a difference – for a brief period, she focused attention on the antiwar movement at a time when support for the war was still relatively strong. And it's hard not to admire someone for speaking out for what they believe in, even if you don't agree with it. The question is whether she might have been more effective in the long term if she hadn't scared away the journalistic establishment that initially embraced her.

Brian Montopoli
Brian Montopoli is the senior political reporter at CBSNews.com.
Follow on Twitter »

10 Comments Have Your Say
Email Story Send to a Friend
Share This Tell Your Friends
Tweet This Tweet This
More Share It

Add a Comment


by atpay1 June 1, 2007 4:58 PM EDT: There are more of "Us" who agree with Cindy Sheehan than tha "Press" is aware of or wants the country to know!! This Rah, Rah, America is *** when our children are dying for Halliburton, Big oil and Security companies that are stealing us blind !! Iraq historically has been fighting since 640 AD over who is the real descendant of Mohammed the Sunnis or the Shiites??? And we're going to resolve this how??? Bush is the most ignorant and arrogant president we have ever had and he could care less about the "Troops" !! Wake up!! Cindy is 100% correct and I thank her for being the courageous woman that she is, take care and rest gently Cindy, we still love and respect the fight you fought !!; Reply to this comment


by ikez78 May 30, 2007 4:52 PM EDT: I have a lot of respect for Cindy who at least is open about her anti war positions.

It's a shame CBS tries to keep telling it's viewers that they are "objective" journalists and have no position on the war when it's patently obvious to everyone watching that they are anti Iraq war. Why not just stop lying to your viewers about your leanings?; Reply to this comment


by proudsoldier May 30, 2007 3:39 PM EDT: I have a problem with this because Cindy Sheehan tried to put blame on her son's death where their honestly was no blame. No one held a gun to her son's head or forced him to sign the dotted line and join the military. Not to mention, its no big secret that joining the military means "you just might have to go to war". He knew what he was doing, and if he didn't then thats his fault. He took an oath to "Support and defend the Constitution of the United States, against ALL enemies both FOREIGN and domestic...and will obey the orders of the officers appointed over me and the President of the United States." End of story! Whether Cindy or her son agreed with it or not, he had to go to war. I'm sorry but by doing what she did, she desicrated her son's memory. She should have mourned him, respected him and honored him proudly. He was a hero. So in the process of her march to anti-war, she alienated her husband, her marriage, and her living children and has nothing to show for her efforts. Was it worth it Cindy?; Reply to this comment


by mattcat25 May 30, 2007 2:31 PM EDT: Cindy Sheehan represents a microcosm of one woman and the loss of a child she raised to serve our country as a soldier. The greater formidable question is %u201CWhy?%u201D

War without reason and conclusion.; Reply to this comment


by boycot-china May 30, 2007 11:56 AM EDT: Dear clueless,

Cindy's a great lady and I admire what she tired to do, but she QUIT her cause! Now that's insane. Are you going to continue to blame the Democrats for that too? Get a clue!; Reply to this comment


by skeezix06 May 30, 2007 9:14 AM EDT: Here is a woman who dared to grieve in her own way, not yours.

Here is a woman who tried to make reason out of the insanity that was the cause of her son's death.

Here is a woman who urged us to be better than we were. The fact that she feels that she failed doesn't negate her cause.; Reply to this comment


by boycot-china May 30, 2007 2:22 AM EDT: Hey misguided. Yeah, I must be very young and naive especially after spending several decades serving my country. What's your excuse for being so confused. I like how you and Cindy continue to make excuses for your failures and lies. Her son served his country while you and Cindy continue to disgrace yourself by burning flags, descrecrating military funerals and blaming everyone else for all the problems in this country. So, instead of being a free loader and calling the military a bunch of Nazi's and baby killers, why don't you and Cindy do something for your country. Why not volunteer at the USO, or at Americorps, or at a VA hospital and serve some real Americans who deserve some attention. That's really making a a difference. Also, quit blaming the Congressional democrats and remember that YOU voted for them so start accepting the blame. Or, are you all going to continue passing that responsibility too?; Reply to this comment


by walker19992 May 30, 2007 12:54 AM EDT: Here was a woman who had no idea what her son fought for; who had no idea what America stood for; who had no idea how to be an American. She stood on her "freedom of speech." This freedom caused more harm to our young men and women in harms way than the taliban and el Qaeda. She is a pathetic image on the screen of history. Semper fi to Corporal Sheehan. Go find something to do to mend the harm you've done to his mother. And to all you politically correct, liberal, anti-war types, don't worry; there will always be old dumb guys like me, my sons and grandsons to stand up and fight for you when you sit down and protest. But as John Adams said, "may God forget that ye were our countrymen." Veritas vos liberabit - Jesus of Nazareth; Reply to this comment


by jelperman May 29, 2007 9:54 PM EDT: Mr. Montopoli, why are you citing a column by a known Holocaust denier as evidence to smear Cindy Sheehan. The e-mail mentioned in the Slate column does not exist. It's a forgery. ABC News was asked to produce it and couldn't:

http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/8/17/18012/6504; Reply to this comment


by one_american May 29, 2007 9:30 PM EDT: The reason that the Democrat Party - and now the liberal press - are marginalizing Cindy Sheehan is because she has denounced the Democrat Party.

The far-left bet on a long-shot running the wrong way, and they feel cheated.

Good.; Reply to this comment