You know the rules. No Ann Coulter posts without pics.
Posted on 08/17/2005 4:23:15 PM PDT by Sam Hill
To expiate the pain of losing her firstborn son in the Iraq war, Cindy Sheehan decided to cheer herself up by engaging in Stalinist agitprop outside President Bush's Crawford ranch. It's the strangest method of grieving I've seen since Paul Wellstone's funeral. Someone needs to teach these liberals how to mourn.
Call me old-fashioned, but a grief-stricken war mother shouldn't have her own full-time PR flack. After your third profile on "Entertainment Tonight," you're no longer a grieving mom; you're a C-list celebrity trolling for a book deal or a reality show.
We're sorry about Ms. Sheehan's son, but the entire nation was attacked on 9/11. This isn't about her personal loss. America has been under relentless attack from Islamic terrorists for 20 years, culminating in a devastating attack on U.S. soil on 9/11. It's not going to stop unless we fight back, annihilate Muslim fanatics, destroy their bases, eliminate their sponsors and end all their hope. A lot more mothers will be grieving if our military policy is: No one gets hurt!
Fortunately, the Constitution vests authority to make foreign policy with the president of the United States, not with this week's sad story. But liberals think that since they have been able to produce a grieving mother, the commander in chief should step aside and let Cindy Sheehan make foreign policy for the nation. As Maureen Dowd said, it's "inhumane" for Bush not "to understand that the moral authority of parents who bury children killed in Iraq is absolute."
I'm not sure what "moral authority" is supposed to mean in that sentence, but if it has anything to do with Cindy Sheehan dictating America's foreign policy, then no, it is not "absolute." It's not even conditional, provisional, fleeting, theoretical or ephemeral.
The logical, intellectual and ethical shortcomings of such a statement are staggering. If one dead son means no one can win an argument with you, how about two dead sons? What if the person arguing with you is a mother who also lost a son in Iraq and she's pro-war? Do we decide the winner with a coin toss? Or do we see if there's a woman out there who lost two children in Iraq and see what she thinks about the war?
Dowd's "absolute" moral authority column demonstrates, once again, what can happen when liberals start tossing around terms they don't understand like "absolute" and "moral." It seems that the inspiration for Dowd's column was also absolute. On the rocks.
Liberals demand that we listen with rapt attention to Sheehan, but she has nothing new to say about the war. At least nothing we haven't heard from Michael Moore since approximately 11 a.m., Sept. 11, 2001. It's a neocon war; we're fighting for Israel; it's a war for oil; Bush lied, kids died; there is no connection between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida. Turn on MSNBC's "Hardball" and you can hear it right now. At this point, Cindy Sheehan is like a touring company of Air America radio: Same old script and it's not even the original cast.
These arguments didn't persuade Hillary Clinton or John McCain to vote against the war. They didn't persuade Democratic primary voters, who unceremoniously dumped anti-war candidate Howard Dean in favor of John Kerry, who voted for the war before he voted against it. They certainly didn't persuade a majority of American voters who re-upped George Bush's tenure as the nation's commander in chief last November.
But now liberals demand that we listen to the same old arguments all over again, not because Sheehan has any new insights, but because she has the ability to repel dissent by citing her grief.
On the bright side, Sheehan shows us what Democrats would say if they thought they were immunized from disagreement. Sheehan has called President Bush "that filth-spewer and warmonger." She says "America has been killing people on this continent since it was started" and "the killing has gone on unabated for over 200 years." She calls the U.S. government a "morally repugnant system" and says, "This country is not worth dying for." I have a feeling every time this gal opens her trap, Michael Moore gets a residuals check.
Evidently, however, there are some things worth killing for. Sheehan recently said she only seemed calm "because if I started hitting something, I wouldn't stop 'til it was dead." It's a wonder Bush won't meet with her.
You know the rules. No Ann Coulter posts without pics.
"Dowd's "absolute" moral authority column demonstrates, once again, what can happen when liberals start tossing around terms they don't understand like "absolute" and "moral." It seems that the inspiration for Dowd's column was also absolute. On the rocks."
LOL, I love Ann!
LMAO - Ann is priceless!!!
"Legs" hits another one out of the park.
Little Anne, the sharpest political pen in the West.
Cindy's looking for an answer to why we are in Iraq because the reason that G.W.Bush keeps giving the American public keeps changing.
First,it was the story about Iraq being a nuclear threat and having weapons of mass distruction.
Then everyone kept alluding to the 9/11 attack. (Those guys were mostly Saudis who trained in Afganistan under Bin Laden. We still have not found Bin Laden...short memory on some people's part)
Then it was the war to liberate Iraq, or the war of Iraqui freedon.
That didn't work and the story became the War against terror.
No wonder she wants answers for why her son died.I can't figure out why we are really there either. Which of the above is it or is it really something else?
A visit to DU (in our hazmat suits, of course) shows the same. After all, the extent of their knowledge of the English language doesn't go any farther than "#@!*& !"
Anderson Cooper is doing an entire coverage on this. It's very good. I have tears from the father who lost his son in Iraqi. What a true patriot and has put to shame Cindy's fake care of the troops. One father said a message from his son (marine) in Iraqi right now....TO Cindy you are getting us killed!
Cindy Sheehan - The B!tch in the Ditch
TROLL
Pow! Ann just nailed another one. So good I had to modify that line for my tagline.
Agreed, a very funny line.
Gee, you need to go back & read the Iraq War Resolution, and you'll find the only thing that's truly changed is that Saddam is no longer in power in Iraq. Welcome "newbie". Enjoy your stay!
Get lost.
Great read!
I love that lady!! She puts me in a very good mood every time she writes.
I love that lady!! She puts me in a very good mood every time she writes.
I ask you; since we have not found Bin Laden, does that mean he doesn't exist?
Along the same train of thought...even though we have not yet found the weapons of mass distruction...could they not in fact exist?
While I'm at it...it was first the "War on Terror" and part of it was Operation Iraqi Freedom. You have your time line reversed and your logic ain't nothing to brag about either.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.