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.
Some one needs to tell Sheikh Cindy Sheehan that Freedom is not Free , and it never has been. My father died in WW2, and I do know for sure, that Freedom is not Free.
I would like for Sheikh Cindy to go and live in some Muslim nation where she is worth 1/2 as much as a man. I think she does not deserve to live in the Land of the Free, and the Home of the Brave. She is pure chicken, and a traitor.
Then this bee-otch Sheehan should get the hell out!!!!
Agreed.
Anns little jaunt to Austria with Matt Drudge must have rejuvinated her ;)
GOOOOAAAAALLL!!
I heard Mike Barnicle quote this sentence on the radio as if it had come down from the Mount with Moses.
I immediately ask myself how the moral authority from parents with differing views on the war can both be authoritarian and absolute. I never did get an answer.
Liberals mourn differently. Within a couple hours of Vince Foster's death the Clinton White House was busily going through every item in Vince's office in their grief.
/S
I have a feeling every time this gal opens her trap, Michael Moore has an orgasm.
Ewwwww. I'm getting a mental image and it ain't pretty.
how could he tell? He probably has not seen his feet in years let alone his....
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.
I would ask Ms. Dowd when she graduated to the thought process there were absolutes in this life. Interesting the Liberals are now adopting terms the American people use with full understanding, yet they cannot quite grasp yet. You can't fool the people if you can't even speak the language in appropriate context.
I would also ask Maureen, knowing she is separate from her own family in ideology, if her mother's opinions are absolute over hers? Since that would appear to be the argument being made. If so, Maureen is guilty of failing to vote for this President of many other errors.
Maureen, these men and woman are adults that believe in and know what they will face. They choose to sacrifice their lives so that you, their families and we may all live free. That willing sacrifice is absolute and deserves honor no matter whether or not you like this President or understand why we are at war. No mother has the absolute right to the beliefs of his or her adult child. The vast majority serving would be horrified to have their names used to detract from their service, and thaose they served with. Including Cindy's own son.
Once again Ms. Coulter is clear and to the point.
My only wish is that she would increase the frequency of her articles.
Such uncommon common sense is refreshing.
ok you asked for it...
I thought not killing babies because they are inconvienient was an absolute. I bet Dowd doesn't.
ping for the weekly coulter.
Holy smokes Coulter just rips into Sheehan and the libs....one of her best articles ever.
can we ZOT? I haven't got to do that yet...
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.