God Rest Ye, Merry Gentlemen - Jars of Clay - listen now

Thursday, August 18, 2005

Cindy Sheehan: Commander In Grief

Okay, the last time I said this I was chastized mercilessly, but I agree with Ann Coulter. [QC patiently waits for the rocks to start flying toward his head] No rocks? So far so good.

Ann brings up a very good point - while we all feel sympathy for Cindy's loss, it doesn't give her any greater moral authority than you or me when it comes to how our country defends itself. It is also evident that the media and publicity storm around Cindy has transformed her from grieving mother into a moral battering ram for the anti-war rabble. I agree with Ann when she says that the left needs to be careful throwing around words and concepts they don't really understand, like "moral" and "absolute." They run the risk of arguing themselves into a corner they can't get out of without revealing their true feelings about America and the freedom and liberty her citizens enjoy. Nothing turns off the average voter more than hearing a liberal say what they really believe.

Excerpts from Ann's column,
Cindy Sheehan: Commander in Grief:

______________________________________________________

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.

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.
______________________________________________________

2 comments:

Gretchen 8/18/2005 08:50:00 AM  

No, Cindy Sheehan shouldn't be dictating foreign policy, but in America, there is the illusion that what the people want matters.

The majority of Americans want the troops out of Iraq. In a Democracy, majority rules or did before the GOP suspended our rights with the Patriot Act.

She has the same rights as all the pro-war hawks who want more blood and deaths. Let her speak. All she wants to know if the truth. Why did her son have to die? There were no WMD, no link with 9/11, so why are we there? Because Saddam went after the current rulers daddy. Just revenge. Sad that so many men and women have died for his revenge. :(

Kevin 8/18/2005 09:48:00 AM  

Gretchen,

Cindy definitely has the right to speak her mind and she is freely exercising it in spite of the Patriot Act. Hmmm, interesting isn't it?

Cindy's son, Casey, joined the army, re-enlisted in fact. He was proud to serve his country and did so willingly and with full knowledge of the risks. For her or anyone else to make him out to be a victim or pawn dishonors him.

As for the "majority" of Americans wanting us out of Iraq, I believe it’s more honest to say that we are evenly divided - see pollingreport.com. In my case, I think we made the right decision; we just haven't handled it forcefully enough.

You're very mistaken (and misguided) if you think I or others who are for a strong self-defense want "more blood and deaths." Actually, it's quite the opposite. But surely you understand that we didn't start this war. Or do you?

Thank God there were no WMD's. It is unfortunate that Sadaam didn't live up to the UN resolutions requiring him to prove that. If we had known they weren't there, it very well could have saved lives. Again - we didn't start the war. As for your claim that there was no link between Sadaam and 9/11 - that isn't entirely true. And while Sadaam may not have directly helped with the 9/11 attacks, he was one of the world's biggest supporters of terrorism and terrorist organizations - including Al Qaeda. Here's some extra-curricular reading for you:

Hussein & Terror

Killing "Innocents" In War, By Don Watkins III

The Survival of American Liberty Demands a Foreign Policy of Self-Interest, By Paul Blair

The Appeasement Disease
By Walter Williams


The "Anti-War" Protestors are Too Conservative
By Michael J. Hurd


End States Who Sponsor Terrorism, By Leonard Peikoff

America's Compassion in Iraq Is Self-Destructive, By Elan Journo and Yaron Brook

Though I doubt you read anything not written by Michael Moore or Maureen Dowd, or anything that might shake-up your conspiracy theory laden worldview.

Recent Comments

Contact Me

eMail:
cyberkevinblogs@gmail.com

MSN:
cyberkevinblogs

Google Chat:
cyberkevin1

Label Cloud

Followers

. . .

. . .

. . .


stats

Blog Archive

Disclaimer

All opinions expressed on this blog are those of the author. The author’s opinions do not represent those of his employers. All original material is copyrighted and property of the author. If you use it at least have the decency to give me credit for it. Don’t steal it or I reserve the right to sue you to heck and back, or worse. Other info may have been copyrighted by someone else; the author believes that such work as is quoted here does not exceed reasonable “fair use” of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the United States Copyright Law as I understand it. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Opinions in comments or trackbacks are not mine, so if you have a problem with those, sorry, I can’t help you. Comments on this blog become the sole property of the blog, and may be reused or quoted on the blog or in any other media. Anyone mentioned in relation to a crime is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Contact: writetokevinp@gmail.com. All e-mails are presumed to be for publication on the site unless I am specifically and politely told otherwise - if you’re rude I’ll publish them just to hack you off. All comments are subject to deletion or revision should the author find them offensive or just simply not like you. Trolling will not be tolerated.

  © Blogger templates ProBlogger Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP