Hitchens hits the mark
We've tried to avoid the Cindy Sheehan "protest" of the Bush ranch, mostly because everyone else is on it and the ongoing spectacle of that woman, who so obviously is being egged on by the Loony Left, really turns the Oklahomilist's stomach. (We've had a touch of something anyway, no sense in making it worse.)
But Drudge tied in to a Christopher Hitchens article at Slate that is worth a read, appropriately entitled, "Cindy Sheehan's Sinister Piffle." An example:
Sheehan has obviously taken a short course in the Michael Moore/Ramsey Clark school of Iraq analysis and has not succeeded in making it one atom more elegant or persuasive.
As a bonus he slams Maureen Dowd for her unqualified support of the "grieving" mother. Dowd is the national poster child for loony lefties, so Hitchens' post is worth reading for that part alone.
posted by Dave the Oklahomilist @ 4:30 PM
2 comments
2 Comments:
You completely cold hearted response shows how out of touch you are. It's people like you that helped get us into this crappy war, believing everything the president said just because he said it, doing nothing to check facts, and now doing your best to dismiss a courageous woman wanting answers. As for Hitchen's comment -
"Finally, I think one must deny to anyone the right to ventriloquize the dead," I think Sheehan has more of a right to talk for her son than a lying president whose sat on his vacation ass for more days than any other previous president while there is a war going on.
1) All wars are crappy, whether they are necessary, justified or not. Most of those who fought and survived WWII thought it was crappy. But necessary.
2) Courageous is one thing. Adopting the anti-Israel cant of the nearest "Peace Center" is just nutty. If the Iraq war was done to smooth things for Israel, why are Jewish settlers moving out of Gaza?
3) But Sheehan DOES NOT speak for her son, does she? Based on her own previous public utterances and the testimony of family members, her son did his duty with gallantry and honor -- over his mother's objections. She is using her son's death to dishonor that for which he fought. While we understand her grief (or any mother's grief over the loss of a child for ANY reason), we are "out of touch" with anyone who would dishonor their child's legacy.
All that notwithstanding, thanks for sharing your opinion.
Post a Comment
<< Home