| Submit your comments on this article |
| Fifth Column |
| Cindy and Maureen Dowd Debunked |
| 2005-08-18 |
| Cindy Sheehan, the mother of Casey Sheehan, an American soldier who was killed in Iraq 
" That's the sentence Cindy Sheehan and her increasingly lugubrious PR machine want every story to begin with. Nobody likes the idea of criticizing a woman who's lost her son in such circumstances. The hope has been that the high wall of Sheehan's "moral authority" will allow her to say whatever she pleases and nobody will say boo about it for fear of seeming insensitive to what must be unimaginable anguish, even though many of her supporters must realize her anguish has caused her to find meaning in a wildly partisan, orchestrated publicity stunt. What's interesting is that Sheehan represents simply the latest installment in a long, nasty, desperate, ideological campaign which demonstrates — thankfully — the limits of identity politics logic. Anybody who's been on the receiving end of the "chickenhawk" epithet knows what I'm getting at. Various definitions of chickenhawk are out there, but the gist is "coward," "unpatriotic hypocrite," etc. The phrase is less an argument than it is an insult. It's also a form of bullying. The intent is to say, "You have no right to support the war since you haven't served or signed up." And this arguement is presented by the Left? the ones too good to serve? It's a way to get supporters of the Iraq war, the war on terror or the president simply to shut up. But there's a benefit-of-the-doubt to be given. There are many people who believe the "chickenhawk" thing is intellectually serious. Obsessed with "authenticity" and the evil of hypocrisy — as they see it — they think the message and the messenger are inextricably linked. Two plus two is four, only if the right person says so. We see this logic most often in the realm of identity politics, where the statements of women, blacks, Jews, et. al. are given more weight for the sole reason they were born female, black or Jewish. People who grew up poor are supposed to have a more "authentic" perspective on economic policy than people who didn't, and so on. Interesting points on a broader scale. Don't get me wrong: Experience is important and useful, including the experiences that come from being black or gay or any other member of the Coalition of the Oppressed. But valuable experience confers knowledge; it doesn't beatify. Identity isn't an iron cage. It is not insurmountable. And at the end of the day, arguments must stand on their own merits regardless of who delivers them. Hmmm.... How ...logical! Indeed, the notion that there is a single, authentic, black perspective strikes me as fundamentally racist in its essentialism. And the idea that women adhere to a female logic unique to them strikes me as definitionally sexist. But the left doesn't care, because this perspective is indispensable for attacking "inauthentic" blacks. What was it that Harry Belafonte said the other week? That blacks who work for the Bush administration are, in effect, "race traitors" akin to high-ranking Jews in the Hitler regime (never mind no such Jews existed). The chickenhawk charge is the misapplication of the same already faulty logic. There are war heroes who oppose the war and there are war heroes who support it. John Keegan is the greatest living military historian and he never saw a day of battle. George McGovern flew 35 combat missions in World War II. I'll take Keegan's guidance on military matters over McGovern's any day. Maureen Dowd wrote of Sheehan in The New York Times this week that "the moral authority of parents who bury children killed in Iraq is absolute." Either this is a truthful but meaningless platitude or it's a charge made in grotesquely bad faith. How about meaningless AND in bad faith? Not so fast Maureen! I had a son who served and Mother and I worried for six months. We have ZERO moral authority? Come over here and tell that to Mrs. Bobby; I want to videotape it! Surely Dowd recognizes that there are a great many mothers of fallen soldiers who believe the war was worthwhile. Is their moral authority absolute, too? If so, then moral authority can't really be very relevant to public debates. Or does Ms. Dowd claim that only those moms-of-the-fallen who say things critical of George Bush have absolute moral authority? Only the ones Maureen says have absolute authority. She'll judge, one by one. If that's the case, does Dowd truly believe — as Sheehan seems to — that this war was fought to line the pockets of Texas oilmen and to serve the interests of a treasonous Zionist cabal inside the United States? I think that's batty and I'd need proof to believe it. Sheehan's word isn't good enough for me on anything — save the fact that she loved her son. |
| Posted by:Bobby |
| #4 I wonder if Dowd would support the 'moral authority' of a father of an adult female who died from complications incurred during a legal abortion [and it does happen]. Suddenly we'll see the right of the adult female is more important than the father's 'moral authority'. It would be a contradiction if the real fact wasn't that this is all about POWER to rule. |
| Posted by: Shomonter Threater9114 2005-08-18 20:47 |
| #3 Today's Ann Coulter article rips Dowd a new one. |
| Posted by: Poison Reverse 2005-08-18 18:49 |
| #2 Scotch, scotch, scotch, scotch, I love Scotch! |
| Posted by: Maureen Dowd 2005-08-18 16:35 |
| #1 That shrill idiot harpy Dowd is an ass. Always has been always will be. |
| Posted by: JerseyMike 2005-08-18 15:10 |