Maureen Dowd The New York Times

June 24, 2012

Maureen Dowd
The New York Times
620 Eighth Avenue
New York, New York 10018

RE: Cindy Sheehan & the other guy’s mother

Ms. Dowd,

Today’s tutorial on “eclectic indignation” highlights the ability of modern American Liberals, particularly the fire breathing, card carrying kind, to overcome their perpetually pretzeled backs. It is caused by the cognitive dissonance that is required by that church of its votaries.

Cindy Sheehan, remember?

Her son was killed in Iraq. At some point in her grieving process she decided that he was killed by President Bush. She was a most persistent critic of him, trying in numerous ways to confront and harass him. The press, both wet and dry, enthusiastically supported and encouraged her. You yourself said that she “has the absolute moral right” to –A- criticize the President and –B- be exempt from any criticism. Further, you said that she must be praised for using the loss of her son to bring about hope and change.

[10 feet from where I write is a framed scroll signed by President Harry Truman. It says that “Corporal Leonard Putnam died in the service of his country on May 25, 1945 in the Pacific area”]

Here comes the other shoe.

If Cindy Sheehan “has the absolute moral right” to try to stick her thumb in President Bush’s eye, and by so doing to ensure that no other mother would have to endure her grief, would not Logic dictate that Brian Terry’s mother has the same right?

Brian Terry was a United States Border Agent. He wore a badge, he carried a gun, and he had the full majesty “of the Republic for which it stands” with him the night he was killed. In death he shares a common bond with Cindy Sheehan’s son in that they both died in the service of their country.

We mourn both their deaths. We grant grieving mothers much latitude in how they express their grief. The fundamental balance of the universe is disturbed when a parent buries a child. All we can do is extend our hand.

By the way, the “other guy’s mom is Josephine Terry.

Some very bright people in Washington, and isn’t that always how stories like this start, decided that the best way to stop guns from crossing the US/Mexican border was to, honest to God, send guns across said border to see how long it took for them to get back across the same border over which they had just been sent.

That sounds like a plan to me.

The United States government called it “Fast and Furious”.

The Attorney General testified, testified, that he never heard of it until May, 2011. Information is then released that he stopped it 6 months before he heard of it. What did he know and when did he know it has a familiar ring to it, no? When that catchy phrase had run its course the claim of Executive Privilege had the tensile strength of Bubbe’s halvah. Quien sabe, as they say on both sides of the border. We may yet see somebody “frog marched” out of the White House.

I rather think that Josephine Terry would like to visit her son’s grave – Maybe Cindy Sheehan could go with her – and tell him what happened. It may not help him but it may help them.

Can we expect a column from you saying that Josephine Terry and Cindy Sheehan are “sisters under the skin”? Can we expect a column from you saying that Josephine Terry has the same “absolute moral right” as does Cindy Sheehan?

If not, why not?




Kevin Smith