Cindy, Cindy

Don’t miss the Los Angeles Times “Outside the Tent” column by Patrick (a/k/a Patterico) Frey: “Peacenik paper fawns over antiwar mom.” Frey writes: “The Times has woefully failed its readers with its one-sided coverage of the Cindy Sheehan story.” And don’t miss the Chicago Sun-Times column by Mark Steyn: “‘Peace Mom’s’ marriage a metaphor for Dems.” Steyn writes:

They’re not children in Iraq; they’re grown-ups who made their own decision to join the military. That seems to be difficult for the left to grasp. Ever since America’s all-adult, all-volunteer army went into Iraq, the anti-war crowd have made a sustained effort to characterize them as “children.” If a 13-year-old wants to have an abortion, that’s her decision and her parents shouldn’t get a look-in. If a 21-year-old wants to drop to the broadloom in Bill Clinton’s Oval Office, she’s a grown woman and free to do what she wants. But, if a 22- or 25- or 37-year-old is serving his country overseas, he’s a wee “child” who isn’t really old enough to know what he’s doing.
I get many e-mails from soldiers in Iraq, and they sound a lot more grown-up than most Ivy League professors and certainly than Maureen Dowd, who writes like she’s auditioning for a minor supporting role in “Sex And The City.”
The infantilization of the military promoted by the left is deeply insulting to America’s warriors but it suits the anti-war crowd’s purposes. It enables them to drone ceaselessly that “of course” they “support our troops,” because they want to stop these poor confused moppets from being exploited by the Bush war machine.

Responses

Books to read from Power Line