Joshua Huck is an anthropology junior at the University of Texas and a writer at the school’s student-run The Daily Texan.
And, at the tender age of—what?…21?—has the historical perspective of…well, of a college kid.
In this piece that he wrote about the revitalization of the anti-war movement, young Joshua wrote:
Her [Cindy Sheehan] power as a historically significant symbol aside, Cindy Sheehan’s asserted solutions to the Iraq problem are completely wrongheaded.
Joshua, Joshua, Joshua (tsk, tsk, tsk)…
Did you really just refer to Cindy Sheehan as a powerful and “historically significant symbol”? If so, your historical perspective is sorely lacking. Cindy is already an afterthought on the Left. Groups such as Code Pink and MoveOn have ridden the grieving mother meme as far as they can.
Once the Left found dead bodies in New Orleans that were more important than the dead body of Casey Sheehan (in terms of the Left being able to use said dead bodies as a reason to bash President Bush), Cindy Sheehan’s 15 minutes were all but over. Her son, Spc. Casey Sheehan’s historical significance is ten-fold greater than anything his shameful mother has ever done.
In the second part of that quote, you wrote, “Cindy Sheehan’s asserted solutions to the Iraq problem are completely wrongheaded.”
Well, yes. They are wrongheaded. But more than that, they are politically and morally bankrupt. You almost acknowledged this fact when you chastise Cindy here:
In addition, Sheehan does a great disservice to the anti-war movement when she spouts anti-Zionist conspiracy theory regarding the Bush agenda in the Middle East.
Instead of calling her anti-Semitic agenda a “disservice”, you should have called her out for being a racist.
At least you got this much right in your article:
Whether or not she is correct, her raving turns moderate Americans away from the movement and ultimately hurts her cause.
Which is why I think she is great!
Left by 2 on September 10th, 2005 at 9:43 am