In order to help the debate over Cindy Sheehan to move forward, I’ve agreed to moderate a debate between right-wing hack Michelle Malkin and conservative apologist Michelle Malkin. (most links via John Cole)
Michelle, we’ll start with you. What do you think of the protest by Cindy Sheehan outside of the President’s Crawford ranch? She says that she wants to know the “noble cause” for which her son died :
I can’t imagine that Casey Sheehan would approve of such behavior, conduct, and rhetoric.
Uh-oh. Michelle, you’re shaking your head over there and flipping back to your notes from last year’s Presidential debates. Would you like to respond to what Michelle said?
John Kerry stooped to the lowest of the low with the shameless, invasive line that will be played over and over again on the news in the next 24 hours. . .Um, has John Kerry talked to Dick Cheney’s daughter? Has John Edwards? Has Mary Beth Cahill, who called Mary Cheney “fair game” on Fox News Channel after tonight’s debate? If they haven’t talked to her, they should shut up.
Ouch. Tough words from Ms. Malkin.
Now going back to you, Michelle. You recently had some harsh words in response to the rumors that the New York Times was looking into the adoption records of Supreme Court Nominee John Roberts. So you think someone’s personal life is off-limits?
I think it’s the journalistic equivalent of dumpster-diving, Steve. And I think there’s no excuse for it. There’s no defense for it and the New York Times should apologize for it.
The name’s Greg, but I see your point. On the same subject, I’m going to pass this one to you Michelle. Michelle has taken a pretty firm stand against digging into personal records, but you recently printed Cindy Sheehan’s divorce records on your own site. Where do you stand on that?
Like it or not, the dispute between Cindy Sheehan and some of her family members is news.
Interesting point she’s got there. Do you have anything to add, Michelle?
What could possibly be gleamed from the adoption records of four and five year old children of a Supreme Court nominee whose professional and personal lives have been beyond reproach? This is what the New York Times has sunk to? Investigative opposition research of pre-schoolers? It’s pathetic.
Okay, so you both seem to disagree on whether digging into someone’s personal life is fair game, but to take this back to the Cindy Sheehan case, where do you think what do you think about the attacks she’s received by people on the right?
Well, I do want to emphasize what you said, Bill, which is that losing a child in any situation, whether it’s in a war, from an accident or disease, is one of the most painful of human experiences. And Mrs. Sheehan deserves compassion and sympathy.
And apparently, according to the accounts from last year when President Bush met with her, that’s exactly what she got. I don’t think that anybody should demonize her.
Well put, Michelle, even if you did get my name wrong again. Do you have anything to add to that Ms. Malkin?
Mrs. Sheehan, as they say, seems to “have issues.”
Now Michelle, you recently printed a reference to Sheehan’s supporters as “grief pimps”. Michelle, would you like to add anything to Michelle’s contention that there’s something exploitational about these activists joining grieving family members?
One of the pro-abortion Left’s favorite attacks on people of faith is that we only care about children before they’re born and not afterwards.
Perhaps this is why the mainstream media has ignored the amazing stories of pro-life activists who have been keeping vigil outside Terri Schiavo’s hospice — people like Steve and Tony Sakac, the Withey family, and the Anderson sisters who won’t ever appear on the front page of the New York Times or Washington Post.
. . .
For millions of Americans of faith of all ages, standing up for the sanctity of life is not just an empty slogan — but a deeply-held principle put into action daily. The MSM had ample opportunity to tell the stories of some of the inspiring people who have stood vigil outside Terri Schiavo’s hospice. Instead, as they have done throughout this ordeal, they looked the other way.
And we’ll have to end it there ladies. I want to thank you both for joining us and though you didn’t seem to agree on much, I hope this debate has helped inform our readership by presenting both sides of what’s happening down there in Crawford.