Maureen Dowd Is Brilliant!

I love the New York Times because their reporters, editors and columnists are the brightest in the country. The Times is the Grey Lady, right? The newspaper of record. It's the best we've got.

And none is brighter than Maureen Dowd, sometimes called Mo Do. Here is an example, from Dowd's August 10 column about Cindy Sheehan:

"...moral authority of parents who bury children killed in Iraq is absolute."

Absolute. Let those words sink in: absolute.....moral.....authority. Does even Dowd's Pope have it so good? Even Jesus had critics, skeptics and detractors. But parents who bury children killed in Iraq-- your moral authority is absolute.

So we've got Cindy Sheehan, whom the Guardian described yesterday as "bereaved," 16 months after burying her son. Maybe she still is bereaved (who can dispute that?), but from footage I've see she seems just....angry. Bellicose. Demanding. Maybe that's all part of bereavement, I honestly don't know.

Anyway, according to Dowd Cindy Sheehan, because she has buried her child killed in Iraq, has absolute moral authority.

In the other corner we have West Chester, Ohio mother Kathy Dyer, who today buried her son killed in Iraq (here). According to the brilliant Dowd's formulation, Kathy Dyer logically must also have absolute moral authority. Dyer supports the war and said, "Honor me this way" by supporting the war.

Ms. Dowd, how do we adjudicate between competing moral authorities who are "absolute"? Can you give us some guidance here? Should we bow before Dyer or Sheehan? Which absolute moral authority carries the argument?