By now you have to have heard of Cindy Sheehan. Chances are, though, that you only know her as “that woman camping out at Bush’s ranch whose son died”. That’s how I knew her, so whenever I heard her name on the radio or whatever, I just assumed it was some other new development in the Valerie Pame case that I missed.

Well, Sheehan’s name is getting a lot more attention, and for good reason. Her son died as a soldier in Iraq. Not long after, she met the president along with several other mothers and waidows who lost their loved ones in the war. Unsatisfied with his response to their sadness, Cindy decided she wanted another, personal meeting with the president. After all, her son gave his life – the most precious thing he had – to the war that Bush started. The least Bush could do in return was give Cindy an hour of his time.

Bush, however, sees things differently. His people refused that meeting with Sheehan, then he decided – in the middle of a war – to take a five-week vacation on his ranch in Crawford, Texas. So Sheehan camped out right in front of the ranch entrance. She’s since been joined by dozens of supporters and a small, peaceful antiwar camp has been established. And Bush still refuses to meet with her. His latest excuse, according to this article at Salon, is that

“[It's] important for me to go on with my life, to keep a balanced life … I think the people want the president to be in a position to make good, crisp decisions and to stay healthy. And part of my being is to be outside exercising. So I’m mindful of what goes on around me. On the other hand, I’m also mindful that I’ve got a life to live and will do so.”

I can only imagine what a meeting with Sheehan would be like for the president. Will she become incoherently angry and scream at him? Will she be pleasant, sweet and, out of politeness, not ream him hard for the mistakes he has made? Or will she, as I hope, sit down, have a frank discussion about the war, Bush’s reasons for keeping our troops there and the true reason for her son’s death? Nothing would come out of any of these three scenarios – the president has already demonstrated a resolve to stay in this war despite mounting public opposition, clear proof that the reasons for the war were manufactured and no clear plan for a resolution. So, ultimately, meeting with Sheehan would do nothing but provide some decent PR and, if he plays his cards right, some sympathy and support from his most visual current detractor.

Instead, he has patently refused to meet with her, even for a few moments. He is on vacation for five weeks and can not spare five minutes to at least greet her in person. He, in fact, completely refuses to give in to her demands. All of this reminds me of the refrain we so often hear when armed criminals take hostages, both in reality and in the movies:

“The United States government does not negotiate with terrorists.”

Yup, President George W. Bush is treating Cindy Sheehan, mother of one of his fallen soldiers, as a terrorist. A hallmark of patriotism in this country, where our freedom of speech and thought is so highly reguarded that the first amendment of our constitution is dedicated to its preservation, is publicly speaking out when we see an injustice taking place. Because the president is perceived as being the one causing this injustice, he is refusing to do anything about it. Every reason his administration has offered for this war has ben a lie – they had WMDs (no they didn’t), they posed a clear an imminent danger to the U.S. (nope), they trained and funded the terrorists that flew our planes into our buildings (no proven connection, no implied connection), the Iraqis wanted us to liberate them (and yet the insurgecny keeps growing). Rather than sit down with her and admit a mistake, rather than say, “based on all of the information we had at the time, this was the right course of action to take, but now we have to see it through despite that information being incorrect,” he’d rather treat the mother of a dead soldier as a terrorist.

Not that it ultimately matters, I guess. He’s not running for re-election so he may as well just skate through his remaining three years in office, just like in his business dealings.