George W. Has Nothing To Crow About... Neither Will The Winners At The Polls
Bush Trumpets Iraq Verdict to Rally Support
It seems odd to me that George W. Bush would crow about another person's death sentence and use it as a way to make political hay for all the wrong reasons. It strikes me as bold, ego-centric and quite indecent to blow a horn about an inhumane outcome of an inhumane use of force against an enemy that was no actual threat to us ab intitio. It also strikes me as the epitome of hypocrisy to use the death sentence against Saddam Hussein as a mark in the win column when everything that we have been involved in over in iraq has been an utter failure. The fact is Bush and the members of his administration have lied to us every step of the way in regard to matters involving Iraq. We know this... and yet we allow him and his administration to crow about facilitating the death of another human being.
How odd it is that we use maltreatment, torture, unjust invasion, corrupted intelligence and an improperly implemented form of "democracy" to convict someone that used maltreatment, torture, unjust invasions of homes/communities, corrupted secret police, and an improperly implemented form of government to inflict inhumane acts against people (his own people).
During a recent training on political leadership it was discussed that democracy implemented by military force necessitates military force to maintain it. We are seeing that in Iraq and Afghanistan. At least in Afghanistan we have some reasoned causes for action, even if the actions we have chosen to implement are the wrong actions.
So I have to ask exactly what Bush and company are crowing about? Is it the death of another human being? Is it the fall from power and grace that an egomaniac has undergone? Is it justice, and if it is what sort of justice is it?
I also have to ask if the court that convicted Hussein was even a fair court? Can a court formed in a rush--under a government that really doesn't have its own stability or ability to stand on its own in any real manner--acting without any real sense of common law, precedent or principles that have been adequately put to the test really administer a just trial, never mind a just sentence.
The idea that justice and principles were not met in this case is not one of my own thoughts alone. The New York Times has asked the very same question in an editorial entitled The Saddam Hussein Verdict. In that editorial there are some issues raised that warrant us asking such questions, including whether or not the trial was merely a way for those victimized by Hussein's regime to strike back for political and power posturing purposes.
But it still demonstrates something about Bush's character, his values and his willingness to do or say anything to maintain his control over our lives, be in the position of peddling influence, lining the pockets of those powerful and privileged people who have had nothing but support from the Bush administration and the GOP-controlled government.
It also says something about the character of his beliefs as a Christian. What kind of Christian seeks to manipulate the systems of society in active pursuit of vengeance, greed and power? What kind of Christian acts knowingly on lies and information proven to be false and misleading? What kind of Christian continues to lie, manipulate and act based on ideological hypocrisy, even when the words of Christ speak volumes against such hypocrisy? What kind of Christian supports such a man or the government led by such a man?
I would plead with the ultra-conservatives--especially the Christian Right--to contemplate this issues carefully if I thought it would do any good. But once these folks become entrenched, it is impossible to convince them that they are wrong. Oddly, the Scriptures speak to the issue of what to do when someone presents evidence that a wrong is being committed in the name of God. Unfortunately, not many Christians genuinely practice those parts of Scripture or tenets of faith that are the most difficult to understand or follow.
I have written in the past that we need to return to the principles--the first principles--embedded and embodied in the Constitution. It is clear to me that the founders and framers were on solid spiritual ground when they developed and presented the Constitution. Unfortunately, we do not see many politicians with the faith, conviction of principle, connection to humanity or intellectual reasoning abilities to put principles, values and reason together in the process of governing.
It is unfortunate that these unprincipled, malfeasant leaders have control over us and have committed us to a long war that has no real objective, no just rationale, no just process and is by definition a war of ideology rather than necessity. In a guest editorial Ted Koppel offers some insight into the cost of this type of militaristic action. But what Koppel and others have not addressed, and what many Americans do not grasp, is that an unjust war or military action, led by an entrenched militaristic ideologue and like-minded supporters, undermines not only our leadership, our government, but our spirit.
I do not know that the Democrats will do any better at leading us by principle, just causes or even by reason. But what I do know is that the punishment received by Bush, his supporters, and the GOP leadership that has failed to invoke the constitutional provisions and powers to keep things from getting out of hand will be a lot more lenient--and a lot more just--than the trial and sentence received by Saddam Hussein. Indeed, there will be a lot for the Dems to crow about should they take back the House. Even more will be cause for gloating should the Dems take back the Senate. The question is whether they will spend their time gloating and crowing, or acting to bring our nation back in line with its first principles?
President Bush on Sunday seized on the conviction of Saddam Hussein as a milestone in Iraq, seeking to rally Republican voters with the issue of national security as some polls suggested that his party might be making gains in the final hours of the campaign.
The White House said the timing of the announcement, two days before Election Day, had nothing to do with American politics and had been dictated by the Iraqi court. But Mr. Bush moved quickly to put it to use in what has been his central strategic imperative over the past week, trying to rouse Republican voters to turn out.
“Today we witnessed a landmark event in the history of Iraq: Saddam Hussein was convicted and sentenced to death by the Iraqi High Tribunal,” Mr. Bush said to roars of approval in a hockey auditorium packed with supporters in Grand Island, Neb. “Saddam Hussein’s trial is a milestone in the Iraqi people’s efforts to replace the rule of a tyrant with the rule of law.”
It seems odd to me that George W. Bush would crow about another person's death sentence and use it as a way to make political hay for all the wrong reasons. It strikes me as bold, ego-centric and quite indecent to blow a horn about an inhumane outcome of an inhumane use of force against an enemy that was no actual threat to us ab intitio. It also strikes me as the epitome of hypocrisy to use the death sentence against Saddam Hussein as a mark in the win column when everything that we have been involved in over in iraq has been an utter failure. The fact is Bush and the members of his administration have lied to us every step of the way in regard to matters involving Iraq. We know this... and yet we allow him and his administration to crow about facilitating the death of another human being.
How odd it is that we use maltreatment, torture, unjust invasion, corrupted intelligence and an improperly implemented form of "democracy" to convict someone that used maltreatment, torture, unjust invasions of homes/communities, corrupted secret police, and an improperly implemented form of government to inflict inhumane acts against people (his own people).
During a recent training on political leadership it was discussed that democracy implemented by military force necessitates military force to maintain it. We are seeing that in Iraq and Afghanistan. At least in Afghanistan we have some reasoned causes for action, even if the actions we have chosen to implement are the wrong actions.
So I have to ask exactly what Bush and company are crowing about? Is it the death of another human being? Is it the fall from power and grace that an egomaniac has undergone? Is it justice, and if it is what sort of justice is it?
I also have to ask if the court that convicted Hussein was even a fair court? Can a court formed in a rush--under a government that really doesn't have its own stability or ability to stand on its own in any real manner--acting without any real sense of common law, precedent or principles that have been adequately put to the test really administer a just trial, never mind a just sentence.
The idea that justice and principles were not met in this case is not one of my own thoughts alone. The New York Times has asked the very same question in an editorial entitled The Saddam Hussein Verdict. In that editorial there are some issues raised that warrant us asking such questions, including whether or not the trial was merely a way for those victimized by Hussein's regime to strike back for political and power posturing purposes.
But it still demonstrates something about Bush's character, his values and his willingness to do or say anything to maintain his control over our lives, be in the position of peddling influence, lining the pockets of those powerful and privileged people who have had nothing but support from the Bush administration and the GOP-controlled government.
It also says something about the character of his beliefs as a Christian. What kind of Christian seeks to manipulate the systems of society in active pursuit of vengeance, greed and power? What kind of Christian acts knowingly on lies and information proven to be false and misleading? What kind of Christian continues to lie, manipulate and act based on ideological hypocrisy, even when the words of Christ speak volumes against such hypocrisy? What kind of Christian supports such a man or the government led by such a man?
I would plead with the ultra-conservatives--especially the Christian Right--to contemplate this issues carefully if I thought it would do any good. But once these folks become entrenched, it is impossible to convince them that they are wrong. Oddly, the Scriptures speak to the issue of what to do when someone presents evidence that a wrong is being committed in the name of God. Unfortunately, not many Christians genuinely practice those parts of Scripture or tenets of faith that are the most difficult to understand or follow.
I have written in the past that we need to return to the principles--the first principles--embedded and embodied in the Constitution. It is clear to me that the founders and framers were on solid spiritual ground when they developed and presented the Constitution. Unfortunately, we do not see many politicians with the faith, conviction of principle, connection to humanity or intellectual reasoning abilities to put principles, values and reason together in the process of governing.
It is unfortunate that these unprincipled, malfeasant leaders have control over us and have committed us to a long war that has no real objective, no just rationale, no just process and is by definition a war of ideology rather than necessity. In a guest editorial Ted Koppel offers some insight into the cost of this type of militaristic action. But what Koppel and others have not addressed, and what many Americans do not grasp, is that an unjust war or military action, led by an entrenched militaristic ideologue and like-minded supporters, undermines not only our leadership, our government, but our spirit.
I do not know that the Democrats will do any better at leading us by principle, just causes or even by reason. But what I do know is that the punishment received by Bush, his supporters, and the GOP leadership that has failed to invoke the constitutional provisions and powers to keep things from getting out of hand will be a lot more lenient--and a lot more just--than the trial and sentence received by Saddam Hussein. Indeed, there will be a lot for the Dems to crow about should they take back the House. Even more will be cause for gloating should the Dems take back the Senate. The question is whether they will spend their time gloating and crowing, or acting to bring our nation back in line with its first principles?
posted by Jim Downey at 4:10 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home