So what
One thing about writing a web log with few readers is that I'll often
get to the end of a post aware of the incompleteness or weakness of
various points. "So what", I'll think, "who's going to call me on it."
So what. This is Cheney's reply; in the Post: Guantanamo Bay to
Stay Open, Cheney Says, and in The Globe and Mail: Guantanamo critics
haven't hurt U.S. image, Cheney says, to our little peccadillos and the
unease they engender.
"the track record there is on the whole pretty good. Now, does this
hurt us from the standpoint of international opinion?" he asked. "I
frankly don't think so. And my own personal view of it is that those
who are most urgently advocating that we shut down Guantanamo probably
don't agree with our policies anyway."
Sec. Rumsfeld has been delivering a
similar speech. The subtext is found in the last line of Cheney's
quote. The message is for the Presedent, who may be dangerously
looking at the bigger picture - - if you're not with us, you're with Al
Queda, they're saying. Krauthammer, in his column from two Fridays ago made similar
points. They weren't passing out bibles at the Hanoi Hilton. If you
disagree with our view you are the enemy as well. Notwithstanding the
unassailable nature of his position Krauthammer would prefer it if we
dropped the subject, now.
So we do what we believe we must, to preserve our way of life. Our
way sanctifies us. What difference does it make between terrorists,
suspected terrorists and when, if, or how we determine which.
Why should I expect anyone in this administration to care what French
proto-progressives from one hundred years ago think. These are people
who consider John Dewey among their greatest enemies
HUMAN EVENTS ONLINE :: Ten Most Harmful Books of the 19th and 20th Centuries (seen on EotS_WotM). Understanding why we ought not debase our enemies - make them weaker
lesser men, more desperate, more craven, more fearful than they were -
is to ask what is it that puts us among the justified, the civilized,
those who have the right to survive? It doesn't matter if your better
if you're still bad and it's only a matter of degree. The distinction
doesn't lie there.
Prickly City in Tuesday's (I gotta stop looking at this strip
whatever the first panel may indicate, the final panal is just going to
be pat empty right-wing rationalizations) strip Stantis compares Mark Felt with Linda
Tripp. By implication Richard Nixon with Bill Clinton. The problem with
that is that Mark Felt did what he felt he had to do. Neccessary,
requiring a deeply personal sense of honor, offering no rewards. Not a confirming tribal one. A
decision he made in confidence with his own conscience, then kept
this confidence. Never trumpeting it or attempting to profit from it
until his family stepped in and made that decision for him. Tripp
made her decision in concert with operatives from the opposing
political party and never stopped trying to profit from it. Richard
Nixon was a foul mouthed paranoid, who stewed in the sewage of his
fears, his personal enemies list, yoking the IRS and FBI to persecute
them. He had his off-the-books plumbers unit carry out such activities
as burglarizing the offices of the Democratatic National committee.
Beyond this he enthusiastically participated in a criminal conspiracy
to cover all this up. Bill Clinton couldn't keep his pants up. His
offense was his weasly dodge of what he was set up to try to dodge
under oath. For Richard Nixon calumny was just another day at the
office.
The comparison is in their dreams. Elements of the right tout
themselves as the party of morality, but they have no better
acquantince with it than anyone else. They hold no demonstrated greater
ability or proclivity to turn aside the consolations of power, the
takings of triumph. Ethics is a matter of actions, opinions and the
distinctions one makes, all interacting with each other. Their
inability to comprehend or even see some distinctions belies their
claim on any automatic morality. Too often as soon as they run the
gamut of their own prejudices and animal needs, they declare this the
absolute definition of morality and truth. They then abandon for life
any further introspection or understanding.
11:52:41 PM ;;
|
|