Wednesday, January 17, 2007

Bush Defenders Want it Both Ways

When opponents of the war quite reasonably pointed out that our continued military presence in Iraq recruits additional support for enemy organizations such as Al Qaeda, defenders of Bush's disastrous actions countered with, "The United States does not allow its enemies to determine its policies."

Yet, just today, I read an opinion piece in which the writer asserted that, "Democrats and liberals who call for the impeachment of President Bush over alleged violations of the Constitution fail to realize that such public challenges to our Commander-in-Chief embolden our enemies; we must not sacrifice our security at home to what is essentially a political exercise." Excuse me? What happened to, "We don't let our enemies dictate policy?" All of a sudden, we're supposed to tolerate a president who violates our Constitution because to call him on it might "embolden our enemies?"

It seems that Bush's defenders want it both ways. They want to claim that it is not a legitimate criticism to point out that our ill-considered invasion of Iraq actually makes us less safe -- because we won't let fear of the enemy intimidate us -- but they want to stifle attempts to hold our elected Chief Executive accountable to the American people because "we don't want to embolden our enemies." Well, which is it, guys? Are we so sure of ourselves that we don't care how many mad mullahs and their fanatical followers we piss off? Or are we so afraid of what the terrorists might do that we're willing to grant an incompetent president dictatorial powers?

Actually, both positions are indefensible. A war built on lies should not be allowed to continue; neither should we tolerate the erosion of the very freedoms that define us by an arrogant imbecile whose favorite political ploy is to invoke the bogeyman. When your only device for holding onto power is manipulating fear, we know what to call you: a terrorist.


Post a Comment

<< Home