I spent far too much time watching the House debate on the Resolution disapproving of the Bush escalation of the war. I admit that after a certain point in the debate, I muted the set during the GOP speakers. I think that the GOP had written only one speech which they shared among themselves. They also recycled their speakers as well as their talking points. Until the very end of the debate, I did not a Democratic speaker repeat, but I think I saw the same GOP speakers over and over again.

But what was shameful is that the GOP, the party of the President, would not defend the policy that the President is implementing, and which has led to such dire results. At no time did they offer a concise explanation of what the situation was in Iraq, and how their policy was going to affect that situation, and why that policy was better than any alternatives.

Instead, they hid behind the troops, the people that they have placed in harm's way, for reasons that they will no longer declare or defend. The troops will be discouraged, they say, if we evaluate the policies for which they are facing fire. What could be more discouraging than to be asked to risk great danger for policies that your leaders no longer sincerely believe in themselves.?



Popular posts from this blog

the difference between "principles' and "virtues"

Starting a Discussion about Multi-partner relationships

Reflection on Merger (Dialectical Theology Part 8 of many)

Denise Levertov's Poem about Thomas

What's In Our DNA (Dialectical Theology, part 7 of many)