What happens when emotions rule politics
Written by Michael Vass
Some people truly scare me. I mean they are just terrifying. Here is one case, where we see a lopsided, targeted attack against Republican candidates. But if you care to read the comments it’s apparent that this individual not only dislikes Republicans, but also Democrats, Congress and basically very politician since perhaps Aristotle I think.
The first thing we get is an attack on the President and a miscommunication of facts to fit the particular viewpoint. The fact is that the President went to Congress with both Afghanistan and Iraq. The members of Congress, including Senator Hillary Clinton, voted in favor of the war. While the information provided was questionable, it was up to Congress to ask for more details, but they assured the public the facts were correct.
Further no one has said we are going to attack Iran. Iran has said that they are building nuclear weapons, and they have stated many times their hate of America since attacking our embassy without provocation and taking our citizens hostage. Perhaps the author of this Youtube video is too young to have lived thru that, but I am not.
But it would not be the first time a nation has sent in surgical strikes and strategic maneuvers to reduce or remove a threat to its people. Recall the bombing of Quadafi or in Kosovo, or the no-fly zone over Iraq? Part of diplomacy is the threat of a stick, not just carrots. Without the stick you get Germany annexing nations that led to World War II.
The originator of the Youtube video then goes on to insult our President. I have to wonder what nation this individual comes from. Again this is a manner in which to warp factual actions that have happened with the awareness and understanding of the public. The personal disapproval of the President clouds all other thoughts and reduces this author to critique anything being said.
As for executing a pre-emptive strike, several world leaders and Congressmen agree that it is a possible action. Even Senator Clinton mentioned in rebuttal to a question asked at a debate that it is an option. And the option is allowed under the War Powers Act of 1973.
Also the fact is that while many questioned the reasons for the war in Iraq, using current displeasure on the war does not mean retroactive emotion. At the beginning of the war the President had massive support and most were actually in favor of the war. Again personal feelings distort fact, to my knowledge.
I can go on, but this is the key. Personal dislike of President Bush has equated too many disprovals of any actions in Iraq and the Republican Party. I agree that no American wants to see our Armed Forces under fire. I agree that war is the worst unnatural state of human nature. I agree that I was not swayed by the arguments that led to the war in Iraq. I will also state that I disapprove of some of the decisions made by President Bush. But I have not lost my mind in near-fanatical hate of our Commander-and Chief.
Were this video blogger equally critical of Democrats I’d have more respect. If they had shown respect for the leader of our nation, perhaps I’d have left this alone. Had they not been blatantly injecting their personal (and in my opinion) extreme political views, I would have been more interested in what they had to say.
This type of tunnel-vision politics can never cause a beneficial outcome to the nation. It is this same type of mentality that caused people to spit upon our soldiers when they returned home from Viet Nam. It is this same mentality style that allowed McCarthyism to flourish I believe. It is a singular mindset that shouts above discussions of reason.
Perhaps some agree with this blogger. I do not. I find their views similar to those of MoveOn.org. I find both to be damaging to positive debate over who our next President should be. I feel this kind of extremism can cause America to focus it’s energies in directions that will not improve the nation in any manner.
When you consider who should run, and ultimately win, the Presidential election of 2008 keep in mind that individual will either face pressure from political groups with agendas like this blogger, or they will be elected with the funds (and thus beholden to an extent) to these types of groups. That does not mean either Party is perfect or better than the other. It does mean that ANY view that is narrow and near-fanatical hurts America.
No matter who becomes President we the public must ensure that we make clear exactly what we believe will be the best actions for America. We can do this through our votes, our blogs, and respect of the office of the President and America. Without respect and open-minded discussion we fall into anarchy.
admin @ October 11, 2007