~~~~~

Slow-motion Implosion

The Rebublicans want us to believe they are the party who deserve control of all branches of government (called single-party rule) because they a) keep us safe and warm, b) know better when it comes to what rights we should have as Americans, or humans for that matter, c) claim a monopoly on morality and d) that their world-view is the one intended by god.

Well, as we've all known, none of these things are true, nor do they work in a democracy like ours. The country, as a whole, is divided. It's true that about half the population supports the Republican agenda. But -- the other half does not. Under the current scheme of things, the does' are feeling empowered to run roughshod over the does nots and those of us who fall into that often ridiculed category of anti-war, respect-for-human-life, anti-racism, anti-bigotry, save-the-planet weirdos can easily be shrugged off by those who claim those values but who demonstrate something quite the opposite.

As Bob Woodward points out in his new book, "State of Denial" and David Corn and Michael Isikoff's new book "Hubris", things actually are as they appear to be to observant people, but the Republicans have refused to admit. The administration and its rubber-stamp congress have completely lost control of everything from foreign policy, to the economy, the wars and now even their own claim of righteousness. Woodward, Corn and Isikoff are journalists of high integrity and while the administration tries to answer to the claims they make, they cannot deny these things outright. Actually they do make denials but it is through clever use of words. For example, on the Sunday talk shows, Dan Bartlett (President's counsel) was out trying to get in front of Woodward's book, due out today. In the book, Woodward claims that several key members of the administration, including Andy Card and Condi Rice, wanted Rumsfeld replaced. When Bartlett was asked about that by Bob Schieffer, he said it was untrue. They did not want to replace Rumsfeld (there's your flat denial) but they did want to bring in a whole new management team at the Pentagon. Now, what's the difference? Something else that seems to be growing legs is the assertion that George Tenet (former CIA director) called for an emergency meeting in July 2001 because of what he saw as an imminent threat of attack by Al Qaeda, and that this went largely ignored, at least for the next two months. I recommend reading both of these books along with "The Emperors New Clothes" by Hans Christian Anderson. Also, listen carefully to how the administration responds. Their wordcraft is self-revealing if you listend for it.

And now we learn the GOP (God's Own Party) has, to their obvious chagrin, a sexual predator and pedophile in their midst, and not only that, they've know about it for a long time (that's the disgusting part). In fact, according to CNN at least, they used to warn congressional pages to keep their distance from Mark Foley because of his 'tendencies'. Why would they say that if they didn't suspect what Foley was about? Now it comes out that Foley, who abruptly resigned his seat in the House of Representatives, was preying on kids, former pages, using instant messager and email, sending salacious messages, probably while he jerked off in his congressional office. GOP leaders are literally diving for cover as this story explodes and glibly referring to these messages as "naughty" and "overly friendly". C'mon, man! This, added to the indictment of Tom Delay, incarceration of Duke Cunningham, corruption of Bob Ney, the racism of George Allen, Dr. Bill Frist's magical ability to diagnose brain damage by video, and lots of other things, clearly demonstrates that the Republicans can neither govern unilaterally, nor do they occupy the moral or any other high ground. This is without even factoring in the run-up to the Iraq war and its tragic mishandling.

There have certainly been numerous transgressions by both parties. I will never try to claim that Democrats are any better. In fact, I think the Democrats as feckless and weak. But it's simply disingenuous to suggest that one party has any claim to moral, ethical or ideological superiority over the other. People are people. All of us have points of view, good and bad ideas, as well as moral failings, which is part of being human. The whole purpose of a multi-party system is that there is a constant debate over the issues and hopefully the best ideas win. Not the strongest party, but the best ideas. Individuals without the proper comportment to lead are winnowed out and not coddeled by their party simply to hold onto a majority (although that's the natural instinct of both parties). We need to go back to balance and it starts with a balance of power in congress. A favorable outcome in November would be just that.

There was a time in our history when it made sense for the winner of the presidential election to appoint the bested opponent as vice president. We end up with the two best possible people in the Whitehouse, a balance of power with occasional fisticuffs. If you have a House controlled by Democrats and a Senate controlled by Republicans (or vice versa), there's nothing wrong with that either. It makes things a little harder to get done but at least things go completely through the ringer first and are fully vetted. Hopefully, then, the whole population feels well served by their government, not just the currently-enfranchised.

When Bush was running for his first term, he made the prophetic comment that things would be a lot easier if this was a dictatorship, provided he was the dictator. While he, and his party, follow that philosphy in practice, we are reminded more and more everyday that while it may be easier, it's really not the better way.

The balance of power is what gives us our strength. Winston Churchill said, "Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things." He also said, "Dictators ride to and fro upon tigers which they dare not dismount. And the tigers are getting hungry."