Right Analogy, Wrong Target

I happened to catch a brief video of Sen. Kit Bond, a Republican from Missouri, on one of the cable news channels. He was comparing the call by many for some kind of “truth commission” to investigate the Bush administration’s use of torture as something you’d see “in a banana republic,” basically trying to argue that it was a partisan witch hunt that wasn’t worth the effort. Several thoughts to share with you Mr. Bond:

- First, you are engaging in one of the oldest and most transparent anti-critical thinking techniques in the book, marginalizing what your opposition is proposing as a distraction from the seriousness of that proposal.

- Second, if you want to talk about “partisan witch hunts,” how about the way the Republicans gleefully went after Bill Clinton for having had sex with a consenting adult in the Oval Office? Questionable judgment for sure, but as far as I know not a federal crime.

- Finally, be careful with your analogies, Senator, because they might come back to bite you. Banana republics are usually run by petty dictators who hold themselves above the law, who spy on everyone for fear they are being plotted against and who torture people. Sounds rather like the George W. Bush administration to me.

If you always do what you've always done...

Here's a quote from an online NY Times article today about how the Republicans are now thinking of trying out the word "fascist" against President Obama, since "socialist" doesn't seem to be getting much traction: “They’re trying to figure out how to oppose a relatively popular president during an economic emergency,” said Robert Kuttner, co-editor of The American Prospect, dismissing the fascism charge. “That’s not an easy thing to do.”

It's amazing how utterly clueless you Republicans are. There's an old axiom in management that goes: If you always do what you've always done, you will always get what you've always got.

Maybe what's needed for you to get back into the mainstream of American politics is not to "oppose" anything and everything Mr. Obama does, which seems to be the essence of the Republican strategy these days. A strategy that doesn't seem to be working very well, does it? And you think becoming even more rhetorically hysterical is going to change things?

Here's a radical idea: Try cooperating for a change. Try helping instead of hindering. Try collaborating instead of confronting. Who knows, you might be surprised.

Disappointed

President Obama has decided his administration will not prosecute anyone who participated in what are euphemistically called "harsh interrogation" techniques because the perpetrators had supposedly believed what they were doing had been cleared by legal opinions.

Isn't that pretty much the same discredited rationale low-level Nazi war criminals tried to use to justify their actions?

Mr. President, you are a political animal and you've made a political choice to not stir the partisan pot. I understand that.

But I am disappointed that those who severely damaged our international reputation, to say nothing of the integrity of our Constitution, are not going to be held accountable.

I can only hope that our Congress (doubtful) or some human rights group (hopefully) will have the will to see this through.

"Palin Blasts Obama On Abortion Stance"

That was the headline on the AP's story of Sarah Palin's recent visit to a cheering Right To Live group. In the article she talked about the so-called "culture of life," but only in the context of a woman's right to end an unwanted pregnancy, with her basic point being a woman shouldn't have such a right.

When you right-to-lifers start talking about ending capital punishment as a "culture of life" issue, then I will stop thinking of you as hypocrites.

Gold Bricks

I've used this analogy often in a variety of contexts, but it seems especially appropriate today...

So, the rightees criticize Obama for waiting until Sunday to take out the Somali pirates and "save" the American ship captain, arguing he shoulda done it on Friday.

I suspect that if President Obama handed out solid gold bricks to every man, woman and child in this country they'd complain because they were too heavy to carry.

Tables turned

According to an article in today’s online New York Times: “Douglas Leech, the founder and chief executive of Central Bank, a small West Virginia bank that participated in the capital assistance program but returned the money after the government imposed new conditions, said he complained strongly about the Treasury Department’s decision to demand repayment of the warrants. That effectively raised the interest rate he paid on a $15 million loan to an annual rate of about 60 percent, he said.

“’What they did is wrong and fundamentally un-American,” he said. “Even though the government told us to take this money to increase our lending, the extra charge meant we had less money to lend. It was the equivalent of a penalty for early withdrawal.’”

And I’ll bet the irony went right over his head.

You're joking, right?

According to today's NY Times: "As part of its sweeping plan to purge banks of troublesome assets, the Obama administration is encouraging several large investment companies to create the financial-crisis equivalent of war bonds: bailout funds.

"The idea is that these investments, akin to mutual funds that buy stocks and bonds, would give ordinary Americans a chance to profit from the bailouts that are being financed by their tax dollars."

Just in case you're listening, Mr. President, no way! There is no chance I'm going to put any more of my money in the hands of those Wall Street crooks. You (and they) have a very long way --- a VERY long way! --- to go to show me they can be trusted.

Three cheers for Iowa!

Yesterday the Iowa Supreme Court unanimously --- unanimously! --- ruled that people of the same sex should enjoy the same right to marriage as those of the opposite sex. Of course. Naturally. What other choice did they have if they were to truly defend the Constitution?

Because to hold differently, to argue that a certain class of people --- whether they are of different races, different religions, or the same sex --- do not deserve the same rights as everyone else is bigotry, period.

Southerners once quoted Bible verses to support their belief that African-Americans were not human beings and therefore could be owned like cattle. They argued that people of different races getting married was “unnatural” --- sound familiar? --- and enacted laws banning such marriage.

Suffrage opponents used to quote Bible verses to support their argument that women should not be allowed the vote. And, of course, were full of dire predictions about the future well-being of society --- sound familiar? --- if women got the vote.

Those who quote Bible verses against and screech about the horrible consequences of same sex marriage are just as wrong as their bigoted predecessors were. What they don’t seem to recognize is that our changing society is very quickly making them historically irrelevant.

Hmm, on the other hand, maybe they do and that’s why we’re getting all this hysterical kicking and screaming…