by Keith Cooper
From Broader View Weekly, December 28, 2007
In January of this year, Nancy Pelosi took the gavel as the first woman Speaker of the House after a congressional election that shifted the balance of power to the Democrats’ favor. In a gesture that even President Bush admitted was a “thumpin’” of Republicans, the nation sent a powerful message to our leadership that it was time for change. So, in January, I had hopes that 2007 would bring greater protection of civil liberties, a swing of focus away from the whims of corporate lobbyists and toward the needs of hard working American citizens; and a Congress that would hold this administration accountable for its shameful conduct.
Nearly a year later, we are still pouring billions of dollars into Bush’s unjust war of choice to appease a power-hungry president who finally learned to use his veto pen (if only to deny healthcare to millions of poor children).
I was further disheartened the other day when I listened to an interview of John Conyers, the Chair of the House Judiciary Committee, which is charged with overseeing impeachment proceedings among other oversight responsibilities. When asked why impeachment of Vice President Cheney and President Bush was not being pursued while recent polls show a growing impeachment support among constituents, Conyers’s response was a dance of avoidance that boiled down to the admission that political fallout and the backlash certain to brew on the Fox News Network trumped the pursuit of truth that would reveal the administration’s crimes and misdemeanors.
With the administration going about business as usual, virtually unchecked by congressional oversight, and the Senate and the House cowering in the face of pressure from the neo-con media, it’s little wonder that approval ratings for Congress are even lower than Bush’s dismal numbers.
The problem isn’t that every Democrat in Congress is spineless. There is still Senator Kennedy calling for an end to the perpetual blank check that the president has enjoyed for most of his term of office. There are still Rep. Robert Wexler and others pushing for investigations into Cheney’s wrongdoings. However, there is a lack of will in the Congress to perform its obligatory duty to hold accountable the Executive.
Looking ahead to 2008, it is difficult to make accurate predictions in the current state of our nation. In the past, I would have confidently predicted that on November 5, 2008, G. W. Bush will be a real lame duck. However, since the Help America Vote Act plunged much of the nation into ballot uncertainty, it is conceivable that Bush could be voted into a third term. Fortunately, the Constitution still prevents such a travesty.
Hopefully, in January of 2009 we will have a leader who can string together a coherent sentence and actually pronounce terms of importance like “nuclear” proliferation and the names of the prisons where we torture and abuse inmates in the tradition of the tyrannical madmen we depose.
With the Democratic and Republican primaries yet to kick off, it is impossible to tell who will be each party’s nominee for that position. Opinion polls award top spots to different candidates each week so it’s anybody’s guess at this point.
Whoever comes out victorious on November 4 will inherit the legacy of one of the worst presidents in our nation’s history. They will be stuck with a lagging economy and the leftovers of Bush’s aggressive Middle East strategy. Our troops will still be dying in Iraq. Our presence there and in Afghanistan will still be a source of instability among Arab neighbors. War profiteering will still be a stain on our reputation and the conduct of U.S. contractors a humiliating reminder of our skewed priorities.
The next president will also inherit an unprecedented amount of executive power. The current administration has brought about a frightening shift in the balance of powers in our government. Wielding fear and patriotism, Bush and Cheney have sought again and again to limit congressional oversight, obstruct the judicial system and strengthen the power of the executive branch. The change in tone in Washington is chilling and it has produced an executive seat that enjoys considerable leeway and power.
No matter which party claims the allegiance of the next president, we, as citizen, must be ever vigilant. The vote we cast is only a minute part of our obligation as citizens in this democracy. We must be proactive in our democratic duties and not abdicate our responsibilities.
The year 2008 may or may not be of historical importance, but it certainly will mark the beginning of a new era. What kind of America can we expect going forward?
Saturday, December 22, 2007
Closing the Door on 2007. Looking Ahead to 2008.
by Gordon Cooper
From Broader View Weekly, December 28, 2007
As one calendar’s final page is torn off and filed in the circular container, a new calendar takes it place upon the wall. The past year slips into my memory and I turn my attention to the future, while noting once again how much faster the pages seem to flip each year. So, to slow the passing a little, let’s walk back through 2007 one more time before we put it away in that dark closet of our mind where old years go.
Like most, I entered 2007 with eagerness and resolve. My family was growing with two new granddaughters on the way. The first is now taking her first steps and the second only spent a few hours sharing our air before she was taken to a place where the air is always filled with heavenly sounds. The blessings of experiencing new life in a new year will always make 2007 special for me, however, it will also be a reminder of how fragile and fleeting is this life.
Apart from these personal milestones, 2007 was a notable year for our nation as well. We entered the year anticipating a new Congressional landscape (however, I must admit I was more apprehensive than anticipative) that promised great things for us in their first 100 days. Ummm… maybe we should change that to 200 days, no, that won’t work either, give ‘em 300… oh well, nobody was really listening anyway, were they?
I must admit here that I am not exactly troubled by the failure of the newly elected Representatives and Senators. In fact, I am boldly stating that gridlock is not necessarily a bad thing, believing as I do that the least amount of government is the best amount of government.
As a Conservative and a Christian, I tend to look at the glass as half full most of the time, therefore I look back at 2007 as another year of proof that we are living in the best possible nation and at the best possible time. While we still have many challenges and 2007 carried its share of dark times (the bridge collapse in Minnesota, the natural disasters, the rampaging madmen, the flag-draped coffins, the lost children and broken hearts) we can proudly say that this is still the best place in the world at this time.
We have seen a steady decrease in the violence of Iraq. We have seen another year without another 9/11/01 type of attack. We have seen some murderers brought to justice and we have seen another country open up its leadership to the will of the people. We have much to be grateful for as we glance back down that long hallway of 2007.
Now, we are facing another door, which opens to a new corridor. Twelve evenly spaced doors are marked with the names of the months ahead and as we open each one in succession we will no doubt find the rooms filled with some days of joy and some of sorrow.
The day will soon be here when we will be tearing down that 2008 calendar, all dog-eared and scribbled upon. and replacing it with a shiny 2009 model. What may we expect to see in that hallway as we look back at 2008?
Let’s take a few minutes and look ahead, shall we?
Perhaps we will look back at November of 2008 and remark about how hotly-contested another election cycle was, yet without bloodshed or violent revolt.
Perhaps we’ll look back at September 11, 2008 and exhale another sigh of relief that the terrorists did not get through our defenses to remind us of that bloody anniversary once again.
Perhaps we will see Hilary give Bill the divorce he really wanted but was afraid to ask for until she lost all hope of residing in the White House again.
Perhaps we will see a channel devoted exclusively to Britney, Paris, Lindsay, et al so the rest of our news channels could cover REAL news.
Speaking of the news, perhaps 2008 will be the year The New York Times goes BACK to printing REAL news.
Perhaps we will see another year without the projected number of hurricanes or the other dire predictions of ‘experts’ and finally realize how far we are from understanding this planet, much less controlling its atmosphere.
Perhaps the 2008 Nobel winners will be noble and winners.
Please clip this column and attach it to the December page of your new 2008 calendar, and just before you throw that page away, unfold this page and see how close we were.
Have a great 2008!
From Broader View Weekly, December 28, 2007
As one calendar’s final page is torn off and filed in the circular container, a new calendar takes it place upon the wall. The past year slips into my memory and I turn my attention to the future, while noting once again how much faster the pages seem to flip each year. So, to slow the passing a little, let’s walk back through 2007 one more time before we put it away in that dark closet of our mind where old years go.
Like most, I entered 2007 with eagerness and resolve. My family was growing with two new granddaughters on the way. The first is now taking her first steps and the second only spent a few hours sharing our air before she was taken to a place where the air is always filled with heavenly sounds. The blessings of experiencing new life in a new year will always make 2007 special for me, however, it will also be a reminder of how fragile and fleeting is this life.
Apart from these personal milestones, 2007 was a notable year for our nation as well. We entered the year anticipating a new Congressional landscape (however, I must admit I was more apprehensive than anticipative) that promised great things for us in their first 100 days. Ummm… maybe we should change that to 200 days, no, that won’t work either, give ‘em 300… oh well, nobody was really listening anyway, were they?
I must admit here that I am not exactly troubled by the failure of the newly elected Representatives and Senators. In fact, I am boldly stating that gridlock is not necessarily a bad thing, believing as I do that the least amount of government is the best amount of government.
As a Conservative and a Christian, I tend to look at the glass as half full most of the time, therefore I look back at 2007 as another year of proof that we are living in the best possible nation and at the best possible time. While we still have many challenges and 2007 carried its share of dark times (the bridge collapse in Minnesota, the natural disasters, the rampaging madmen, the flag-draped coffins, the lost children and broken hearts) we can proudly say that this is still the best place in the world at this time.
We have seen a steady decrease in the violence of Iraq. We have seen another year without another 9/11/01 type of attack. We have seen some murderers brought to justice and we have seen another country open up its leadership to the will of the people. We have much to be grateful for as we glance back down that long hallway of 2007.
Now, we are facing another door, which opens to a new corridor. Twelve evenly spaced doors are marked with the names of the months ahead and as we open each one in succession we will no doubt find the rooms filled with some days of joy and some of sorrow.
The day will soon be here when we will be tearing down that 2008 calendar, all dog-eared and scribbled upon. and replacing it with a shiny 2009 model. What may we expect to see in that hallway as we look back at 2008?
Let’s take a few minutes and look ahead, shall we?
Perhaps we will look back at November of 2008 and remark about how hotly-contested another election cycle was, yet without bloodshed or violent revolt.
Perhaps we’ll look back at September 11, 2008 and exhale another sigh of relief that the terrorists did not get through our defenses to remind us of that bloody anniversary once again.
Perhaps we will see Hilary give Bill the divorce he really wanted but was afraid to ask for until she lost all hope of residing in the White House again.
Perhaps we will see a channel devoted exclusively to Britney, Paris, Lindsay, et al so the rest of our news channels could cover REAL news.
Speaking of the news, perhaps 2008 will be the year The New York Times goes BACK to printing REAL news.
Perhaps we will see another year without the projected number of hurricanes or the other dire predictions of ‘experts’ and finally realize how far we are from understanding this planet, much less controlling its atmosphere.
Perhaps the 2008 Nobel winners will be noble and winners.
Please clip this column and attach it to the December page of your new 2008 calendar, and just before you throw that page away, unfold this page and see how close we were.
Have a great 2008!
Celebrating the Birth of Our Bill of Rights
by Keith Cooper
From Broader View Weekly, December 14, 2007
As we celebrate the Bill of Rights of the Constitution, I’m reminded of the importance of the provisions. These first ten amendments set a tone for governance that represents the spirit of a democratic republic. The Bill of Rights focuses primarily on the rights of the citizenry and the limiting of the federal government’s power. In these amendments, I see the foresight of the framers to realize that power has the potential to corrupt; and to look ahead to times when individuals might need to protect themselves from overreaching power. Sadly, it took a while for these rights to be broadly applied to our nation’s citizens, but today they serve as a guideline, and a check to balance power and preserve civil liberties.
Some of the amendments are easy for me to get behind. For example, I am ever grateful for the provisions of the First Amendment that proclaims my right as a unique individual to my own belief and the right to freely express that belief. The First Amendment has provided me with this forum, and with a growing access to news and information. Also key to my admiration of the First Amendment, is the establishment of a separation of church and state.
Under the protection of the First Amendment, I have the freedom to publicly criticize the current administration’s preemptive war strategy. I have the right to stand in peaceful protest against injustices I see perpetrated by my government without fear of reprisal. Unfortunately, sometimes reprisal is executed through legal means, as the recent sentencing of five protestors outside representative John “Randy” Kuhl’s office in Bath, NY showed. I even have the right to publicly express my opinion about George W. Bush’s lack of presidential qualifications and his abuse of our highest office. The First Amendment has given me this forum.
Having seen the oppression of state-imposed religion, the framers saw the need to explicitly guard against such an abuse of power. The First Amendment expressly prohibits the state from imposing a religion upon its citizens. It also protects the free exercise of any religion. I find this particular provision important when I see so much talk, today, of the professed faith of one political candidate or another. Presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s recent appeal to evangelical Christians illustrates the challenge for political figures to prove their religious allegiance. This is a concern to me. While one’s faith can provide a moral code by which one would execute his leadership, certain religious beliefs can color the judgment of a leader and lead to injustice. Keeping religious influence in check is vital to religious freedom. One only needs to look to the recent persecution of a British woman in Sudan (imprisoned and nearly sentenced to 40 lashes for allowing her students to name a stuffed bear Muhammad) to see the dangers of state religion.
The framers also were concerned about the privacy of the citizenry. Knowing the great power wielded by the government, they sought to protect privacy by expressly restricting the government’s access to private property. The current administration’s disregard for privacy is far-reaching and has implications beyond its term in office. Personal information is now available through diverse technology, and this administration has been chipping away at safeguards that would protect that information, almost from the beginning, escalating dramatically following 9/11. We must hold our leaders to the standards of the Bill of Rights when they would sacrifice our privacy rights in the name of national security.
One amendment that gives me some pause is the Second Amendment, which institutes a right to bear arms. Though I fully support legal gun ownership, I am concerned by the fervency of some gun advocates and certain vocal fringes. I am also alarmed when I see a show like The Outdoor Channel’s Personal Defense series. While claiming to offer self-defense techniques against an intruder, the show demonstrates quick reload tricks and such skills as maintaining sustained and rapid fire one-handed behind cover. These tools don’t seem suited to self-defense from a common intruder. The only applicable scenario I can imagine is picking off ATF agents or S.W.A.T. team members from within your secured compound. Also concerning to me, are gun rights activists who campaign against any restriction to the types of weapons one may own. We should all be appalled that 19-year-old Robert Hawkins had access to the SKS assault rifle he used to gun down 8 innocents at an Omaha, Nebraska mall last week. The right to bear arms as outlined in the Second Amendment should not be viewed as a civilian’s unconditional license to buy weapons intended for military-style mass killing.
Though I may question the relevance of certain amendments as they apply to today’s America, I applaud the foresight of some members of Congress to add the Bill of Rights to our Constitution in 1791. It is the exemplification of democracy at its finest.
From Broader View Weekly, December 14, 2007
As we celebrate the Bill of Rights of the Constitution, I’m reminded of the importance of the provisions. These first ten amendments set a tone for governance that represents the spirit of a democratic republic. The Bill of Rights focuses primarily on the rights of the citizenry and the limiting of the federal government’s power. In these amendments, I see the foresight of the framers to realize that power has the potential to corrupt; and to look ahead to times when individuals might need to protect themselves from overreaching power. Sadly, it took a while for these rights to be broadly applied to our nation’s citizens, but today they serve as a guideline, and a check to balance power and preserve civil liberties.
Some of the amendments are easy for me to get behind. For example, I am ever grateful for the provisions of the First Amendment that proclaims my right as a unique individual to my own belief and the right to freely express that belief. The First Amendment has provided me with this forum, and with a growing access to news and information. Also key to my admiration of the First Amendment, is the establishment of a separation of church and state.
Under the protection of the First Amendment, I have the freedom to publicly criticize the current administration’s preemptive war strategy. I have the right to stand in peaceful protest against injustices I see perpetrated by my government without fear of reprisal. Unfortunately, sometimes reprisal is executed through legal means, as the recent sentencing of five protestors outside representative John “Randy” Kuhl’s office in Bath, NY showed. I even have the right to publicly express my opinion about George W. Bush’s lack of presidential qualifications and his abuse of our highest office. The First Amendment has given me this forum.
Having seen the oppression of state-imposed religion, the framers saw the need to explicitly guard against such an abuse of power. The First Amendment expressly prohibits the state from imposing a religion upon its citizens. It also protects the free exercise of any religion. I find this particular provision important when I see so much talk, today, of the professed faith of one political candidate or another. Presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s recent appeal to evangelical Christians illustrates the challenge for political figures to prove their religious allegiance. This is a concern to me. While one’s faith can provide a moral code by which one would execute his leadership, certain religious beliefs can color the judgment of a leader and lead to injustice. Keeping religious influence in check is vital to religious freedom. One only needs to look to the recent persecution of a British woman in Sudan (imprisoned and nearly sentenced to 40 lashes for allowing her students to name a stuffed bear Muhammad) to see the dangers of state religion.
The framers also were concerned about the privacy of the citizenry. Knowing the great power wielded by the government, they sought to protect privacy by expressly restricting the government’s access to private property. The current administration’s disregard for privacy is far-reaching and has implications beyond its term in office. Personal information is now available through diverse technology, and this administration has been chipping away at safeguards that would protect that information, almost from the beginning, escalating dramatically following 9/11. We must hold our leaders to the standards of the Bill of Rights when they would sacrifice our privacy rights in the name of national security.
One amendment that gives me some pause is the Second Amendment, which institutes a right to bear arms. Though I fully support legal gun ownership, I am concerned by the fervency of some gun advocates and certain vocal fringes. I am also alarmed when I see a show like The Outdoor Channel’s Personal Defense series. While claiming to offer self-defense techniques against an intruder, the show demonstrates quick reload tricks and such skills as maintaining sustained and rapid fire one-handed behind cover. These tools don’t seem suited to self-defense from a common intruder. The only applicable scenario I can imagine is picking off ATF agents or S.W.A.T. team members from within your secured compound. Also concerning to me, are gun rights activists who campaign against any restriction to the types of weapons one may own. We should all be appalled that 19-year-old Robert Hawkins had access to the SKS assault rifle he used to gun down 8 innocents at an Omaha, Nebraska mall last week. The right to bear arms as outlined in the Second Amendment should not be viewed as a civilian’s unconditional license to buy weapons intended for military-style mass killing.
Though I may question the relevance of certain amendments as they apply to today’s America, I applaud the foresight of some members of Congress to add the Bill of Rights to our Constitution in 1791. It is the exemplification of democracy at its finest.
Celebrating the Birth of Our Bill of Rights
by Gordon Cooper
From Broader View Weekly, December 14, 2007
The Fourth of July will always hold the prominent place in our nation’s history. Everyone recognizes that day as the day several heroic men signed their names to a document that declared our independence from Great Britain. Few remember, however, that this document also includes a declaration and recognition of dependence upon God. Realizing that this endeavor would only succeed if they enlisted the assistance of a Higher Power, these men sought counsel and protection from Him who was able to deliver them from the most powerful army of their day.
December 15, 1791 should also be recognized as a significant day in our nation’s life. It was on this chilly date, as opposed to the heat of July when tempers and emotions run high, that wisdom and reason took precedence and the representatives put their names to a document that enumerated a list of ten ‘Inalienable Rights.’
As we celebrate the signing of our Bill of Rights, it is certainly obvious to me that God answered the prayers of these men, who agreed with Benjamin Franklin when he stood up during the chaotic and heated debate of the Constitutional Convention to say:
In the beginning of our contest with Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayers in this room for Divine protection. Our prayers, Sir, were heard, and they were graciously answered…and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth: ‘that God governs in the affairs of man.’ …I therefore beg leave to move that, henceforth, prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven and its blessing on our deliberation be held every morning before we proceed to business. (The Light and the Glory, pp 342, 343)
As we look back over the 216 years since the Bill of Rights was ratified and signed, we must recognize that it was more than mere human wisdom that guided these men. For example, a similar revolution and constitution in France took place two years after the passage of this legislation. Based upon the enlightened philosophy of Voltaire and Rousseau and devoid of the influence of Judeo – Christian ethics and scriptural guidance, this revolution quickly devolved into a ‘Reign of Terror.’
When James Madison brought his proposal to the floor on June 8 of 1789, he was initially blocked by members who thought these ten amendments to be superfluous and better left to the individual states. However, he persisted in his belief that unbridled power is always ripe for abuse and that unless certain rights were clearly designated, their abridgement would be certain.
It is such a comfort to me when I am reminded of the rights these men recognized as ‘Inalienable’ – meaning ‘incapable of repudiation and non-transferable’.
For example, knowing that Congress is prohibited from prohibiting my free exercise of religion or the free expression of my thoughts, gives me assurance that our founders recognized the difference between religion (which refers more broadly to the actions and habits of individuals) and church. These men were not trying to exclude God from our public discourse but they were intent upon excluding one particular church or denomination from domination in public policy.
As I read the documents of our founders and study the lives they lived, I am reminded anew of how fortunate I am to have been born in this country. The beauty of the wording and the overriding philosophy that man was created by an Omniscient Deity who endowed the individual with equal status, yet holds each accountable to His ultimate authority, makes this document one of the greatest achievements of mankind.
It would be a shame for us to forget the story of how this document came into being and I would strongly recommend at least an annual publication of these amendments and a regular reading be required of our high school students.
It is my belief that our Constitution, and the Bill of Rights that is amended to it, should be preserved and should be held as inviolable. I, therefore, support the idea that all Supreme Court Justices be of the belief that strict interpretations of the original document be given weight over current public opinion polls. In other words, I believe this document is not an evolving piece of paper, but a solid proclamation of policy.
While many may see, for example, the ‘right to privacy’ in the Fifth Amendment is flexible enough to allow a woman to kill her unborn child, I believe that it is, in fact, ‘depriving life’ without due process of law. I do not, however, abdicate violent overthrow of our judiciary because of this difference. Instead, I believe that as technology and science catches up with the scriptures which tell us that each embryo is indeed an individual human life; public outcry will result in an amendment similar to the 13th Amendment which finally recognized the humanity of slaves.
In conclusion, let us regard this day as important as that hot day in July, and hold these inalienable rights as highly as we hold the Stars and Stripes.
From Broader View Weekly, December 14, 2007
The Fourth of July will always hold the prominent place in our nation’s history. Everyone recognizes that day as the day several heroic men signed their names to a document that declared our independence from Great Britain. Few remember, however, that this document also includes a declaration and recognition of dependence upon God. Realizing that this endeavor would only succeed if they enlisted the assistance of a Higher Power, these men sought counsel and protection from Him who was able to deliver them from the most powerful army of their day.
December 15, 1791 should also be recognized as a significant day in our nation’s life. It was on this chilly date, as opposed to the heat of July when tempers and emotions run high, that wisdom and reason took precedence and the representatives put their names to a document that enumerated a list of ten ‘Inalienable Rights.’
As we celebrate the signing of our Bill of Rights, it is certainly obvious to me that God answered the prayers of these men, who agreed with Benjamin Franklin when he stood up during the chaotic and heated debate of the Constitutional Convention to say:
In the beginning of our contest with Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayers in this room for Divine protection. Our prayers, Sir, were heard, and they were graciously answered…and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth: ‘that God governs in the affairs of man.’ …I therefore beg leave to move that, henceforth, prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven and its blessing on our deliberation be held every morning before we proceed to business. (The Light and the Glory, pp 342, 343)
As we look back over the 216 years since the Bill of Rights was ratified and signed, we must recognize that it was more than mere human wisdom that guided these men. For example, a similar revolution and constitution in France took place two years after the passage of this legislation. Based upon the enlightened philosophy of Voltaire and Rousseau and devoid of the influence of Judeo – Christian ethics and scriptural guidance, this revolution quickly devolved into a ‘Reign of Terror.’
When James Madison brought his proposal to the floor on June 8 of 1789, he was initially blocked by members who thought these ten amendments to be superfluous and better left to the individual states. However, he persisted in his belief that unbridled power is always ripe for abuse and that unless certain rights were clearly designated, their abridgement would be certain.
It is such a comfort to me when I am reminded of the rights these men recognized as ‘Inalienable’ – meaning ‘incapable of repudiation and non-transferable’.
For example, knowing that Congress is prohibited from prohibiting my free exercise of religion or the free expression of my thoughts, gives me assurance that our founders recognized the difference between religion (which refers more broadly to the actions and habits of individuals) and church. These men were not trying to exclude God from our public discourse but they were intent upon excluding one particular church or denomination from domination in public policy.
As I read the documents of our founders and study the lives they lived, I am reminded anew of how fortunate I am to have been born in this country. The beauty of the wording and the overriding philosophy that man was created by an Omniscient Deity who endowed the individual with equal status, yet holds each accountable to His ultimate authority, makes this document one of the greatest achievements of mankind.
It would be a shame for us to forget the story of how this document came into being and I would strongly recommend at least an annual publication of these amendments and a regular reading be required of our high school students.
It is my belief that our Constitution, and the Bill of Rights that is amended to it, should be preserved and should be held as inviolable. I, therefore, support the idea that all Supreme Court Justices be of the belief that strict interpretations of the original document be given weight over current public opinion polls. In other words, I believe this document is not an evolving piece of paper, but a solid proclamation of policy.
While many may see, for example, the ‘right to privacy’ in the Fifth Amendment is flexible enough to allow a woman to kill her unborn child, I believe that it is, in fact, ‘depriving life’ without due process of law. I do not, however, abdicate violent overthrow of our judiciary because of this difference. Instead, I believe that as technology and science catches up with the scriptures which tell us that each embryo is indeed an individual human life; public outcry will result in an amendment similar to the 13th Amendment which finally recognized the humanity of slaves.
In conclusion, let us regard this day as important as that hot day in July, and hold these inalienable rights as highly as we hold the Stars and Stripes.
Friday, December 7, 2007
Bush Credibility Problem Hurts U.S. World Standing
by Keith Cooper
Again, the president’s lack of credibility is threatening to worsen U.S.-world relations. When the National Intelligence Estimate was released this week, stating that Iran may have halted the weapons program that the administration has been using as the foundation to build a case for war with Iran, Bush chose to disregard the intelligence once more. In a repeat performance of the rush to the Iraq war, Bush is stubbornly sticking to the hard-line approach of sanctions and pressure that is in keeping with the administration’s frightening pre-emptive war strategy.
The new intelligence wasn’t so easy for other world leaders to ignore, though. Condi Rice and the State Department spent hours on the phone trying to patch up the holes the report punched through our European alliances. Meanwhile, Bush appealed to Russia’s Putin, who was already critical of the international policy toward Iran, in an attempt to smooth things over. Any hopes of getting China on board to support a U.N. hard line may be out the window at this point. I know that this may mean little to an administration that has ever disdained the U.N. as a quaint and irrelevant organization, but our standing with the international community is important.
The U.S. military force is already overextended with our engagements in Afghanistan and Iraq. We can ill afford to become entangled in yet another conflict in the region, even with the support of an international coalition. A unilateral U.S. invasion of Iran would be catastrophic in its human costs as well as in the damage to our international standing. I am not claiming we are incapable of being the “big dog” bully in the Middle East. We are. However, the costs will be too great for our nation to bear.
Right now, it appears that public support for a war with Iran just isn’t there. I hope that’s true and that Bush can’t go to the same well of fear that allowed the administration to sell us the Iraq travesty. However, the continued saber rattling seems like déjà vu to me.
Again, the president’s lack of credibility is threatening to worsen U.S.-world relations. When the National Intelligence Estimate was released this week, stating that Iran may have halted the weapons program that the administration has been using as the foundation to build a case for war with Iran, Bush chose to disregard the intelligence once more. In a repeat performance of the rush to the Iraq war, Bush is stubbornly sticking to the hard-line approach of sanctions and pressure that is in keeping with the administration’s frightening pre-emptive war strategy.
The new intelligence wasn’t so easy for other world leaders to ignore, though. Condi Rice and the State Department spent hours on the phone trying to patch up the holes the report punched through our European alliances. Meanwhile, Bush appealed to Russia’s Putin, who was already critical of the international policy toward Iran, in an attempt to smooth things over. Any hopes of getting China on board to support a U.N. hard line may be out the window at this point. I know that this may mean little to an administration that has ever disdained the U.N. as a quaint and irrelevant organization, but our standing with the international community is important.
The U.S. military force is already overextended with our engagements in Afghanistan and Iraq. We can ill afford to become entangled in yet another conflict in the region, even with the support of an international coalition. A unilateral U.S. invasion of Iran would be catastrophic in its human costs as well as in the damage to our international standing. I am not claiming we are incapable of being the “big dog” bully in the Middle East. We are. However, the costs will be too great for our nation to bear.
Right now, it appears that public support for a war with Iran just isn’t there. I hope that’s true and that Bush can’t go to the same well of fear that allowed the administration to sell us the Iraq travesty. However, the continued saber rattling seems like déjà vu to me.
Thursday, December 6, 2007
REMINDER: All In The Family -- Live!
Gordon and Keith Cooper were interviewed live on an internet radio show, Monday, November 26, by conservative blogger Dee Vantuyl, whose Conservatism With Heart weblog features a weekly radio show. You can find the blog at chatterboxchronicles.blogspot.com and download the interview at TOGINET.net. The All In The Family column will be found on page 3 of December 14th’s Broader View Weekly. For subscription information, phone (607) 589-7878.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
