A Matter of Political Perspective

In a few days, Queen Elizabeth II of England will be in Virginia to celebrate the anniversary of the founding of the Jamestown Colony. It's hard to believe that a scant 400 years ago this country was beginning to see the first immigrants come over in growing numbers. I would hope that at that time the lines for immigration were a bit shorter and not subject to investigation by the Department of Homeland Security. A little under 300 years ago the country established it's first government, a democracy of the people and by the people that would ensure that the oppression they felt by the British monarchy would no longer plague them in this new country. Built on the shoulders of the founding fathers like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and the like, this country has managed to become and remain, one of the oldest sustained democracies in the world. But when you see the way in which our governmental representatives, the so-called representatives of the people, behave, you almost wonder how it was that the country has continued to survive under a democracy.

Now I'm not calling out one party or another; in my estimation there are faults along all political fronts and there is no one side or another that is currently shining above any of the others. Quite frankly, the sheen on politics was rubbed off long ago and we're still trying to get back to some semblence of it. What do I mean? Well let's take a look at some of the political happenings in the world today. Former CIA director George Tenet was blasting the Bush Administration this past weekend just prior to announcing the release of his new book detailing his role in the war in Iraq. Now George Tenet has every right to be upset if he feels like it; it's the right of every American to feel upset when they feel like it. However, the reason Tenet is currently so livid is not because someone at the last donut at breakfast, but rather because he feels he and his agency are being made scapegoats for the current war in Iraq.

Tenet was on every show he could schedule explaining how his words were taken out of context and how his rationale for war was not needed by an administration already set on a course for war in Iraq. Now that may be true but why is it that now after being put out to pasture that he is suddenly becoming so vocal in explaining that he was being made the whipping boy? During the build up to the war in Iraq, there were many people with knowledge of what was happening and what was being discussed and decided with regards to Iraq. At that time very few, if any, politicians and leaders were taking a stand that they didn't agree with the war. Why? Simple, because the overwhelming voice of the people was for war. And why shouldn't it have been? Everything we were hearing in the public made it seem like Iraq's army was just waiting for a traffic signal to turn green before crossing the Atlantic Ocean and beginning a war with us. Now that we are past the second election of George W. Bush, everyone is coming out of the woodwork to rally against the war. Why? Because Bush won't be back in office and everyone else is looking to salvage their political careers.

The vocal majority is now beginning to come out and call for accountability with regards to the war. After the death of over 3,000 Americans in a war that doesn't seem to have an end close at hand, people are now beginning to wonder what's going on? Suddenly now politicians on both sides of the aisle are coming out and speaking on behalf or in support of Tenet and guys in similar situations. They are calling into question the votes for going to war and why it was so easily agreed upon. They all try and justify it by saying that the justification for war is in the evidence that was shown to the people despite the fact that the majority of this evidence is now known to be false. So in comes the spinning. Rather than owning up to their mistake and admitting that they didn't vote along with their conscience but rather with the popular majority they continue to fudge the truth. When asked why they voted in favor of the war, most point to the people saying, "I was duped like they were."

To say that democracy doesn't work would be a falacy because rather than looking at the evidence that they had access to, politicians on both sides went with the popular opinion and voted for war. Rather than wanting to open people's eyes and say, "look, something isn't right here" they went ahead and voted with what they were being told. You can argue that that's their job but their job is to also represent the people and that doesn't mean listening to people when they aren't getting all matters of perspective. If someone tells you the sky is orange and you're not on Mars, it pays to look up to the sky and check. The people can keep arguing that the sky is orange but as a leader, you should look up and if it looks blue to you then tell the people that it's blue. You have to work to convince them. Don't pass the buck off on someone else and say, "I'm like you, I got duped."

Unfortunately the ones being most directly affected in this case are the brave men and women of our armed forces who are out in harm's way daily. The struggle within Congress and with the White House over spending plan approval has been and continues to be the place where the soldiers are being used as pawns the most. If someone passes something relating the troops but another party doesn't like it, they immediately say that they aren't supporting the troops. Wanting the supply them and wanting them to come home or at least have an idea of when they can come home is important and shouldn't be used as political leverage by either side. It's true, if the bill has provisions in it that are above and beyond what the original scope of the bill was then there are reasons to be wary but sitting comfortably in Washington, it's easy to have debates. Tell that to the soldiers who are sitting ill-equipped and unsure of how much longer they'll be in harm's way. In Iraq on almost a daily basis there are deaths on the scale of Virginia Tech's massacre. Imagine the pallor that fell over the country falling over it daily.

The simple truth is that most politicians are interested in nothing more than protecting their jobs. At the onset of the war, most politicians spoke out in favor of the invasion simply because anyone who didn't support it was lambasted in public for being against the country and against their countrymen. When last I checked, this type of quashing of dissenting opinion was part of the reason for the original immigrants to this country to leave England in the first place. At that time our forefathers came here to escape from a government that did not allow free speech or free thought. After nearly 300 years, isn't it funny to see a British monarch coming here to celebrate a democracy that doesn't seem to be quite as democratic as it used to be.