On Sunday, as I sat watching former House speaker Newt Gingrich unabashedly endorse the politics of fear on Meet the Press, ("I think people should be afraid"), I couldn't help wonder why so many Republicans hate America so much.
Don't get me wrong. I know Republicans think they love America. They talk a lot about how much they love America. And they were quick to question the patriotism of anyone who opposed the Bush administration's policies after the 9/11 attacks. But do they?
Yes, I know, I'm being a wise guy to make a point. But when Gingrich talks, it seems like he opposes the basic principals of freedom and due process that for centuries have defined what it means to be an American.
Gingrich, after forecasting doom if Guantanamo is closed down (Terrorists will recruit in our prisons!), even defended torture and Guantanamo by saying, "[W]hat's your highest priority? Is it to defend America and protect American lives, or is it to find some way to defend terrorists and to get terrorists involved in the criminal justice system?", adding that "only" three targets were tortured. (As Keith Olbermann asked last night, is only committing three crimes, hundreds of times, a defense to those crimes?)
Gingrich defended the Bush policies in these words:
"And so they did everything for seven and a half years to--and they have a very simple principle: If you're in doubt, do what it takes to help America survive every time. So they consistently fell down on the side of being very tough about national security, being very tough with specific terrorists."
He also explained his thought process:
"The question is, is the most important thing to us today to find some kind of civil--American Civil Liberties Union model of making sure that we never offend terrorists, or is the model for us today to say to the CIA and others, 'Do everything you can to protect America....'"
But here's the thing: Gingrich talks about defending America, but he and his pro-Guantanamo, pro-torture crew are not defending America, at least as it has been identified by presidents from Franklin Roosevelt to Ronald Reagan to even George W. Bush. In fact, the America that we have defended from World War II through W.'s administration seems to be something Gingrich, Dick Cheney and those that agree with them feel comfortable disposing of.
Every U.S. conflict of the 20th century has been explained as some variation of freedom fighting tyranny. That quality, it was said, is what made America special. We had a free society, with a democratically elected government that followed the laws of the land. We bragged about the lack of succession challenges when Richard Nixon resigned, noting that even though Gerald Ford had never been elected president or vice president by the American people, his legitimacy was never questioned, since his ascension to office followed the process set out in our laws. World War II was a battle between democracy and fascism. The Cold War was about freedom versus Communist repression.
Even in the 21st century, Bush spoke a lot about freedom. One of the 1,876 justifications (I may be exaggerating a tad) offered by Bush for the Iraq war after no weapons of mass destruction were found was to provide Iraqis with democracy and freedom. Iraq was to be a beacon of freedom, Bush liked to tell us. He said the terrorists hated us for our freedoms.
But those freedoms seem irrelevant to Gingrich and Cheney, at least with regards to torture and Guantanamo.
Republicans deify Ronald Reagan for standing in West Berlin and saying, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall." But Reagan wasn't talking about lousy architecture. Rather, he was saying that on one side of the wall lived the good guys who enjoyed democratic freedoms, and on the other side resided people who had no freedom and lived under the oppression of the bad guys, the Communists. It was the guys in the East that did things, like, say, torturing people and holding them without charging them, while such atrocities would never go on in the West.
But what if the governments on both sides of the wall tortured people and held suspects without trial? What then? Would Reagan's words have meant anything?
That is the very question facing Gingrich and Cheney now. If we torture and hold suspects without trial, where is our moral high ground? Can we torture and be Reagan's good guys? What are we fighting for? I thought the whole point of the war on terror is to defend the American way of life. But if we surrender our values to fight the war, to use a popular saw, haven't the terrorists won?
It seems to me that the Cheney/Gingrich crowd have no interest in protecting this America, the America of freedom and due process. Rather, they want to protect America as one side of a conflict, without regard to the very values that they purport to be fighting for. It's as if they've reduced defending America to rooting for a sports team, where you just want your club to win.
So when Gingrich says, "Do everything you can to protect America," or, "Is it to defend America and protect American lives, or is it to find some way to defend terrorists and to get terrorists involved in the criminal justice system?", he is missing the point completely. If we do everything we can to protect America, including discarding the freedom and due process that is at the heart of American values, what are we protecting?
Of course, it doesn't have to be a choice. As President Obama has said, we don't have to choose between our values and our security.
And as Sen. Dick Durbin noted on the same episode of Meet the Press, allowing fear to drive policy is no way to govern. He said:
"[I]f you, if you step back and take a look at history for a moment, you will find the message we just heard from Mr. Gingrich, from Vice President Cheney and Mr. Rush Limbaugh to be the same, it's a message of fear: 'Be afraid, be very afraid.' And to say that this president is not doing everything in his power to keep America safe is just as irresponsible as anything I've ever heard said on your program."
Durbin went on to say:
"America cowering in fear is not going to be a strong nation. I disagree with Mr. Gingrich. We can understand the threat, we can deal with it rationally, we can be strong and we will be safe with President Obama. But this notion that fear is going to guide us is what brought us to the notion of weapons of mass destruction and this war in Iraq and all that it has cost us. You know, Vice President Cheney said the other day without hesitation, 'I'd do everything all over again.' He hasn't learned any lesson from history."
And our entire criminal justice system is built on the principal of suspects being innocent until proven guilty. Why is it so unreasonable to ask that these terrorists actually be proven to be terrorists, in some way that respects the tradition of our laws? It seems that the major impediment to trials is that the Bush administration's torture and other practices have rendered the government's cases harder to prove. Nobody, not President Obama and certainly not me, is arguing that hardened terrorists be released so that they can go out and do damage to Americans. But there is a huge gap from that idea to holding individuals with nothing more than a "trust me, they're bad guys" from the government. If we really are a nation of freedom, we can find a way to give these terrorists basic rights to contest their guilt, while still keeping them from harming us.
What really bugs me is that the items used by Gingrich and Cheney to perpetuate the politics of fear are a huge pile of garbage. Gingrich can sit on Meet the Press and try to scare the American people for political gain, all while he is surrounded with evidence that his claims are wholly without merit.
The idea that keeping Guantanamo open makes us safer has been debunked over and over again. Even if you reject the point that Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib have been key recruiting tools for al Qaeda (a point Durbin made over and over on Meet the Press), the support of key leaders for closing Guantanamo and ending torture seems to be overwhelming. None other than Gen. David Petraeus, the right-wing darling who was the architect of the vaunted surge in Iraq, and who currently serves as the Commander of the U.S. Central Command, said last weekend that he agreed with President Obama's decisions to close down Guantanamo and reject torture. Petraeus also endorsed the symbolic value of closing Guantanamo. (Last night, Olbermann showed footage of Petraeus addressing these issues.) Durbin noted that Sen. Lindsey Graham has admitted that we can safely house terrorists in federal prisons in the U.S. And several individuals who have conducted interrogations have related that torture was not -- and is not -- an effective means by which to secure intelligence from suspects, most recently argued by a 14-year military interrogator going by the alias Matthew Alexander.
So, basically, you have Cheney and Gingrich, and others, running around trying to scare the life out of Americans, arguing that President Obama has made us less safe, and if we shut down Guantanamo and stop torturing, the terrorists will run amok. But, at the same time, a vast majority of reputable sources, including Gen. David Petraeus, have completely debunked the Cheney/Gingrich vision of doom.
Of course, I understand the political strategies that underlie the Cheney/Gingrich sky-is-falling claims. As Jonathan Alter pointed out on Olbermann last night, Cheney and Gingrich are "laying a trap" for President Obama, waiting for an attack so they can then say, "See, we were right. Obama made us less safe."
But I think it goes beyond petty partisan politics. People like Gingrich and Cheney (and most of the Republicans in Congress) have a view of America that is completely out of sync with what America has meant over the last century, including what Reagan was drawing on when he made his speech in West Berlin. The America that Cheney and Gingrich see is one in which it's more about us versus them than preserving the very qualities that make America something worth defending.
That is why I say that Cheney and Gingrich don't love America. Because they don't seem to care about American values as they have traditionally been viewed. At least before Bush took over the White House.
They hate about 70% of America, Dems and Independents and 30% of their party they call RHINO.
the Constitution, the rule of law, and the moral high ground.
Republicans DO NOT hate America. We are sick and tired of incompetent instructors in our taxpayer-supported institutions. Consequently, we demand an end to tenure.
We are sick and tired of the claim that computers are necessary in order to improve academic performance in the public schools, because the problem is caused by the failure of the education establishment to adopt sound practices. Consequently, we demand a removal of all electronic teaching tools, and a return to the slide rule. Any faculty member who cannot cope with the change is incompetent to teach and should be fired. We are sick and tired of actors and musicians who allow themselves to be mouthpieces for political, environmental, and moral causes, when in fact they are even more ignorant of politics, the environment, and morality than are our elected officials. Consequently, we demand that all professional actors and musicians be prohibited from making public statements on any issue not directly related to their craft.
Republicans DO NOT hate America. WE are sick and tired of elected officials who say that the government can't afford a tax cut, and then turn around and give themselve raises. Consequently, WE demand that raises for elected officials be limited to those officials who have voted against every tax increase and in favor of every tax cut that has come before them.
WE are sick and tired of nepotism. Consequently, WE demand that the spouses, children, siblings and in-laws of any president, past or present, be ineligible for any elected or appointed office.
WE are sick and tired of self-styled "public interest" groups with moralizing names for themselves. WE demand that public-interest groups can only have moralizing names if a group of equal prominence exists with the opposite moralization in its name. Consequently, the People for the American Way must take a new name until a group named People for the Un-American Way achieves equal prominence.
The writer of the article was trying to make an arguement that Republicans Hate America.
WE Don't. However, I would think that the way the media, hollywood, and many of the left field liberal loons treat those that wish to oppose that which hasn't worked in other socialist countries, as one's hating America, then I needed to point out certain facts.
The mentallity of those in charge, feel it is my way or the highway. We heard it said by obama himself, "I won. So I think on that one, I trump you.” To have that childish way of thinking without the intellect of ever maybe thinking that there is a better way to get America out of this financial hole, except by digging her deeper into the hole, is surely hateful on one level.
So no, Republicans Do Not Hate America.
Republicans DO NOT hate America. WE are sick and tired of government-funded studies that do nothing more than confirm something WE already knew. Consequently, WE demand that before any government-funded study is released, tWElve randomly-selected citizens will be informed of the nature and methodology of the study, and asked to guess what the results will be; if all of them arrive at the same conclusions as the researchers, thereby proving that the study was useless, the researchers shall be required to refund the grant money.
WE are sick and tired of every aggrieved group receiving special attention and favors just because they have big mouths and can get on television.
WE are sick and tired of disgruntled fringe groups bringing our communities to a halt by blocking the streets with their bodies. Consequently, WE demand that it be legal to run over any protestor who blocks a traffic lane.
Republicans DO NOT hate America. Basically WE are tired of you liberal dems taking away the very freedoms this country was founded on. WE are tired of having to justify our way of life. WE are tired of being called racists when YOUR president uses every means to twist race card to his favor. WE are tired of having our religions crapped on by the liberal secular progressives. WE are tired of having the Constitution
WE are tired of liberal politicians pandering to stupid people in order to get their votes. WE are sick and tired of religious hypocrisy in our elected leaders, especially those who use the meeting house as a stage for publishing their political agendas. Consequently, WE demand that whenever elected officials or candidates for elected office are in a house of worship, they be required to sit in their pews and keep their big mouths shut. WE are sick and tired of a government that claims to fight racism by imposing racism. Consequently, WE demand that all levels of government set the example and immediately stop keeping track of racial categories.
Second, explain what rights we are trying to take away from you. All that I see is the RIGHTWINGNUTJOBS trying to take away the right to marry, women's rights, right to die, right to utilize mind altering substances, etc....
If someone from the left was run out of Congress for ethics violations and was a known hypocrite, whose sole function was to go on television almost weekly to call someone a traitor, he or she would be considered crazy. But Gingrich is considered an oracle for little else. As the author suggests, Gingrich and others on the far right want to protect an America, but an America which resembles the former Soviet Union with few civil liberties or privacy from government intrusion. After all, Gingrich would probably reason if one does not have anything to hide, then why worry?
General Petraeus recently stated we should close Guanatamo and stop the torture practices. I am still waiting for Gingrich to accuse General Petraeus of working for the enemy.
Answer: Jane Fonda went to Vietnam.
Do you really think that North Korea chose Memorial Day to test a nuclear weapon by accident?
Nonsense, you have no concept of the world. Ignorance is a dangerous thing in the hands of small minded people with limited vision.
Everyone remind ole Newt when he sings the Star Spangled Banner
The last line is sung: O'er the land of the free and the home of the BRAVE.
Stop spreadling hysteria and shaming America. We can deal with the detainees on American soil just fine. Close GITMO now!
None of this has happened by accident.
Century of the Self, which examines the birth of media control using the new field of public relations science-- http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/features/century_of_the_self_episode_1.shtml
And The Power of Nightmares, which follows the growth of the Islamists and Neo-con movements as a part of the politics of fear, side by side-- http://www.amazon.com/Power-Nightmares-Various/dp/B001707D98/ref=sr_1_1/189-9550278-0177900?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1243530352&sr=8-1
While we are busy falling for this Red vs Blue b.s. the real powers that be are moving forward with their own agenda.