Why Republicans Are Pissing My Off
Author's Note: This piece was originally written shortly before the election. However, it's worth thinking about the frustrations I have with the Republican Party, and assuming others agree, how that may have affected the election. And no, I'm not suggesting the Democratic Party is above the problems I discuss here... I just think the Republican Party is more salvagable. For the record, I voted Bob Barr in 2008, although I live in a solidly Blue state so my vote is nothing more than a protest vote in any case.
I've been voting Republican, at least at the Presidential level, for as long as I've been old enough to put a hanging chad on a ballot. When George W. Bush took office, I was excited. In the days after 9/11, he united and motivated our country, and he immediately ordered decisive action to make our country more safe, while maintaining our international image of power.
But then things fell apart, quickly.
George W. Bush hasn't done a bad job as President. He does, however, have the lowest popularity rating ever -- below that of Nixon during impeachment. Ask any man on the street, and they'll likely tell you he's the worst President we've ever had What gives?
The first problem is we have elevated the position of the President far beyond its original intent. Politicians from both parties are guilty of this. The President leads the country, we are told. The President is to blame when the economy sours (even though it was doing fine until Democrats took control of the House). The President is to blame for lack of Federal health care system (even though the Constitution reserves that power, as it does all non-enumerated powers, to the States). The President leads the Executive Branch, yet all the campaign promises we hear involve legislation the candidates intend to submit if elected.
Ironically, as a president, McCain and Obama would have the exact same power to enact legislation that I have as a citizen -- they can ask a Congressman to introduce it. As Senators, either one could submit legislation directly today. Bush opened himself up to criticism on the economy souring by taking credit for the economy in better times.
But every pundit knows the single biggest factor hurting the Republican Party right now is the war in Iraq. Virtually every American agrees that invading Iraq was a mistake, and blame Bush for "failed intelligence" that justified the war. And here is where we see the Republican Party's greatest liability -- the tendency to lie when the truth would work better.
In late 2002, there was a lot of evidence that Iraq was working on weapons of mass destruction. None of it was hard solid evidence, but nevertheless it was an impressive quantity of evidence. We now know the reason for the evidence. Saddam Hussein operated a military deception program designed to convince the world that he retained WMD while simultaneously not allowing any proof to appear. He gambled this would make America and the UN look like bumbling idiots, increase his influence and power in the region, and prevent any justification for war against him. In retrospect, he failed miserably.
But we didn't invade Iraq because we thought they had weapons of mass destruction. A lot of countries have weapons of mass destruction. A lot of those countries obtained them in violation of treaties and UN resolutions. Israel? India? Pakistan? North Korea? Hello? Anyone care?
We invaded Iraq not because we thought they might be working on chemical weapons, but because we knew Iraq was actively attempting to do the US harm, and we couldn't tolerate it anymore. The WMD excuse was a poorly-executed cover-up, meant to distract the world from the true reasons for the invasion. The problem was the true reasons were better than the cover-up!
Under international law, we obtained causa bella in 1993 we we obtained conclusive proof that the ISS, under direct orders from Saddam Hussein, had attempted to assassinate former President George H. W. Bush during a 1993 visit to Kuwait. President Clinton chose to bomb a few facilities rather than press the issue, but causa bella was extant and it does not go away that easily.
During the rapid withdrawal of US troops after the First Gulf War, Saddam Hussein sent troops into Southern Iraq and Kurdistan to commit genocide against tribal peoples that he believed had supported the US invasion. The UN passed a resolution prohibiting Iraq from doing this, which Saddam Hussein blatantly ignored. In response, the United States, along with the British, French, and a few other allies, agreed to patrol Northern and Southern Iraq to prevent air assets and heavy military equipment from reaching the vulnerable populations.
Iraqi forces violated the declared safe zones on a daily basis, and began routinely firing on US aircraft. Saddam Hussein went as far as to offer huge cash rewards for anyone that killed an American pilot. Again, this is causa bella. The Coalition's muted response was to destroy symbolic air defense assets on a semi-regular basis.
To summarize that lengthy boring history lesson, Iraq attempted to assassinate a former US President, attempted genocide on its own people, and ordered its military to kill American service members by any means possible. Yet instead of using these legal justifications for war, George Bush chose the somewhat sketchy excuse that we had to rid Iraq of weapons of mass destruction -- then stood by that statement until the bitter end. The result? A loss of international respect for America, and a loss of trust in our government domestically.
You would think the Republican Party would have learned this lesson, but it hasn't. Sarah Palin has made the exact same mistake in Alaska, and its haunting her now. Yes, I'm referring to troopergate. Monegan alleges that he was fired because he refused to fire Palin's sister's ex-husband, Mike Wooten. Sarah Palin has denied this, claiming Monegan was fired for "not being a team player" and other vague problems. But by denying that Wooten was a factor in Monegan's dismissal, she opened herself up to investigations, which are now finding she probably lied about why Monegan was fired.
Can you imagine how differently troopergate would have gone if Sarah Palin had handled this differently? What if she admitted right from the start that Monegan was fired because he refused to fire Mike Wooten? I'm envisioning a Checkers speech on the lawn of the Alaskan Governor's residence. I'm envisioning a speech that looks a little like this:
"Yes, I fired Walt Monegan. I fired him for gross incompetence. My sister brought it to my attention that Mike Wooten, her ex-husband and a state trooper, was a worthless lump of flesh drawing a state paycheck and carrying a badge and gun in my name. He tasered his own stepson for practice, yet Walt Monegan felt he should continue as a state trooper. I don't know if I could legally order Monegan to fire Wooten or not, but I do know this -- nobody who thinks a man that tasers his own stepson for practice should be allowed to enforce the law in our state will ever work for me, as long as I'm Governor of Alaska."
There you go. Draw a line in the snow, and anybody who criticizes you over it now has to publicly admit that they feel troopers should be allowed to taser small children for fun. Who's going to stand up for that creep?
Instead, by denying the obvious truth and using made-up justifications, Sarah Palin made herself vulnerable to attacks on her integrity. And thus the problem all the Republicans seem to have right now... They have so little integrity that they will lie, even when the truth would be better for them. I guess it's just become a force of habit at this point.
