Monday
Jan242005
Talk is Cheap
Monday, January 24, 2005 at 3:00AM
By Ellen Ratner
I would be "one happy camper" if the president's words and actions were more closely associated with one another. As he said in the opening remarks of his second inaugural address, "At this second gathering, our duties are defined not by the words I use, but by the history we have seen together." This is an eloquent way of saying "talk is cheap."
The president would do well not to throw so many stones out of his glass house. If the president actually believes freedom is the antidote to the world's spiraling security and stability index, then I would be curious to know why he has only supported democracy in a country blessed with the world's second-largest oil reserve.
On the other hand, the president stood by while those who the president would normally refer to as "gangs and thugs" overthrew a legitimately elected Haitian president. Yes, Haiti has had its share of problems, but as President Bush said in his speech, "The difficulty of the task is no excuse for avoiding it."
Today, the Haitian people live in fear and squalor. President Aristede was not the chosen president of this administration and until a suitable candidate is found or selected, Haiti can count on more misery. I guess the president wasn't serious when he said, "The rulers of outlaw regimes can know that we still believe as Abraham Lincoln did: 'Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves; and under the rule of a just God, cannot long retain it.'"
What about Venezuela? They are in our hemisphere and they even have oil. Hugo Chavez, however, is pals with Fidel Castro and that makes him enemy No. 1. This administration has at best stood idly by, and at worst, supported the attempts to overthrow Venezuela's president, Hugo Chavez. There seems to be a trend developing. If you don't think like this administration does, then the decision of your voting public does not count for anything.
I would be remiss if I did not discuss the president's freedom "blind spots" and there are many. He says, "In the long run, there is no justice without freedom, and there can be no human rights without human liberty." This must not apply to longtime Bush-family friends who happen to be members of various royal families throughout the Middle East.
As one member of the Saudi royal family said on a BBC roundtable discussion prior to the invasion of Iraq, "Freedom is incompatible with Islam." It sure is when "one man, one vote" would turn the Saudi Royal family back into Bedouins overnight. This same line of logic can be applied to the rest of the so-called "gulfie states" as well.
Speaking of human rights and the rule of law, one need not look far to see the giant blind spot that festers in our backyard. The U.S. Constitution, Geneva Convention and Human Rights "Free Zone" of Guantanamo Bay has definitely, as the president says, "... lit a fire – a fire in the minds of men." This abrogation of the Magna Carta is a cancer on the soul of America and has emboldened a new generation of terrorists. If the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the "poison in the wound of terror," as the longtime Israeli peace proponent, Uri Avnery says, Guantanamo is a whole new way to spread the terrorism virus.
The president's vision of freedom is also a bit blurry when it comes to equal protection under the law for our own citizens. He says:
In America's ideal of freedom, the public interest depends on private character – on integrity, and tolerance toward others, and the rule of conscience in our own lives ... that edifice of character is built in families, supported by communities with standards, and sustained in our national life by the truths of Sinai, the Sermon on the Mount, the words of the Quran, and the varied faiths of our people.
Perhaps I am missing something, but nowhere in the Ten Commandments or the Sermon on the Mount do I see mention of a need to discriminate against a person on the basis of their sexual orientation. Granted, I cannot speak for the entire Quran or the "varied faiths of our people." But I do know the meaning of the word, "tolerance" and it doesn't end with an amendment that seeks to undermine what the president calls, "the durable wisdom of our Constitution." If the Constitution is so durable, why does the president seek to amend it?
In the end, faith without works is dead. The president, as usual, has attempted to speak hope into the hearts of people who live without freedom. It would have been a beautiful speech had the man's words been backed by his actions.
I would be "one happy camper" if the president's words and actions were more closely associated with one another. As he said in the opening remarks of his second inaugural address, "At this second gathering, our duties are defined not by the words I use, but by the history we have seen together." This is an eloquent way of saying "talk is cheap."
The president would do well not to throw so many stones out of his glass house. If the president actually believes freedom is the antidote to the world's spiraling security and stability index, then I would be curious to know why he has only supported democracy in a country blessed with the world's second-largest oil reserve.
On the other hand, the president stood by while those who the president would normally refer to as "gangs and thugs" overthrew a legitimately elected Haitian president. Yes, Haiti has had its share of problems, but as President Bush said in his speech, "The difficulty of the task is no excuse for avoiding it."
Today, the Haitian people live in fear and squalor. President Aristede was not the chosen president of this administration and until a suitable candidate is found or selected, Haiti can count on more misery. I guess the president wasn't serious when he said, "The rulers of outlaw regimes can know that we still believe as Abraham Lincoln did: 'Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves; and under the rule of a just God, cannot long retain it.'"
What about Venezuela? They are in our hemisphere and they even have oil. Hugo Chavez, however, is pals with Fidel Castro and that makes him enemy No. 1. This administration has at best stood idly by, and at worst, supported the attempts to overthrow Venezuela's president, Hugo Chavez. There seems to be a trend developing. If you don't think like this administration does, then the decision of your voting public does not count for anything.
I would be remiss if I did not discuss the president's freedom "blind spots" and there are many. He says, "In the long run, there is no justice without freedom, and there can be no human rights without human liberty." This must not apply to longtime Bush-family friends who happen to be members of various royal families throughout the Middle East.
As one member of the Saudi royal family said on a BBC roundtable discussion prior to the invasion of Iraq, "Freedom is incompatible with Islam." It sure is when "one man, one vote" would turn the Saudi Royal family back into Bedouins overnight. This same line of logic can be applied to the rest of the so-called "gulfie states" as well.
Speaking of human rights and the rule of law, one need not look far to see the giant blind spot that festers in our backyard. The U.S. Constitution, Geneva Convention and Human Rights "Free Zone" of Guantanamo Bay has definitely, as the president says, "... lit a fire – a fire in the minds of men." This abrogation of the Magna Carta is a cancer on the soul of America and has emboldened a new generation of terrorists. If the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the "poison in the wound of terror," as the longtime Israeli peace proponent, Uri Avnery says, Guantanamo is a whole new way to spread the terrorism virus.
The president's vision of freedom is also a bit blurry when it comes to equal protection under the law for our own citizens. He says:
In America's ideal of freedom, the public interest depends on private character – on integrity, and tolerance toward others, and the rule of conscience in our own lives ... that edifice of character is built in families, supported by communities with standards, and sustained in our national life by the truths of Sinai, the Sermon on the Mount, the words of the Quran, and the varied faiths of our people.
Perhaps I am missing something, but nowhere in the Ten Commandments or the Sermon on the Mount do I see mention of a need to discriminate against a person on the basis of their sexual orientation. Granted, I cannot speak for the entire Quran or the "varied faiths of our people." But I do know the meaning of the word, "tolerance" and it doesn't end with an amendment that seeks to undermine what the president calls, "the durable wisdom of our Constitution." If the Constitution is so durable, why does the president seek to amend it?
In the end, faith without works is dead. The president, as usual, has attempted to speak hope into the hearts of people who live without freedom. It would have been a beautiful speech had the man's words been backed by his actions.
Reader Comments