President Bush:
In a world where some no longer believe that we can distinguish between simple right and wrong, we need your message to reject this "dictatorship of relativism," and embrace a culture of justice and truth.
Froomkin:
Yet some of Bush's most defining decisions -- such as launching a war of choice against Iraq and his picking and choosing which laws actually apply to him -- suggest a highly subjective sense of right and wrong. Most notably, he defends the use of interrogation tactics that violate human dignity by arguing that the ends justify the means.
Also consider Bush's attack on "moral relativism" in the context of the recent GAO report, which found that the Bush administration has no plan to eliminate al Qaeda as a threat to national security.
Think about that for a moment.
Think of all the sacrifices the Bush administration has asked us to make for the sake of national security - increased security screening and video surveillance in public places, the Patriot Act, Real ID, suspension of habeas corpus, warrantless wiretapping, online surveillance, and torture, to name a few - without it actually planning to address the threat of the one terrorist group that did breach our security and harm Americans.
Reminds me of what Jon Tester said back in the last election about the administration's policies, that they punish Americans first. Now it's evident that we're the only ones punished by the administration's "national security" policies. You can't even argue that the curtailing of our liberties fit in a larger context to battle terrorism.
And how does that all show that President Bush - or any one of his simpering GOP yes-men - knows right from wrong?
If I were an advocate of Bush's "anti-terror" policies, I'd be pretty embarrassed right now. |
