9.22.04Just 41 Days Left
McCain and Powell: Honk if You Love the Status QuoBy Mark Grueter
-------------------------------------
If Bush is re-elected in November, his opponents will look around for someone to blame. Hardcore Democrats will no doubt aim the finger at Ralph Nader. We ought to have worked harder to purge his name from the ballot, they’ll say. Other liberals may blame the stupidity of the American Voter, media and government propaganda, the 527 ads, the cowardice of the Democratic Party or even the lackluster Mr. Kerry himself. Or some combination of all that.
I add John McCain and Colin Powell to the list and place them at the top. They are the two leading political figures in America today. Exceedingly popular within government and media circles, remarkably high public favorability ratings, either one of these registered Republicans could hand John Kerry the presidency if they so chose to abandon Bush. Only George Bush himself, and only by resigning, yields as much power as either of these men. But, soldiers to the end, Powell and McCain back their bumbling commander-in-chief.
Along with what could be four more years of George W. Bush, Powell and McCain are already largely responsible for all of the casualties (over 1,000 American dead, over 7,000 wounded, roughly 15,000 Iraqis dead, untold wounded) caused by the war in Iraq. It doesn’t matter if they disagreed with some of Bush’s tactics along the way, because by ultimately throwing their unequivocal support to the President and by aggressively repeating Bush’s falsehoods (in Powell’s case, on behalf of Bush, in front of the UN Security Council) regarding WMDs and the non-connection to 9/11, they are, in effect, totally culpable.
I’m fed up with McCain and all of the sick, groveling attention he receives from our media. I no longer care about his stint in the Hanoi Hilton either, as if that somehow gave him a lifetime of immunity from criticism, or made him an expert on questions of war and peace. The pseudo-maverick McCain says he supports President Bush because “we” must win in Iraq. Win what? Refresh my memory, captain straight talk, who are we fighting against? The remnants of the former government? Foreign elements that have penetrated the Iraqi border? The Iraqi people themselves? Do “we” need to win in Iraq like we needed to win in Vietnam? And just like in Vietnam, are we now waging a war against the very people we say we’re fighting for?
Oh, but McCain says we shouldn’t discuss Vietnam because it brings back old divisions. An open opponent of history, McCain thinks we should all just forget about the three million Vietnamese the U.S. military killed and the 58,000 Americans that died. Too divisive, says the reigning “ayatollah of American Politics” (as CNN labeled him, without a trace of irony). Among a series of shameful acts, McCain righteously condemns Saddam Hussein for using chemical weapons without recognizing the fact that his own government did the same thing on a much larger scale. The “Agent Orange” our military dumped all over Indochina kills to this day.
McCain cites Bush’s “leadership,” his “clarity” and “strength” in the war on terror as the main reason why Bush should be re-elected. In other words, it doesn’t matter how badly and how often Bush is wrong, so long as he’s clear and resolute about it. In McCain’s world, simple-mindedness in the name of leadership is no vice.
To justify the war, the “arbiter” of American Politics, the “referee,” the Dictator McCain, says that the “status quo in Iraq was unacceptable.” True enough, but isn’t that the case in almost every country? I mean, honk if you love the status quo. The belligerent McCain would evidently take us to war in every country where the status quo is unacceptable. Well that’s just great.
The only way the pro-Iraq War argument ever made any sense was if the proponents and conductors of it could somehow demonstrate that the “status quo” in Iraq would be improved as a result of the war. But any fair reading of the reports from inside Iraq so far lead one to conclude the contrary – that conditions have gotten worse, far worse (Not to mention the reality that the U.S. is now less rather than more safe because of it). As for promises that things will get better down the road from a president who has stated falsehoods from the beginning of the trip, well, that’s just not good enough. Nor are any promises good enough when they emanate from the very journalists who lobbied for this disastrous war in the first place and who believed Bush could be counted upon.
The argument that Iraq’s fate remains undetermined, that it’s still too early to pass judgment, and that if we really want to help the Iraqi people, we must keep fighting, does makes sense on one level. But how can anyone believe the Bush team has the wit and wherewithal to pull this off? How many Abu Ghraibs have to occur, how many lies have to be told, how many miscalculations, how many people have to die, before we realize that George Bush and apologists like John McCain and Colin Powell, cannot be trusted?
It was unfortunate that Dan Rather used what now appear to be forged documents to tell us what we already know about George Bush’s National Guard service: that he skipped out on his duties to go work, ostensibly in order to work on a political campaign in Alabama. A former professor at the Harvard Business School now says Bush used to brag about the fact that his dad kept him off the battlefield. Does this bother Colin Powell? Apparently not, even though, not so long ago, Powell wrote the following:
I am angry that so many of the sons of the powerful and well-placed... managed to wangle slots in Reserve and National Guard units...Of the many tragedies of Vietnam, this raw class discrimination strikes me as the most damaging to the ideal that all Americans are created equal and owe equal allegiance to their country. (Colin Powell’s autobiography, My American Journey, p. 148)
Some people suggest McCain and Powell only stand up for Bush because of party loyalty and a desire to remain influential within the Republican Party in the years to come. If either man defected to Kerry, he would be finished as a Republican and potentially as a leading national figure. But couldn’t either one of them win have a legitimate shot as an independent candidate for president? Well, perhaps not, as favorability ratings and reputations can change overnight. Do not underestimate the destructive power of the GOP political machine when it sets it target on someone. Remember how it temporarily disabled McCain when he dared challenge Bush for the nomination in 2000?
But if this is true, it’s hard to imagine anything more sinister or even treasonous – compromising national security because of personal ambition. I have no idea if Powell and McCain genuinely support Bush or if they have ulterior motives, but does it really matter? Either way, the two men represent all that is vile and contemptible about American politics.
Click here to see Grueter's previous column.---------------------------------------
Mark Grueter is a writer living in New York City. He can be contacted at grueter@methree.net.
© 2004 Me Three