I watched the festivities from Ben's Chili Bowl, a historic restaurant in the U St. Corridor, where President Obama first ate when he arrived in town. The Bowl is a legacy of the civil rights movement and the mood was appropriately joyous. Joy is one thing and, given the historic nature of the moment, warranted. But the classless booing of President Bush is not. I don't care for ideologues of either side. Results deserve congratulations more than a win and competence is to be praised above party. This is not to say that Bush delivered good results or was competent but to treat a man who has given 8 years of his life to this country in such a way is childish. In this vein, please indulge me posting pieces of Andrew Levy's most recent "To Don't" list for conservatives. I may not agree with everything he writes or believes, but the core message, that we should act as practical adults, is more welcome than any gloating.
DON'T question the motives - question the policy...remember that President Obama is doing what he think is best for the country, as President Bush did. Both men love America and want what's best for her. End of story.DON'T make it personal.DON'T cozy up to and champion foreign dictators and despots.DON'T pretend you're being brave when you criticize your government. Not while people in other countries actually, y'know, DIE, when they do that.DON'T say you're going to move to Canada and then stay here.DON'T call people un-American one week, and then talk about how 'We are not blue states or red states, we are the United States' next week.DON'T automatically think people who disagree with you are stupid or evil. Some of them are, of course. But most of them aren't, and you might actually learn something if you listen to them.
We're facing one of the most difficult periods in our countries history. Squabbling and lingering on past wrongs won't get us anywhere. Both sides need to remember that.
4 comments:
While I embrace the spirit of your post Nick, I strongly disagree that the booing of Bush was either "childish" or "classless."
It reminds me of the argument that athletes shouldn't be booed because, even when they stink, they are really trying to play well and that deserves support and respect. As Bush demonstrated all too well, effort and stature just arent good enough. When your ticket revenue and taxpayer funded stadium pays the salary of an athlete, you have every right to express your displeasure with poor performance. The rule applies even more so to the POTUS. Your vote, taxes, and even blood sustain the office of the president, without which it would lack legitimacy, purpose, and authority. Thus, booing poor performance is a legitimate and entirely appropriate expression of disapproval. Blind deference should not be confused with respect for the office. Nor do I believe the boos were from ideologues; a 70% disapproval rating cuts across ideological divides, and a lot more than 50% of that crowd was booing.
Finally, fractured societies in crisis must "linger on the past", it is essential to moving forward. No one wants this congress to be defined by investigative hearings into Bush admin policies, but as TRC commissions have demonstrated from ZA to the former Yugoslavia (a parallel I draw lightly, of course), a clear account of the past is essential to providing closure and perspective moving forward. That requires hearings, testimony, and time. And if a crime is committed, it should be prosecuted, even when it originates in the executive branch.
A few comments/clarifications...
"This is not to say that Bush delivered good results or was competent"...I agree his effort wasn't good enough and we all have every right to express our displeasure. But for me, true displeasure expresses itself in action, not cheap words. Grace and class should be exhibited on such a day.
I'm not confusing deference and respect but it's all too easy to kick people when they're down. Bush knows how he's viewed, he doesn't need a crass reminder. He may have such low approval ratings, but let's face it, people in that crowd were at least rabid Obama fans, if not ideologues.
Finally, such investigative commissions look alot better on paper than they actually are (9/11?). Without a fly on the wall, we're going to end up with a nice fat report that no one will ever read. Obama signed an executive order today rolling back Bush's interrogation reforms and barring evidence gained under such durress. Personally, I think we should leave it at that.
-
You raise an important point on the topic of investigative commissions in the US. They are typically either a blatant partisan exercise, or a half-hearted attempt at transparecy that usually reveals itself as cheap political cover. I read a bit on TRC and post-conflict commissions as an undergrad, and they offer lessons on the scope and authority/independence common to "successful" commissions. But it is obviously a strained parallel to what would likely investigate Bush admin policies.
Although to your point, given the size of the NSA's wiretapping program, that little "fly" on the wall just might exist!
Post a Comment