The Problem with the Current Political Conversation

This morning, I watched Newt Gingrich on Meet the Press. Along with Dick Durbin, the former Speaker of the House explored some of the rhetoric being used by Simon Bar Sinister er, Dick Cheney, and the President.

Simon Bar Sinister – see the resemblance? rr-rr-rr! (see Lil Bush series)

While the President has ratcheted back some of the ideas that made me vote for him (like closing Guantanamo Bay prison) I wonder, as I watch the entire debate unfold, if we aren’t being steered in the wrong direction.

Everyone wants to point to what will be done with the people currently incarcerated, and how dangerous they are. Noted, but the fact remains, they are still human beings. Barely perhaps, but they are.

So instead of the vilification of those who would try to treat these people as criminals (which I believe they are), and instead, maintain they are wartime combatants, we should be asking how we treat those who would oppose, no matter their label.

If these people in question are criminals, they should be tried, sentenced, and incarcerated, with credit given for time already served. If they are combatants, then they should fall to the judgement of military courts, and punished, if found guilty, accordingly.

But no one has the right to hold another, without proper judgement, indefinitely, for fear of perceived harm .

This is the crux of the current problem. The Republicans want to be able to abuse human rights, as set forth by the Geneva and other conventions, in the name of safety. Obviously, no one is against the idea of safety, which is the only reason that this idea gets any traction. If we decide, however, that our fear is more important than others’ rights, haven’t we fallen backward decades, or perhaps, centuries in time, where the ‘might makes right’ claim was used, and don’t we lose much of our claim to being civilized?

§

‘

‘

Kids, just because I don’t care doesn’t mean I’m not listening. • Homer Simpson

•