Monday, June 30, 2003

Rigidity and Moral Stupidty


Wow, I wrote an essay, better note this because I don't do it often. Edited, corrected impeach (bring charges against) to remove from office.

Orson Scott Card wrote an essay called Moral Stupidity I really objected to. I posted my response in their forum, a little after a longer criticism of the illogic of the polemic which is at top. Let's see if it gets me bounced. I also sent it without a couple of edits as an essay but doubt it will be published that way.


Orson Scott Card was a fine writer whose novels often examine moral themes. I treasure Ender's Game and Speaker for the Dead as well as respecting his more recent Pastwatch: The Redemption of Christopher Columbus. Unfortunately his recent essay "Moral Stupidity"is a political polemic that indicates an avoidance of facts.

I'll just ask the following questions:

1. Mr. Card said "Israel hasn't been targeting helpless civilians."

Fact - AP 6/24 - Israel knew that the wife of a senior Hamas militant was with him when it decide to kill him, but went ahead with the airstrike anyway, the air force commander said Tuesday.

In July, an air force F-16 dropped a one-ton bomb on the house of Salah Shehadeh, leader of the Hamas military wing, in Gaza City. Shehadeh and a Hamas activist were killed, along with Shehadeh's wife and 16 other bystanders, among them nine children.

So why doe Card think the Israeli Air Force morally superior to a suicide bomber?

To me it seems they both know they might kill a military target and don't mind innocent bystanders also being killed. It is hard to find any instance of Israelis killing opposition leaders when they do not kill bystanders as well if not instead.

2. "Take the case of Jenin."

OK, I will. Fact - the most objective analysis I found: ABC News 4/26 - It is not clear that the U.N., or anyone else, is capable of conducting an impartial analysis of Jenin or the other areas of intense fighting over the last few weeks.

The fact is, however, that urban warfare is probably the most difficult single form of warfare, and potentially one of the bloodiest. It is also the form of war that politicians, human rights activists, and media are least likely to understand and most likely to condemn.

Looking at the initial videotapes of the fighting, the problem may also have been compounded by poor discipline within the IDF. This kind of close fighting leads to a breakdown in fire discipline even with the best troops.

The fact the IDF was not fighting a uniformed opposition made things worse; any civilian was a potential combatant. Younger Israeli troops and officers also seem to increasingly be willing to trash what they occupy and to try to "punish" their enemy.

Are these undisciplined troops what Card is pointing to as an example of Israeli restraint?

3. Clinton and "dirty tricks"

There was no impeachable offense, there was no slander by Clinton, for every instance of Democrat dirty tricks, (he did not even give one), I can give you a GOP example.

Clinton wasn't removed from office, the American people didn't want him to be, when will Card get over it?

4. Florida

If there had been a statewide recount Florida would have been won by Gore using either Florida law as previously defined by the Florida Supreme Court or, even more appropriate, Texas rules which require a hand count of every ballot to look for the intent of the voter. They had a majority of cast ballots despite a GOP get-out-the-days-late-vote campaign to urge military to mail in ballots after the election was over and action by the President's brother and a campaign manager to illegally strip 90,000 residents of the right to vote because their name or address or birth date was similar to a felon's.

Which of those actions is Card supporting? Having no statewide recount, encouraging people to break the law, or stripping citizens of the right to vote? How would Card feel if he couldn't vote because he had a similar name as a felon in his county?

I admit Gore wasn't the best candidate but the GOP had no respect for the law.

5 Supreme Court

The Constitution gives to the states, not the Supreme Court, the power to conduct elections as long as it doesn't contravene any articles in the US Constitution. The tortuous logic the five Justices applied in the Florida case is directly opposite their previous rulings. GOP Justices wanted the election over and their candidate to win.

Why does Card think the five justices said this decision should not be a precedent for any other case unless it was that they couldn't support their ruling?

6 "How many of the press hold their feet to the fire and demand to know exactly who they think was stealing what?"

Exactly, when the riot lead by Republican operatives closed down the Dade county recount where was the press? According to the Wall Street Journal, most riot members inside the building were "Capitol Hill aides on all-expenses paid trips, courtesy of the Bush campaign.” Where has the press been on anything connected to Bush?

Does Card think the Wall Street Journal some liberal propaganda rag? Does he really disagree with O'Reilly that there is now a conservative media in this country?

7 "A Democratic Party that had any honor at all would not be filibustering judicial appointments, making a mockery of the President's constitutional authority to appoint federal judges with the approval of a simple majority of the Senate."

What history has Card read?

Ahem, "In the early years of Congress, representatives as well as senators could use the filibuster technique. As the House grew in numbers, however, it was necessary to revise House rules to limit debate. In the smaller Senate, unlimited debate continued since senators believed any member should have the right to speak as long as necessary.

"In 1841, when the Democratic minority hoped to block a bank bill promoted by Henry Clay, Clay threatened to change Senate rules to allow the majority to close debate. Thomas Hart Benton angrily rebuked his colleague, accusing Clay of trying to stifle the Senate's right to unlimited debate. Unlimited debate remained in place in the Senate until 1917. At that time, at the suggestion of President Woodrow Wilson, the Senate adopted a rule (Rule 22) that allowed the Senate to end a debate with a two-thirds majority vote -- a tactic known as 'cloture.' "

http://permanent.access.gpo.gov/lps12426/www.senate.gov/learning/brief_13.html

Does Card not know every Senator had the right to Filibuster and even a two/thirds cloture vote was not in the Constitution?

More importantly, what recent history has he forgotten?

How is the Democrats blocking 3 judges worse than Republicans under Orin Hatch blocking a staggering and unprecedented 167 of Clinton's judicial nominees?

8 Democratic Party Attacks

Rather than answer these attacks on the honor and integrity and patriotism of Democrats I will ask a question of my own? Where is the honor and integrity and patriotism of the GOP?

Did Card write anything in the last elections when GOP draft dodgers launched an attack on the patriotism of Democratic combat veterans?

Did Card write anything comparing the Bush's military desertion and substance abuse record when the GOP was attacking Gore's skimpy service record in Vietnam?

Why has Card given Bush a free pass on all the lies?

If Card thought Clinton should be removed from office for lying about sex how does he feel about Bush lying to get America to support a war?

9. "While the Palestinian people are constantly lied to, are never given a chance to make up their own minds about anything, and if any Palestinian leader dares to disagree, he's in line for assassination."

Sorry, it seems the Palestinian leaders who dare to disagree with Israel are in line to be assassinated or kidnapped. There are too many examples to choose from.

Does Card think it more dangerous for a Palestinian leader to disagree with Arafat - or with Sharon?

10. "Let's not blame the victim."

Absolutely, unfortunately the Likud Party seems like a victim of childhood abuse and now that they have power can only recycle the violence they received.

Does Card think supporting the violence by one side but not the other is going to bring peace?

11 "But as far as I'm concerned, those who find moral equivalence there are simply confessing that they not only know nothing of either ethics or history, but that they are determined not to learn.

When was the last time Card tried to learn something from both sides of an issue instead of reading and listening to only his shrill partisan voices?

Is intellectual dishonesty, moral rigidity, and authoritarianism the response of all adults who made a choice that the good their religion provides counterbalances the lies it tells?


No comments: