There are some things in life I just don't understand.
One, and possibly the major one, is why politicians oppose a good bill just because it was introduced by the other party. They all do it; it's a grown-up version of the childish "if it isn't my idea, it's no good."
I don't understand why adults who have voluntarily taken on the responsibility of running our country and preserving our heritage for the coming generations behave so pettily -- behave as though they never had mothers to teach them manners.
Look at Barbara Boxer, for example. She said, as part of her rude confrontation of Sec'y Rice that the invasion of Iraq "was all about WMDs." (She knows better (or she's senile).
The truth is, the threat of WMD was part of the Senate's worry. And it was a danger called real by Democratic Sen. John Kerry and growing by former Sen. Tom Daschle. Sen. Hillary Clinton summed it all up when she warned
that "If left unchecked Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his
capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare."
But the Senate approved the use of force against Hussein for a good deal more than "WMDs, period."
The resolution listed 23 other grievances:
violations of the 1991 armistice accords,
brutal repression of the Iraqi people,
failure to inform about missing Kuwaitis,
the 1993 attempted assassination of former President Bush,
firing on American forces in the no-fly zone,
harboring of terrorists in Iraq,
the presence of al-Qaida in Iraq ("Whereas members of al-Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq),
and violation of U.N. inspection protocols, to name a few.
Boxer knows that. So she was being disengenuous, dishonest and untruthful in her interrogation of Sec'y Rice. Why? What does she gain by that kind of behavior? There must be something or she wouldn't do it.
But what she does is misconstrue and destroy truth -- and truth is the very base on which America stands.
I wish she would discuss this with me. I know she won't, she wouldn't if I were someone truly important in her world. But I wish I could understand...
There are so many real possibilities in our world that politicians swat down for petty reasons.
I'm having a "discussion" -- he sends me a poorly constructed and written form letter and I answer each of his points with a well-researched, thoughtful answer which I'm sure some aide glances at, then hits the delete button -- with my congressman about the Fair Tax proposal. Check it out by clicking here.
Rep. Dennis Moore is a Democrat who is going to support anything proposed by a Democrat and nothing proposed by a Republican. So of course he's against the Fair Tax. Not because he's bothered to learn anything about it (although he possibly read the Democratic Committee's report on it which was based on made-up facts and incorrect conclusions) but because it was introduced by a Republican.
I've answered each of his points with the truth -- but it's really not true that truth can stand up against lies. People believe what they want to believe, for reasons that have nothing to do with the issue at hand.
The first reason he gave for not supporting the tax is that it had only a few co-sponsors in the 108th Congress (this year's is the 109th). In other words, he's no leader -- he won't support an issue unless it's safe. I don't understand that, either. It seems to me that Congressmen should be striving to be first when something great comes along.
I don't understand why losing an election seems to give people the right to curse and demean their opposition. Calling winners "dumb" is dumbness itself -- how can they be dumb if they beat your best efforts? The logic doesn't work. And how does that benefit your next campaigns if you've called the people you want to support you "dumb." That's stupid.
Just musing here . . . one of the the great things about politics (and life) is the surprising behavior of other people. Even if I don't understand.