Honorable people do not let American diplomats twist slowly in the wind while they attend “debate prep” and rest up for a shakedown meeting with the One Percent. Honorable people do not suddenly go AWOL while American soil is under attack. Honorable people do not fail to mobilize the formidable resources of the American military, even if it might not be possible for them to get there in time. Honorable people, under questioning by Congress, do not lose their temper and start shouting. Honorable people do not look the bereaved in the eye and lie about who and what killed their loved ones.I bold the one section because it's the one thing he says with which I disagree. Honorable people might tell bald-faced lies about a military problem, and continue to do so for as long as necessary. It is easy to imagine Churchill lying at length if it were necessary to deceive the Nazis in a way that would ensure the final victory in the war.
Further: honorable people do not go before the public on the Sunday talk shows and knowingly transmit a bald-faced lie. Honorable people do not continue to lie about what took place. Honorable people do not say “We are Americans; we hold our head high,” and then hang their heads in shame as they cut and run at the first sign of trouble. Honorable people do not continue to reward the dishonorable with ever-higher posts. Honorable people resign.
Honor is sacrifice, and we accept Churchill's imaginary lie as an example of honor because we know it pains him. He does it for his people, not for his own personal advantage.
Mr. Walsh is right that this band is entirely without honor. The unifying thread in all the complaints he raises against them is that, in every case, they put their own personal advantage over the good of the people and the nation.
It is often said that our country's Constitution was devised on the assumption that good people would not always be in charge, and indeed might only be so rarely -- that bad people are more common, and more likely to assume the levers of power. Perhaps it is so. Nevertheless, there is a price for it.
3 comments:
Focusing on one of his lesser points, I've been struck for years at the collapse of the tradition of resigning in protest when one finds he has been innocently following the orders of a dishonorable superior. Clinton's whole cabinet should have resigned after the Lewinsky scandal broke, when he admitted he'd lied to them so they'd support him to the press. It doesn't even really matter whether they believed he'd cross the line by having the affair: as soon as they knew he'd tricked them into lying for him, they should have been out of there.
That nobody resigned over Benghazi speaks volumes.
Rumsfield tried to resign over abu Ghraib and some other incidents. Bush kept refusing.
Bush sometimes erred on the side of favoring the loyal. Rumsfeld had some admirable qualities, but it was only after his departure that we were able to swing Iraq onto the right path.
It almost worked, but for the post-Obama piece.
Post a Comment