Wow, I have officially used a modified Star Wars quote for a title, even if it is from the prequels, and I feel great. Anyway, I am at a loss for words after reading these case studies. The same things seem to be true as with the other cases of deception. I think Bok still holds very true about the use of lies, secrecy, and deception. In this case I do feel the both Clinton and Cheney should have disclosed the information about the task forces and the reasoning stopping them was nothing more than using lawyers to defend injustice. I think that Thompson was correct in recognizing that the government may use deception if it admits to it after the fact and that it needs to hold the debate as to whether it should keep actions secret. I just don't see what was really gained by keeping members secret unless there was something else more sinister going on. Its one thing to keep names secret if I could truly believe it was to protect the quality of opinions but I just don't trust the Bush administration especially when large energy companies could have been responsible for the final result.
I think the real victim was the GAO. I liked the argument that the GAO is an additional check on the expanded executive branch. The task force issues were secondary to the question of hypocrisy in the political process. I keep coming back to the accusation that the Republicans were being totally hypocritical from its position on the Clinton task force to the energy task force of the Bush regime. During the last discussion I was wondering about the loyalty of politicians. Shouldn't we be really worried when the Republican party as a whole is being so blatantly one-sided in favor of party interests. I am thinking about how President Obama wants to be less partisan, but yet there are the Rush Limbaughs of the world who seem to only care about pushing one agenda and not figuring out the best solution. I guess the actions of the Republican party in this situation and their actions during the Bush presidency leaves a bad taste in my mouth. How do you fight the group dynamic that encourages and produces loyalty to the to the party or a single person versus ethics/democracy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I have always been a little worried about the Republican Party (haha)...
ReplyDeleteBut seriously, it is always difficult to compromise with a group that is unwilling to make any concessions. Many liberal fanatics won't give (to credit the other side a bit), and many conservatives remain determined to push a single-item agenda. Often the loyalty to the person/party is seen as deontologically necessary (ie Not killing unborn babies is more important than political ethics/democracy as a whole). I've personally come to the conclusions that there is no way to argue against that and find compromise. It's a very big frustration of mine, and why I don't often like to debate politics with many people.