As evidenced by the spectacular failures regarding intelligence, the war in Iraq, Katrina, and energy policy, the Bush administration has pursued a policy of rewarding slavish political allegiance ahead of merit and open, constructive debate. In the latest example, the Justice Department’s own inspector general has found that political affiliation has been used, illegally, as a screening criterion for recruiting programs aimed at attracting highly qualified candidates to the Justice Department. The facts are crystal clear—the report found that applicants with Democratic affiliation were turned away “at a significantly higher rate” than candidates with Republican ties.
The relevance of these facts is that Fairfield County’s representative in Congress, Christopher Shays, has steadfastly stood by Bush throughout his tenure in office. While Shays may have expressed muted disagreement here and there, he has not evidenced the independent, principled thinking that we need to solve the many crises that threaten our country. He has strongly supported Bush on disproportionate tax breaks for the wealthy, violating constitutional protections in the name of national security, and waging a war in Iraq that has done anything but made the U.S. more secure. Like so many other Bush loyalists, Shays is unable or unwilling to break free from President Bush and his ill-conceived policies.
Fortunately, it’s within our power to break free from Christopher Shays. With Jim Himes, running for Congress in the Connecticut 4th District, we have an intelligent, independent and socially conscious candidate who can help set America back on course. I urge voters in the 4th District to learn more about Jim Himes in what Time Magazine is calling one of the top 15 Congressional races to watch.
Showing posts with label Iraq. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iraq. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Thursday, October 21, 2004
Questioning Bush isn't unpatriotic
There has been a consistent theme running through the Bush campaign that is very disturbing, and should give pause to any voter who is still undecided. Which is: if you disagree with how the Bush administration is prosecuting the war on terror, you are unpatriotic and not supportive of our troops. A cornerstone of American values is the right to challenge our government, enshrined in the first amendment’s right of free speech. While we fight the war on terror to preserve our liberties, Bush is subverting these very values here at home.
I do not question President Bush’s determination to fight the war on terror. But I support John Kerry for president because I believe he has a more sound approach for winning this war – based on the realization that the United States is stronger when it has strong alliances, that we are more likely to succeed when we consider the implications of our actions (planning for the peace, not just the battle), and holding ourselves to the very highest standards of proof and imminent threat when we commit our country to war – which puts our troops in harm’s way and kills innocent civilians.
President Bush has fallen short on all these accounts. There are no weapons of mass destruction – so there was no imminent threat to American security, or the ability to arm terrorists. There is convincing evidence that intelligence was manipulated to make the case for war. Now Iraq is a hotbed of terrorist activity – and over 1,000 Americans have died as a result. Meanwhile, there is a resurgent and very real threat of Taliban and Al Qaeda activity in Afghanistan, where we have only 10 percent of the number of troops that are tied down in Iraq. No progress has been made on disarming North Korea, a real nuclear threat. Insufficient efforts are being taken to secure nuclear materials in the former Soviet Union. These facts do not attest to strong leadership in the war on terror.
We are blessed that we have the right to challenge our leaders in order to make the United States a better, safer country – and I will exercise that right by voting for John Kerry for president.
I do not question President Bush’s determination to fight the war on terror. But I support John Kerry for president because I believe he has a more sound approach for winning this war – based on the realization that the United States is stronger when it has strong alliances, that we are more likely to succeed when we consider the implications of our actions (planning for the peace, not just the battle), and holding ourselves to the very highest standards of proof and imminent threat when we commit our country to war – which puts our troops in harm’s way and kills innocent civilians.
President Bush has fallen short on all these accounts. There are no weapons of mass destruction – so there was no imminent threat to American security, or the ability to arm terrorists. There is convincing evidence that intelligence was manipulated to make the case for war. Now Iraq is a hotbed of terrorist activity – and over 1,000 Americans have died as a result. Meanwhile, there is a resurgent and very real threat of Taliban and Al Qaeda activity in Afghanistan, where we have only 10 percent of the number of troops that are tied down in Iraq. No progress has been made on disarming North Korea, a real nuclear threat. Insufficient efforts are being taken to secure nuclear materials in the former Soviet Union. These facts do not attest to strong leadership in the war on terror.
We are blessed that we have the right to challenge our leaders in order to make the United States a better, safer country – and I will exercise that right by voting for John Kerry for president.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)