Quote:
Originally posted by Spanky
They fill the airwaves with treason, but when called to vote on withdrawing troops, disavow their own public statements. These people are not only traitors, they are gutless traitors.
|
Here's the one flaw I see consistently in her reasoning.
What is "treason"?
To what are we beholden?
If I believe that my country is pursuing a path that will lead it to harm, and my actions in response are guided by a sincere desire to keep my country from that harm, can my anti-administration actions and words be deemed "treason"? Do I owe my allegiance to the current leadership of my country, or to my country? If I take actions or speak words that lead to a short-term harm to my country, but generally result in my country moving in a direction that I deem to be more healthy, and more likely to leave my country improved and less harmed overall, am I not truly serving my country?
I think her flaw is her fixation on "treason". I don't think that what she describes in her columns is treason. I think she could use the word "stupidity" and be far more accurate and far less offputting. Her message gets lost because she riles in too visceral a way.
I'm sure every person who thinks that our war in Iraq is horribly wrong, and who is fighting politically to end that war, is serving their conception of what our country is, or, at least, should be. I could use the "treason" label easily on a Galloway, or on any American counterpart actively serving anti-American interests for personal gain. But, just as we weren't treasonous in the sixties or seventies as we (stupidly, and without placing the proper value on educating ourselves to reality) fought to end a war, so too the current dissent isn't treason.
