As he shook his head in disgust for the majority of President George W. Bush’s State of the Union address, Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., once again demonstrated his distaste for conservative policy in his typical immature manner. The recent recipient of the George Bush Public Service Award has done great deeds as a senator and public servant, but a recent comment made regarding the Bush administration’s involvement in Iraq tops off and summarizes Kennedy’s longstanding and mindless Bush-bashing streak of comments.
In a speech on Jan. 14, Kennedy said the war in Iraq was a political product invented by the Bush Administration to win elections, according to The Boston Herald. In the past, Kennedy has made other claims regarding the war, deeming it nothing short of unjust and fraudulent.
A man of such prestigious and significant responsibility has more important jobs to do, but he remains intent on exploiting the Iraq war to bring down the GOP, often basing his claims on invalid or ridiculous arguments.
One can reasonably argue that the war was miscalculated. It can even be charged that the decision was made with disregard for certain just-war criteria. But claiming that the war was a political move is outlandish. It would be illogical for Bush to risk an 80 percent approval rating by going to war to make his party look good.
In contrast, Bush foresightedly set aside his political popularity to make one of the most important decisions in American history.
The president repeatedly mentioned that post-9-11 America is a different scenario – one that many liberal politicians have failed to recognize. Bush was sincere and passionate about envisioning a more secure world. It cannot be said that the world is a worse place with the liberation of millions of Iraqis and the capture of one of the most infamous and brutal dictators in history.
There was no guarantee of capturing Saddam Hussein or finding weapons of mass destruction, but Bush disregarded his approval ratings to do what he thought necessary to improve the well-being of a nation and a world. Why would a president confronted with the inevitability of civilian casualties and the possibility of chemical and biological attack on his own troops take that path to boost his political ratings?
Kennedy is renowned for his candor when critiquing Bush. And, in most circumstances, a politician should be credited for speaking his or her mind when it comes to political matters. After all, one significant virtue of a democracy is allowing multiple ideologies to compete against each other to win over public opinion.
In addition, this continuing competition allows for the evolution of a necessary system of checks and balances between the parties. But there is a difference between a political mind keeping another in check and one set out to annihilate the other. Sen. Kennedy represents the latter.
Aside from Kennedy’s inadequately supported arguments, what should be considered most important is that Kennedy’s contribution to America in a time of conflict here and abroad is nonexistent. The country needs skeptics to monitor and critique the government, but only in a decent and mature manner. Kennedy and other politicians who claim that going to war was a mistake must avoid using the situation as only a political weapon.
As the presidential election day nears, both parties will inevitably continue to pummel the other. But as American troops continue to risk their lives everyday in the face on ongoing violent attacks, even the most fanatical of liberal politicians must refrain from declaring their efforts as products of some fictional and politically ambitious leader. The number of coalition lives that are lost grows every day, and, as America has its hands full and tries to make progress in the Middle East, it needs politicians who are more interested in the unity of a country than partisanship.