When Forgiveness Happens
It’s easy to understand Mr. Cheney’s aversion to the investigation that Attorney General Eric Holder ordered last week. On Fox, Mr. Cheney said it was hard to imagine it stopping with the interrogators. He’s right.
The government owes Americans a full investigation into the orders to approve torture, abuse and illegal, secret detention, as well as the twisted legal briefs that justified those policies. Congress and the White House also need to look into illegal wiretapping and the practice of sending prisoners to other countries to be tortured.
[editorial, "Dick Cheney’s Version", New York Times, 2 September 2009.]
I'm aware that the conciliatory tone in today's headlines, coming mostly from the Bush-Cheney camp, oddly, tells us to move on and look to the future and to forgive the past. Aside from vindictiveness towards those who willfully try to corrupt our country, I have two wee problems with that.
One, I've read plenty of anthropologists who have explained persuasively why we, as a society, feel the need to punish social "cheaters" and how important that is for maintaining social order. In the case at hand, it's very, very important lest their way of doing things becomes the way it is done.
Two–and I'd think that conservatives of a fundamentalists persuasion would understand this before other–forgiveness does not come until the truth is known. It may not even precede the punishment. What parent is going to say "Well, I see the cookie jar is broken and one of you kids did it, but let's just forget about it and pick up the pieces."
One forgives after the transgressors are identified and the truth is known; then we can look towards the future.
2 Responses
Subscribe to comments via RSS
Subscribe to comments via RSS
Leave a Reply
To thwart spam, comments by new people are held for moderation; give me a bit of time and your comment will show up.
I welcome comments -- even dissent -- but I will delete without notice irrelevant, rude, psychotic, or incomprehensible comments, particularly those that I deem homophobic, unless they are amusing. The same goes for commercial comments and trackbacks. Sorry, but it's my blog and my decisions are final.
on Wednesday, 9 September 2009 at 05.36
Permalink
Aside from vindictiveness towards those who willfully try to corrupt our country
I hate Hollywood too.
At the time these activities fell under the heading "battle field activities", where one can be put in situations where your activities would not play well in quieter times. That liberals want to air this laundry is political posturing.
feel the need to punish social "cheaters"
Unless you are a liberal politician. Ted Kennedy, Barney Frank, and Chris Dodd haven't suffered any electoral punishment for their transgressions. Yet Larry Craig gets bounced after allegedly trolling for a little action.
on Wednesday, 9 September 2009 at 10.42
Permalink
In the former instance, of course, I refer to the Bush-Cheney axis, towards whom I feel the vindictiveness. I don't really feel that starting a war so that one can be a war-time president and invoke "war-time powers" or excuse their "battle field activities" is acceptable.
As for Craig, I thought he was a ridiculous character but I didn't see the reason for all the hoopla and censure and such. As for actual electoral punishment, the electorate seems inexplicable but almost predictable when it comes to rallying around their own poor, persecuted underdog candidate. We might call it the "Marion Barry syndrome". (The others get mixed reviews from me and this comment space seems too confining.)