Not that long ago, I advanced the idea that John Boehner and his Republican colleagues in Congress could be considered guilty of treason for inviting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netenyahu to speak to a joint session of the House and Senate--without consulting the President before they did so. I did so reluctantly, in part because there is no more serious charge that could be leveled at any American, whether in public office or not. But I suspect that my reluctance stems from a simple, all-too-convenient desire to not have to believe it. If one branch of government is actually working in such a way as to undermine the functioning of one of the other branches, in particular the one directly responsible for our national security, then none of us are truly safe.
But, along with the rest of us, I may have to overcome what little reluctance I have left to face the truth. It's not as if I'm alone in reaching the conclusion the the formerly Grand Old Party has at last devolved into the enemy within; as this illustrates, others have already arrived at that conclusion. But two recent incidents have pushed me further toward agreeing with them.
The first was Senator John McCain's dismissal of protesters objecting to the appearance of former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger before the Senate Armed Services Committee. The protesters demanded that Kissinger be arrested for war crimes and, while they waived handcuffs, made no attempt to harm Kissinger in any way. McCain wasn't impressed; he had the Capitol Police escort them from the room, and verbally denounced them as "low-life scum." Later, he justified his characterization of the protesters on the grounds that they had physically threatened Kissinger.
There's so much absurdity going on in all of this that I scarcely know where to begin. The protesters weren't armed. They never touched Kissinger. The handcuffs were offered symbolically, rather than with the intention of putting them on Kissinger. And the protesters conducted their protest knowing that they were at the mercy of the formidable security that Congress enjoys. If McCain really thinks that these people were so dangerous, or so lacking in integrity that they deserve to be denounced as "low-life scum," then he's clearly forgotten who he's supposed to be working for. And I won't even get into the irony of the fact that, had it not been for Kissinger's efforts to expand the Vietnam War into the rest of Indochina, McCain might never have been a POW in the first place. As for McCain's judgment about who should be a heartbeat away from the presidency, or his membership in the "Keating Five," the less said the better.
McCain's arrogance, in its own obnoxious way, betrays an attitude about public service that pops up elsewhere among Republicans. We don't serve the public, they serve us. Given the post-Citizens United purchase of the party by billionaires, that shouldn't be surprising. But it does support the treason accusation, in its own way. If you have no ability to tolerate differences on issues, you have no real respect for democracy, and no interest in seeing it function.
But McCain's lack of tolerance toward the Kissinger protesters, in illustrating how far down this road the GOP has gone, is as nothing compared to Boehner's defense of the House-approved bill to extend funding for the Department of Homeland Security while undermining President Obama's executive orders on behalf of undocumented immigrants. Speaking at a news conference, Boehner challenged Senate Democrats to "get off their ass" and stop insisting on a clean bill (i.e., one not tainted by legislative blackmail). Some of his colleagues went further, either challenging the patriotism of Democrats who objected to the House bill, or otherwise saying that they wouldn't entertain any debate on it. (You can read all about it here.)
The problem, of course, is that legislatures are designed for debates. This is all the more so the case when a legislature consists of two houses, both of which have to approve a bill before the President can sign it. Neither the House nor the Senate has any kind of a mandate, constitutionally or electorally, to get 100% of what it wants. And the real flaw in the House defense of its bill, the one that Senate Democrats have already exposed, is patently obvious. Why not have both chambers vote on a clean funding bill AND separately vote on the President's executive orders? Why not have more debate, rather than less?
The answer to this is equally obvious. Republicans know that, 2014 elections notwithstanding, they don't have the people behind their backs. They know their proposals can't survive direct up-or-down votes. So they rely on hitching them to must-pass spending bills, in the hope that they can muscle then into reality. It's bullying. It's cowardly. And, when it threatens the continuous funding of our national security, it couldn't be more treasonous if it tried. Worst of all, it's not even the treason of the majority; it's the treason of a tiny minority that cloaks itself in the imagery of our Revolution but functions more like George III. How bad is it when even the Wall Street Journal can't stand it? Pretty damn bad.
As for the rest of us, we no longer have any choice but to regard the GOP as the enemy within. As such, they must be opposed. By any means necessary. I don't use those last words lightly, and I pray that the worst will not happen. But we may already be beyond the point at which even prayer can stop the American dream from becoming the American nightmare.
No comments:
Post a Comment