Tuesday, October 26, 2004

Letter to Mom

This is a letter I wrote to my mom the other day. I think it’s pretty self-explanatory. Since I think it’s my best writing I’ve done about the election, I asked her if I could post it here. (She said yes.)

Mom,

Yesterday, you asked me why I didn’t think the President had “moral strength.” I had a hard time putting it into words – I find him outrageous on so many levels that I often don’t know where to begin.

But I’ve found it. Looking back, it’s the moment when it crystallized for me that GWB was not simply a bad president, but a disastrous one, one who, despite his easygoing manner, is actually undermining everything that makes America great.

That moment was Abu Ghraib.

Mom, seeing those pictures turned my stomach. I couldn’t believe that Americans were doing these things. When I was younger, I didn’t have a very high opinion of soldiers, but that’s changed in the last few years. I’m sure there are plenty of soldiers I wouldn’t like personally (although probably just as many that, like Mark G., I would like a whole lot), but I’ve grown to respect what they do and the peace they keep a great deal. They’re often called on to dirty their hands in a way that I don’t think I could ever do. They do it to keep me safe, and you safe, and people in other countries safe. Often, it’s in high-stress environments, keeping an already bad situation from becoming incalculably worse.

These men and women deserve our respect. And in most cases, they earn it.

But then there was Abu Ghraib. There were pictures of naked prisoners, prisoners threatened with dogs. Prisoners forced to stand motionless for 12 hours at a stretch. People, men and women, were raped and sexually humiliated. I don’t know if I’ve ever seen anything more horrifying to me – because I knew that my own people did this. Not the Germans, not the Japanese, not Osama bin Laden. My people. People who grew up in towns like ours.

It turned my stomach for days. The photos kept coming, and all I could think about was how wrong it was. We’re Americans, I thought. We don’t torture. We’re Americans.

To my mind, there are two people ultimately responsible for this (aside from George Bush himself). One is Donald Rumsfeld, who is in charge of the military, and who let this happen. The Red Cross estimates that 70 to 90 percent of the Iraqis detained were held in error, on his watch. The other is John Ashcroft, whose Justice Department wrote a memo that blurred the line between torture and acceptable interrogation techniques.

Looking at the situation, I have to ask: What would a moral person do, if this happened on his watch? Ask yourself what Dad would have done if he were President when it happened. What would you have done? What do you think Rev. Ev would do, or me, or Tommy, or anyone else who you can think of as moral?

Here’s my answer, for every one of these people: They would get to the bottom of why it happened, and they would make sure it never happened again. In doing this, they would hold the right people accountable – not just the people who got their hands dirty, but the people who encouraged or allowed it to happen. They would replace these people and move forward. And they would take personal responsibility for their own oversight, and assure America and the world that it would never happen again.

That didn’t happen. The administration scrambled to put a lid on the photos, trying to crack down on the people who took and shared the pictures, rather than the torturers themselves. Soon after the story broke, the President stood by Rumsfeld and called him one of the best Secretaries of Defense the country’s ever had. Instead of focusing on the problem, he focused on political damage control, hoping the story would blow over.

And amazingly and sadly, it did.

But whenever the President has been asked about any mistakes he’s made, he never mentions Abu Ghraib. It’s understandable that he doesn’t want to dwell on it during an election. But neither he nor any of his staff have ever taken any sort of responsibility for the horrible treatment prisoners received there. That’s neither moral nor strong.

And that’s why I can’t vote for him.

I know you’re planning to vote for Bush, Mom. I can only ask, please consider his actions, rather than what he says about himself. Does he measure up to your standards of what a good man should be?

I can tell you he doesn’t meet mine. Not by a long shot.

I love you, whatever you decide.

Rob

6 comments:

Sharon GR said...

Well put, Rob. Andrew was reading this over my shoulder, and commented that one of the few swing voters he knows swung to Kerry for this very reason.

One person has said to me that the prisoners in Abu Ghraib deserved it. They deserved what they got because of what they did to us. She was unable to separate the actions of 19 evil men on Sept. 11 from the rest of the Arab world. That kind of racisim terrifies me, as well as the notion that anyone deserves torture. We are the United States of America; we are the richest and the brightest; we should be above the behavior those prison guards and their superiors showed. That's the type of thing we should be fighting against, not perpetrating. Unfortunately, we're not. It was horribly shoved in our face that we're not.

You're right, the story blew over, but don't think the rest of the world forgot it. I'm sure most of the Arab world hasn't forgotten it. Y'know, I bet there are people there that also think the actions of a few individuals indicate the whole group's mentality.

Rob S. said...

Well, Mom forwarded my letter to my brother Tom, and he sent me this reply. I asked him if it would be okay to post it here-- and indeed it was!Mom and Rob,
I feel your pain and embarrassment for the horrible incidents that occurred at Abu Ghraib prison. What happened there is despicable and inexcusable. I also believe that the people who committed these acts should be locked up for a long time. While I believe they have really deflected responsibility for this matter I do not believe that The leaders of our country are immoral men. They mandated that information be acquired and the people that acquired it went way out of bounds going about it. They should be held accountable in some way because this occurred on their watch.

I want to say that there is no politician on earth that could ever hold a candle to my father. Pop would have nothing to do with these people.
These men no matter what political affiliation are not even in the same ballpark as dad as far as morals go. Abu Ghraib, Oral Sex/adultery, Chappaquiddick - the list goes on and on. These are all despicable things that the politician was given the equivalent to a political pass on.

If Bill Clinton were a president of a company and he did this with one of his interns what would of happened to him? What if he were a teacher of a school and did this with one of his student teachers? In the real world he would have been fired from his job and seen as a public disgrace.

People go to Jail for years just for drunk driving alone let alone for manslaughter. What happened to Kennedy? Nothing. He should have done felony jail time for involuntary manslaughter. If he got what he deserved he would not even be able to even vote in the state of mass. let alone be a senator.

Abu Ghraib is the latest thing to be added to a list of things that Presidents walk on. And yes I believe he walked on it. There should have been more questions asked. But at the same time did the president give the order for this type of malicious torture? Was he there firsthand to do this horrible deed? He definitely is accountable but was he the person actually committing the crime? Did he order it? The answer is no. He is accountable because this occurred on his watch but is he less accountable than the people that actually committed these acts? I believe yes. Did he actually tell his commanding officers to sexually humiliate to get info? Of course not. He said get the information. He did not say get the information by any means necessary. Each person that did these acts had an individual decision to make and they failed as an individual to act morally. If I were in the same situation there is no chance I would do any of these things. I would rather be dead than to disgrace my nation in this fashion.

I too respect people in the military. I have had former students email me from Iraq and inform me that the war over there is much different than the one we see on TV. They tell me they are doing good for the Iraqi people and that the Iraqi people want democracy. I truly believe we are doing good over there because I am hearing it from people over there. We see the horrible things everyday on TV - why? The reason why is clear I think. Building Hospitals, building schools, and feeding Iraqi children are not good for ratings. The majority of the Iraqis want us there.

Who are the terrorists in Iraq right now? The leaders are Syrians, and Libyans and Saddam loyalists. Why are they fighting so hard? They know how important Iraq is.... If we succeed in time Democracy will be a beacon of light in a very unstable part of the world. The terrorists know that if they succeed they will be in business for a very long time. I truly see this as a struggle so great that it has to be won at any cost. We cannot let these people win. We cannot let the Iraqi people down.

We have many differences in our culture but there are fundamental things that any parent Iraqi or American wants for there children. They want them to be educated, they want them to be a part of a free society where they do not fear for their life, and they want them to better off than are. Clearly this is not going to happen if the terrorists win. It just might happen though, if we do.

I have more to say about these issues and others but my fingers hurt from typing so I need a break!
Take care both of you

Love,
Tom

Rob S. said...

And here's my reply back to Tom. If he replies to me via email, I'll post that here too, if it's okay with him.Tom,

Thanks for your thoughtful reply. You’re obviously as passionate about this as I am, and I’m glad we can disagree about this so well. There are many families that don’t have that going for them, which are being pulled apart by these events, causing wounds that won’t heal until long after Nov. 2. That’s never been a problem for us, and I don’t expect it ever will be.

And, of course, I can certainly agree with you about one thing: none of these characters hold a candle to Dad. But looking back, I think it’s a shame that, as you said, “Pop would have nothing to do with these people.” I don’t think he ever wanted to, but it’s hard to say. Our national perception of politics changed right as you were born, and when I was too young to know any better. Before Watergate, politics was largely considered an honorable profession, I think. Since then, we tend to think of it as the refuge of the ruthless and underhanded. And like shit draws flies, the perception of politics as a dirty business brings out dirty characters. And good people find other avenues to do good.

I think that needs to change. There’s no way to bring our political system back from the abyss if it doesn’t. But there’s two things that have to happen to make things change, and we need to start now.

First, we have to stop tarring all politicians with the same dirty brush. While we should always be aware – and watching – for any misdeeds on their part, every one of them is an individual. Kerry is no more responsible for the excesses of Clinton or Kennedy than Bush Jr. is responsible for Iran-Contra or Watergate. Just because politicians share a party doesn’t mean they share a rap sheet. I’ve never heard a bad word about Curt Weldon, and yet he’s in the same party as Rick Santorum, whose views and statements I find completely repugnant. At the same time, I have no reason to believe he’s unethical – just because I disagree with him doesn’t make him a crook. I’m sure you can find similar examples on the other side of the line.

What we need is to try to retain hope that the people who represent us will act in our best interest, rather than their own. We need to keep an eye on them, and when they let us down, we need to remove them. But we can’t allow ourselves to think that just because they’re politicians, they must be dirty. They may have to make hard compromises with dirty people, but we must leave ourselves open to the possibility that, until we’re shown otherwise, they’re doing the best they can to work for us.

Bringing this back to the election for a moment, I have to say that I have yet to hear a credible word that John Kerry is not a dedicated public servant. Yes, he has personal ambition – no one could even become a candidate without it. But the criticisms I’ve heard leveled at Kerry fall into three types:

1) Silly, inconsequential ones, like “He looks French,” or “He’s rich, so he’s out of touch.” The first is ridiculous, and the second is pretty hollow, coming from someone just as rich.

2) Attacks on his service in Vietnam. The sources of these attacks, despite their media traction, have no credibility with me. The official records say otherwise, as does all the available nonpartisan evidence.

3) Criticisms of Kerry’s Senate record. These are the only valid criticisms, in my mind. I think much of his record has been distorted by the Bush campaign, but if you take a look at his voting record and what he stands for and decide that he won’t be an effective president, I’ll still disagree with you, but you’ll have based your choice on the right stuff. (The “flip-flopper” charge straddles this category and the first, to my mind.)

And now back to the abstract. As I said, first, I think we need to be able to believe our politicians are capable of working for us, rather than themselves. As difficult as that may be, the second part is tougher.

We have to get involved.

We have to work for the campaigns of candidates we believe in. We have to volunteer to make sure our elections work honestly, even if that means not always in our favor. And eventually, some of us have to run for public service ourselves.

I think you should, Tom, even though we disagree on a lot of issues. Eventually, I plan to do it, myself. I knew that the minute we bought our house. Kathy and I have found a little corner of the planet to call our own – and once I’ve set some roots here, I’m going to figure out the best way to serve, and help lead, this community. It doesn’t have to be a big effort, but any position – no matter how small it seems – will affect people’s lives. And it’s important to do that, if you think that in whatever your sphere of influence, you can make a difference.

Like it or not, we’re the adults now. There are older, more experienced people that we can, and should, learn from. But sooner or later, we can’t blame anything on the people in Washington, or Trenton, or the school board, or the parks committee. Because these people will be us, or the people we’ve let stand in for us when we could do a better job ourselves.

We’re good people. Not the only good people in the world, but good people nonetheless. And one way or another – through government, through teaching, through example – good people have to lead. Or else someone else will.

Rob

P.S. I have some opinions on Iraq, and more on Abu Ghraib, too. But this was long enough, and I think I found a pretty good place to stop for now.

gberke said...

I don't know how old you are, Rob. Maybe you're 12 or something, 17?
But if you are a grownup, you know right from wrong: you're mom is wrong. Your mom's vote could be getting people killed. Your mom's vote is telling the world that the Americans are not the victims of a bad government that has accidently come to be, that this was a total surprise from 2000, for the so called compassionate conservative. This time your mom will be saying "yes, I am an American and I approve this man's action".
You said it yourself: we're Americans and we don't do that. Your mom may be an American citizen, but you'd bet let her no: she's simply NOT voting as an American, not the kind you thought you knew. So, it may be time to let go of your beliefs in what America is, what it stands for and what it means to be an American. America? it's your mom, and it's you who cutting her the slack.

Ken said...

Rob, I think you have a good thing there in your family. Your mom may well not be voting for the right guy (at least that's what I think) but your family sounds warm and loving. I posted a link to this post from a blog site because I found your post to be warm and it was nice to read a post on politics that wasn't some abstract diatribe but one from someone who was dealing with differences with and within his family because of the election. I hope you don't mind that I made the link but I guess it's too late now.

Rob S. said...

Ken,

Thanks for your kind words. I don't mind the link at all. If I didn't want people to see the note, I wouldn't have put it on the web.

Gerald,

I'm 35. I know right from wrong. But I have to say you're wrong in saying my mom isn't voting as an American. She just disagrees with me; it isn't the end of the world. She's an American, and she thinks Bush is the right man to lead the country. I've tried to talk her out of it, but her vote is her decision -- which is what America is all about. I think she's wrong, but she's been right on countless things -- she deserves all the slack I can give her.

Look, I've ranted and raved about Bush and Cheney and the rest, and will likely continue to do so. But part of the reason I wanted to post my letter to my mom is because I had written something that tried to engage the other side of this debate, rather than call them names and express my frustration. Because as soon as the election is over, that's what we'll all have to do, no matter who we're voting for. We'll have to live with people who voted for the other guy, whether they're family, friends or coworkers.

But one way or another, please don't call my mom unamerican again. If you knew her, you'd know how ridiculous that is.

Rob