Bry Brigitte L. Nacos
In today’s Washington Post, David Broder devotes his column “Independence Days” to point to the emergence of a real moral majority in opposition to the policies of President Bush, who, according to Broder, “has proved to be lawless and reckless. He started a war he cannot finish, drove the government into debt and repeatedly defied the Constitution.” For Broder, the refusal of a handful of Republican Senators and former administration officials transcends the immediate issue of torture. In Broder’s words, “Now, however, you can see the independence party forming -- on both sides of the aisle. They are mobilizing to resist not only Bush but also the extremist elements in American society -- the vituperative, foul-mouthed bloggers on the left and the doctrinaire religious extremists on the right who would convert their faith into a whipping post for their opponents.” Are we really headed for better days—this year’s election throwing lots of the congressional rascals out and the 2008 election bringing a moderate and moral leader into the oval office?
For Broder, “American politics reached a critical turn last week. The revolt of several Republican senators against President Bush's insistence on a free hand in treating terrorist detainees signaled the emergence of an independent force in elections and government. This movement is not new, but the moral scale of the issue -- torture -- and the implications for both constitutional and iternational law give it an epic dimension, even if it is ultimately settled by compromise.”
Although Broder recognizes that the current conflict between
the pro- and anti-torture sides is likely to be settled in a compromise, he
does not see that as the end of the beginning of a true moral majority—the
independence party--to strengthen.
For Broder, the reelection of Senators Lincoln Chaffee of
Rhode Island and Joe Lieberman of
Connecticut this fall would boost what he considers the independence movement.
Chaffee? Yes. But Lieberman?
Comments