The U.S. Senate passed a non-binding resolution apologizing for the fact that for years and years they refused to pass any kind of legistlation at all prohibiting lynching, even though Congress had passed such things repeatedly. Some 5000, almost all black people, were lynched from the late 1880's up until the 1960's. I don't usually worry a whole lot about passing apologies for things that happened years ago, such as the Catholic church a few years back saying they didn't really think the Jews were responsible for killing Christ, or apologizing for not speaking out against the Nazis, or whatever.
What I found so interesting about this latest apology, however, is that of 100 Senators only 80 supported this resolution. How on earth could anyone now, in the 21st century, not support such a resolution, especially as it was non-binding? Of the 20 who did not support it, 19 were Republicans (surprise!), mostly from the south. I guess this means that southern Senators still think lynching must have been, or perhaps still is, perfectly okay. Presumably they feel sentiments about lynching are still so strong in their areas that they do not dare to suggest it might have been (or still is) about the most disgusting and horrble crime ever.
One Democrat refused to sign on, Kent Conrad of South Dakota. I guess he must be a Senator of genuine conviction. Personally, I find it hard to believe that people in South Dakota actually support lynching, but I guess Conrad knows his constituency better than I do. Or at least he thinks he does.
What really bothers me the most, however, is that Senator Mike Crapo of Idaho (my own state) didn't support this resolution. Even our other Senator, Craig, the Senator from Boise Cascade and the timber industry, somewhere to the right of Genghis Khan, must have supported it. So what is it with Crapo? As Idaho is the most Republican state in the union, and not exactly enamoured of Black people, I suppose Crapo is doing what he thinks is the best for representing his constituents. But as both Craig and Crapo are right-wing nutcases, and almost always vote in the same way for all Republican causes, I can't help but wonder what went wrong. Perhaps one of them didn't get his instructions from the White House on time, or misread them because of his eagerness to destroy Anwar as quickly as possible. Maybe because there are so few Black people in Idaho Crapo just didn't think it was important. After all, we were so busy lynching Indians back then we just didn't have much time to seek out Blacks. You just can't do everything at once, as we all know.
So, apropos of nothing, let us consider Grandpa Rumsfeld, busily destroying the U.S. military. By any objective standard whatsoever (not that Republicans understand the concept of objectivity) Rumsfeld has been a total failure as Secretary of Defense. He was wrong about what would happen in Iraq, wrong about how many troops would be needed, wrong about post-"war" requirements, wrong about how long the insurgency would last, wrong about...hell, just wrong, wrong, wrong about everything. But he is still there, still in charge of torture and war crimes, still doing what Bush has described as a superlative job, the best Secretary of Defense ever. I bet when he finally gives it up there will be 72 virgins waiting there in heaven for him. I suggest that 72 psychiatrists would be more appropriate. If you think Rumsfeld has been or is doing a fine job you need to join him in his much too late lobotomy.
Someone today said that if Bush had sex with a sheep on the White House steps and then set the animal on fire her mother would say, "he's just trying to help. Why do you hate America?" Why, indeed?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment