  |
|
|
|
With the following words in late in 2001, John Ashcroft strongly criticized those he believed were exaggerating civil libertarian concerns about the Bush Administration's efforts to protect us from terrorism:
"We need honest, reasoned debate; not fear mongering. To those who pit Americans against immigrants, and citizens against non-citizens; to those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty; my message is this: Your tactics only aid terrorists - for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve. They give ammunition to America's enemies, and pause to America's friends. They encourage people of good will to remain silent in the face of evil." Never a favorite of the Left, John Ashcroft immediately became de facto poster boy for the rabid anti-Bush Left. The paragraph was seized upon as one more piece of evidence that Ashcroft seeks to crush dissent and paint anyone who disagrees with the Bush Administration as "unpatriotic." Though the Bush Administration has been careful never to use these terms, we constantly hear and read the faux concern for stifling of honest dissent. Indeed, the statement does suggest that we need "unity" and some people who disagree with the Administration must be aligning themselves with the interests of terrorists. To the extent that such suggestions are conveyed they are grossly unfair. The judicious use of a single word would have rendered the entire paragraph far less controversial. One need change, "Your tactics only aid terrorists..." to "Your tactics only unintentionally aid terrorists...'' The use of the word "unintentionally" concedes that critics retain the same goals with perhaps different approaches. Now suppose someone on the Left has used the same rhetorical logic and argued: "We need honest, reasoned debate; not fear mongering. To those who pit Americans against immigrants, and citizens against non-citizens; to those who scare peace-loving into yielding personal liberty; my message is this: Your tactics only aid terrorists - for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve. They give ammunition to America's enemies, and pause to America's friends. They encourage people of good will to remain silent in the face of evil." Would there have been calls on the Left to tone down the rhetoric and not depict opposition as mean spirited? The evidence suggests not. There have been far more egregious statements than Ashcroft's by serious people on the Left with nary a yawn of concern and usually accompanied by smiles of support. The Left has been exquisitely and deliberately sensitive to even subtle indirect implications that they are less than patriotic, though they seem to have few qualms about making such direct charges themselves.
The copyright of the article Better Angels of Our Nature in Conservative Politics is owned by Frank Monaldo. Permission to republish Better Angels of Our Nature in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.
|
|
|
|
