[tomatoealive]

November 2, 2004

"There are some people so addicted to exaggeration that they can't tell the truth without lying."
-- Josh Billings (1815-1885), American humorist, lecturer

 

Americans Know The Meaning of "Is" http://www.americasvoices.org/archives2004/PattonD/PattonD_110204.htm by Doug Patton & America's Voices, Inc. As I write this, our first presidential election since 9/11 is just hours away.  Depending upon the number of dead Democrats who make it to the polls, and whether enough honest poll watchers can "intimidate" Mickey Mouse and Dick Tracy from committing voter fraud, momentum at this point seems to favor the reelection of George W. Bush. In these waning hours before this crucial election seals the fate of the Republic for the next four years (and possibly forever), it is instructive to look at the damage done by our last Democrat president.  In his new book, "The Meaning of 'Is' – The Squandered Impeachment and Wasted Legacy of William Jefferson Clinton" former U.S. Representative Bob Barr (R-GA), does just that. Barr, a former U.S. Attorney who served on the House Judiciary Committee during his years in Congress (1995-2003), was one of the House Managers prosecuting Clinton during what turned out to be a sham of a trial in the United States Senate.  Never one to pull his punches, Barr lays bare the truth about the incredible damage done to the presidency by the felon and his bride during their stay in the White House, and gives us a glimpse of where the nation may be headed in the future. Barr writes of Bill Clinton, "If he had decided to lead a religious cult instead of a political campaign, I am sure he would have been one of the most successful cult leaders in history."  Looking at Clinton's status among today's Democrats, one could argue that a cult has indeed arisen around him, one that now permeates the thinking of at least half the country. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich once said that growing up in a tourist trap (Hot Springs, Arkansas), Bill Clinton learned early in life how to hone his skills as a charming huckster who never had to remember a story for more than three or four days at a time.  Bob Barr goes a step further: "The great evil of Bill Clinton's presidency", Barr writes, "is that he always told us what he knew — or sometimes only what he thought he knew — we wanted to hear.  Thus, he always found himself appealing to the base, cowardly, weak instincts of the American people and almost never brought out the higher, nobler traits that have made us great over the course of our history." Not since former House Impeachment Committee Counsel David Schippers' book, "Sellout", has anyone so effectively exposed the treachery that allowed Clinton to escape conviction in the Senate.  But Barr's book goes much deeper into the ramifications for America's future, as his telling chapter titles reveal: » Preface to 9/11: Clinton and National Security » Pimping Out the Presidency: Clinton and the White House » Ripping Away at Our Rights: Clinton and the Constitution » Investigating Clinton: What Went Wrong? » On the Road to Impeachment » Success in the House » Failure in the Senate » Liberalism, Conservatism and Clintonism » Righting History: The Clinton Legacy Bob Barr has written an important volume on the history of America in the 1990s.  "The Meaning of 'Is'" will serve historians well in their quest for the full story of this dark chapter in the history of the presidency. Barr has been an outspoken critic of more than a few Bush Administration policies (notably the Patriot Act).  Yet his analysis of the destructive nature of our last Democrat presidency leads me to only two conclusions for America: If George W. Bush is reelected, we will have dodged a huge bullet.  If John Kerry is elected, the cult will once again take up residency at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Bill Clinton didn't seem to know the meaning of "is".  John Kerry has shown little evidence that he does, either.  I believe the American people do.

[tomatoealive]

The Death of Honor

David C. Stolinsky
Friday, Nov. 1, 2002

What is left when honor is lost? – Publius Syrus, 42 B.C.

Recently, bank robbers in Nebraska murdered five people in a horrible crime. One of the murderers had been stopped for a traffic violation by a state trooper. The man was found to be carrying a gun. The trooper entered the serial number of the gun incorrectly, so the computer did not identify the gun as stolen. As a result, the suspect was released, though the gun was confiscated.

Had be been in jail, his companions might have called off the robbery. Or they might have robbed another bank with equally tragic results. Who can say? But the tragedy deepened when the trooper, distraught over his error, shot himself. He left a wife and six children, aged 4 to 15.

We can sympathize with the trooper's feelings of guilt and worthlessness. Many of us have had similar feelings. At the same time, we can criticize his suicide on religious grounds, and because he abandoned a family dependent on him.

But beyond these factors, there is the question of honor. The trooper probably felt that he could die with honor if he could no longer live with honor.

The concept of honor is no longer taught to young people. Indeed, the word is rarely used. The only times I recall hearing it in years is in TV courtroom scenes, where the judge is addressed as "Your Honor."

But is it good to live in a nation where honor is merely a title for judges?

Have we lost something important – something we had in former years, when kids were taught not to commit dishonorable acts? Are we poorer because instead of thinking "Is this honorable?" people now ask themselves, "Is this legal?" That is, we lowered the bar from what is right to what is legal.

If we feel an act is dishonorable, we are reluctant to do it. True, we wouldn't want our friends to find out. Still, honor is largely internal – we monitor ourselves. But if we feel an act is illegal, we probably ask ourselves, "Will I get caught?"

Honor demands that we monitor ourselves; legality requires merely that we avoid detection. That's a key difference. A society where citizens monitor themselves needs fewer laws and fewer police than a society where citizens need others to monitor them.

But, you object, honor-based societies tend to be primitive and violent. In the Middle East and elsewhere, the concept of honor has become twisted. Fathers and brothers believe that "family honor" demands that they kill teenaged girls who have sex before marriage, or sometimes even if they are seen in the company of the "wrong" boy.

And, of course, we have the gang "culture" in our own country. Gang members commit murder because they feel "dissed." Clearly, murdering people whenever you feel disrespected is destructive to civilization.

Nevertheless, if an excess of something is bad, this does not mean that its absence is good. Overeating causes a variety of diseases. This does not prove that starvation is good for you. Too little of something can be as harmful as too much.

An excess of honor, or at least what is called honor, can be dangerous. But what about too little honor, or none at all? Can a civilization survive if its members, especially its men, have no concept of honor?

Can we believe what people say, if they no longer use the expression "My word of honor"? Can the family survive, if men no longer feel that honor requires them to stand by their wives and support their children? Can the nation survive, if citizens no longer feel that honor demands that they fight – and if need be die – to defend it?

Consider:

In the disaster at Waco, 84 people, including 26 children, were gassed and burned to death. Regardless of who was to blame, Attorney General Janet Reno was in charge. In testimony before Congress, she "took responsibility." Honor would have required her to resign, to retire from public life, and perhaps to devote herself to charity. "Taking responsibility" required her to do precisely nothing. The contrast is stark. But the concept of honor escaped her.

 

• Over 3,000 innocent people were murdered by foreign terrorists on 9/11. As with Waco, one can argue endlessly about details. But CIA Director George Tenet, a Clinton appointee, was in charge of our intelligence-gathering apparatus. Tenet did not resign, nor was his resignation demanded. The concept of honor never came up.

   

• Famous lawyers bamboozled the O.J. Simpson jurors by concocting far-fetched scenarios and making a mountain of hair, fiber, shoe print, blood group and DNA evidence "disappear." The jury packed its bags before deliberations began, and returned a not-guilty verdict in two hours. The concept that "verdict" means "to speak truly" escaped them.

   

• President Bill Clinton lied under oath and disputed the meaning of "is" and "alone." But supporters dismissed his lies as amusing foibles. The concept that an oath to God means something escaped them.

   

• Presidential candidate Al Gore claimed he "took the initiative in creating the Internet," "found" the Love Canal toxic site, and performed other fictitious exploits. But supporters dismissed his lies as amusing foibles. The concept of honesty escaped them.

   

• Journalists depicted Gore as too smart for his own good, though he flunked out of divinity school and dropped out of law school. Meanwhile, they depicted George W. Bush as a drooling idiot. Many people remain unaware that he has an MBA from Harvard Business School. But journalists saw nothing wrong with distorting the facts, if it would further their agenda. The concept of truth escaped them.

   

• Corporate accountants and auditors turned liabilities into assets, and losses into profits. The concept that signing one's name means something escaped them.

   

• Corporate executives exited in "golden parachutes" while employees were left unemployed and shareholders were left holding worthless shares. The concept of responsibility escaped them.

   

• Some clergymen forgot that "pastor" means shepherd and acted more like wolves than like sheep dogs. The concept of trust escaped them.

   

• A senatorial candidate was behind in the polls. He was replaced with another candidate after the deadline had passed, but New Jersey Supreme Court justices saw nothing wrong with changing the rules in the middle of the game. The concept of fairness escaped them. It may be too late to send new ballots overseas, so military votes may not count. But the concept of gratitude also escaped them.

   

• After enactment of harsh gun laws, homicide rates rose in Washington, D.C., and in Britain and Australia. Law-abiding citizens were disarmed, but street criminals and the Beltway Sniper were undeterred. Despite the evidence, liberals pressed for still more gun laws. Their political agenda was more important to them than public safety. The concept of duty escaped them.

   

• Leftist teachers and self-anointed gurus taught some of our young people to hate America and admire anti-American tyrants and anti-democratic ideologies. But they felt no guilt when John Walker Lindh joined the Taliban, or when John Allen Muhammad reportedly approved of 9/11 and became the Beltway Sniper. The concept that words have consequences escaped them. The concept that they were incredibly lucky to live in a free country never occurred to them.

   

• Three Democratic congressmen went to Iraq – a hostile country – and proclaimed that they trust Saddam Hussein – a homicidal dictator – more than they trust their own president. The concept of loyalty escaped them. The concept of honor was totally beyond them.

  But here's what's really irritating. All these people who do not understand honor can live their selfish lives in safety, because they are protected by soldiers, sailors, Marines, airmen, police and firefighters – who understand honor quite well.

  Yes, an excess of honor can be dangerous. But what will result if our enemies believe that honor requires them to fight to the death to destroy our civilization, eradicate our religion, cripple our nation, and murder our people – while we busy ourselves with making money and having fun?

  One need not be a prophet to foresee what will happen if the other side has an excess of honor, while we have a deficiency, or none at all.

  We can criticize the trooper who shot himself. But we also can sympathize with him. And we can use this tragedy to ponder the question of just how much honor is enough. Too much is dangerous, but so is too little.

  For the sake of freedom, the signers of the Declaration of Independence pledged "our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor." If we aren't careful, we will raise a generation of citizens who care so little about freedom that they won't risk the first two, and don't know the meaning of the third.

  Dr. Stolinsky is retired after 25 years of teaching in medical school .He writes on political and social issues. He may be contacted at dcstolinsky@prodigy.net.