The Vice President and Aaron Burr
A word of warning: I expect to be accused of being politically partisan by some readers of this post. Maybe so. But I'm an equal-opportunity basher when it comes to stupid political statements, as my earlier denunications of Pat Robertson illustrate. And if you think Pat Roberton's an easy target, wait to you see who I'm picking on this time. :)
--------------------------------------
Dick Cheney gave a scare to an elderly lawyer last weekend and lots of chuckles to the rest of us with his hunting accident. My favorite: "Last Saturday Vice President Dick Cheney shot a lawyer. His approval ratings are now at 92%."
There have been, of course, the inevitable comparisons with Aaron Burr, the only other sitting VP to shoot a man. But it was what Burr did after murdering Alexander Hamilton that provides the most striking comparison right now. And the comparison is not with Cheney but with his predecessor.
Burr's reputation was already pretty low in 1804. In 1800 he had attempted to steal the election away from Thomas Jefferson using a loophole in the election laws. He did not succeed. In the process his integrity took a hit with both Jefferson's Republicans and Hamilton's Federalists. In 1804, Jefferson was up for re-election and Burr was not desired on the ticket of either party. In frustration and spite, he attempted to do harm to his native country by encouraging foreign parties (the British and the Spanish) to take military advantage of the weakness of the Western frontier. They were all too eager to do so. Burr's dealings were eventually revealed, he was charged with treason and dragged into court, and only the intervention of Chief Justice John Marshall, who was always eager to embarrass Jefferson, saved Burr's skin.
Fast forward to 2006. Last weekend former Vice President Al Gore, who had attempted to circumvent Florida election laws in order to overturn the 2000 election and who was so unpopular with his own party in 2004 that he was not able to raise enough money to even launch a campaign, traveled to Saudi Arabia on a big-money speaking trip. There the apparently still-bitter former veep informed his Arab audience that their relatives in the United States were being "indiscriminately rounded up" and held in confinement in "circumstances that are unforgivable."
Now, even if this were true, it's not the kind of thing one would say in the Middle East at the moment. Things are tense enough right now, wouldn't you think? People are being killed because thousands of militant Muslims are upset over a cartoon depicting their founder as a militant Muslim. Wouldn't one expect a former veep to be a tad more responsible than to stoke the fires? We wish.
What makes this worse is that Al Gore was struggling with the "truth thing" yet again. No, large numbers of Arabs are not being indiscriminately rounded up. Gore explained that he was referring here to those here without green cards or those whose visas had expired or those who had entered the country illegally. That's not "indiscriminate." That's the INS doing its job, a job that most in the U.S. consider very important after the mess-ups prior to 9/11. And what the heck does he mean by "unforgivable circumstances?" No cable TV in the county jail? More importantly, how would Arabs in the Middle East interpret "unforgivable?" What images does that word convey to them? And what will some choose to do about it?
This is not empty rhetoric. Words have consequences and Al Gore's words will bring almost certainly bring harm eventually upon one or more of his countrymen. So why, Al? Maybe he's adopted the Jimmy Carter strategy. (President Carter's increasingly bizarre bouts of nastiness are worth a post all their own.) Or, maybe Gore's adopted the Burr strategy. Feeling rejected and doomed to irrelevance, he tried to inflate his own reputation abroad by pandering to its enemies. He may want to remember that that plan didn't work out real well for our third V.P.
Take away Dick Cheney's hunting rifle and a couple of hunting companions may be a bit safer. Take away Al Gore's microphone and maybe we'll all be a bit safer.
--------------------------------------
Dick Cheney gave a scare to an elderly lawyer last weekend and lots of chuckles to the rest of us with his hunting accident. My favorite: "Last Saturday Vice President Dick Cheney shot a lawyer. His approval ratings are now at 92%."
There have been, of course, the inevitable comparisons with Aaron Burr, the only other sitting VP to shoot a man. But it was what Burr did after murdering Alexander Hamilton that provides the most striking comparison right now. And the comparison is not with Cheney but with his predecessor.
Burr's reputation was already pretty low in 1804. In 1800 he had attempted to steal the election away from Thomas Jefferson using a loophole in the election laws. He did not succeed. In the process his integrity took a hit with both Jefferson's Republicans and Hamilton's Federalists. In 1804, Jefferson was up for re-election and Burr was not desired on the ticket of either party. In frustration and spite, he attempted to do harm to his native country by encouraging foreign parties (the British and the Spanish) to take military advantage of the weakness of the Western frontier. They were all too eager to do so. Burr's dealings were eventually revealed, he was charged with treason and dragged into court, and only the intervention of Chief Justice John Marshall, who was always eager to embarrass Jefferson, saved Burr's skin.
Fast forward to 2006. Last weekend former Vice President Al Gore, who had attempted to circumvent Florida election laws in order to overturn the 2000 election and who was so unpopular with his own party in 2004 that he was not able to raise enough money to even launch a campaign, traveled to Saudi Arabia on a big-money speaking trip. There the apparently still-bitter former veep informed his Arab audience that their relatives in the United States were being "indiscriminately rounded up" and held in confinement in "circumstances that are unforgivable."
Now, even if this were true, it's not the kind of thing one would say in the Middle East at the moment. Things are tense enough right now, wouldn't you think? People are being killed because thousands of militant Muslims are upset over a cartoon depicting their founder as a militant Muslim. Wouldn't one expect a former veep to be a tad more responsible than to stoke the fires? We wish.
What makes this worse is that Al Gore was struggling with the "truth thing" yet again. No, large numbers of Arabs are not being indiscriminately rounded up. Gore explained that he was referring here to those here without green cards or those whose visas had expired or those who had entered the country illegally. That's not "indiscriminate." That's the INS doing its job, a job that most in the U.S. consider very important after the mess-ups prior to 9/11. And what the heck does he mean by "unforgivable circumstances?" No cable TV in the county jail? More importantly, how would Arabs in the Middle East interpret "unforgivable?" What images does that word convey to them? And what will some choose to do about it?
This is not empty rhetoric. Words have consequences and Al Gore's words will bring almost certainly bring harm eventually upon one or more of his countrymen. So why, Al? Maybe he's adopted the Jimmy Carter strategy. (President Carter's increasingly bizarre bouts of nastiness are worth a post all their own.) Or, maybe Gore's adopted the Burr strategy. Feeling rejected and doomed to irrelevance, he tried to inflate his own reputation abroad by pandering to its enemies. He may want to remember that that plan didn't work out real well for our third V.P.
Take away Dick Cheney's hunting rifle and a couple of hunting companions may be a bit safer. Take away Al Gore's microphone and maybe we'll all be a bit safer.
posted by A.L. Blair | 9:35 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home