When will the ‘war on terror’ become the ‘war on hypocrisy’?

The battle for Fallujah has begun in earnest now that the U.S. election is in the ‘win column’ for the Bush Republicans. Is it a coincidence that “Operation New Dawn”, what most believe will be a blood-bath, was put off until after November 2? I think not.

Among the many things the election showed is that the American voter can be distracted domestically by ‘moral issues’ in sufficient numbers to avoid a critical examination of what is going on in Iraq, and elsewhere, under the Bush Doctrine of fundamentalism – a doctrine which, while espousing fundamentalist views of its own, decries the fundamentalism of its challengers (anyone, American or otherwise, who balks at the simplistic “You’re either with us or against us” challenge).

George Orwell and Margaret Atwood were more accurate in their science fiction than either would have wished.

Iraq aside Bush & Co., under the stealth-like guidance of Carl Rove and Ralph Reed, successfully mobilised Catholics and conservative evangelicals to elect Republicans who equate the fight for equal marriage rights for same-sex couples with an erosion of America’s moral fibre almost as if uncommited, unrecognised relationships would be more palatable. (I say ‘ almost’ since the blustery Rev. Jerry Falwell was at great pains to tell a CNN interviewer that the only hope for gays and lesbians was to renounce our ‘lifestyle’ and accept Christ – more than suggesting that being gay and Christian are contradictory.)

This is the same Bush gang which, while paying lip service to the AIDS crisis in Africa, discourages HIV prevention measures that include condoms and female reproductive choice – opting, instead, for the naive ‘abstinence’ and adopt-an-AIDS-orphan approach. For every suggestion that condoms promote promiscuity I suggest there is the equally absurd silent tolerance of unnecessary HIV infection and victimization of women by men exercising their patriarchal hormones.


3 thoughts on “When will the ‘war on terror’ become the ‘war on hypocrisy’?

  1. Juner

    I have to say I truly love your zeal and enthusiasm – if only more of us were so willing to stand up and try to make change for what we believe in. I would love to hear your point of view on the positives and negatives of both US presidential contenders – I am all too aware that I am missing something!

  2. Kenn Chaplin (mail: kenngc at sympatico dot ca)

    Frankly, I didn’t think either of the main contenders was a good candidate. The “middle ground”, which both parties need to court, is still more to the right than anything we Canadians would call “liberal”. Think of it – ‘health insurance for all’ was one idea indirectly rejected by voters as being too radical, i.e. too liberal or socialist. Yet to vote for someone more progressive, like Ralph Nader, would have been to vote for Bush by default.

  3. Juner

    Hmmmm. Have you ever thought of running? I’m sure they’ll drop that pesky rule about being of US birth – “Ah-nold” will talk them into it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s