The right to debate

It's a sad democracy when we can't even debate a highly contested war in the Senate. Though a majority of the Senate is in favor of debating the war, they are four votes short of 60 (it's 56 for and 34 against), and can't debate something that is relevant to our lives. Obviously the 60-majority rule is so that the Senate won't debate stupid things like how to redesign the lawn at Camp David, but there is something wrong with it if it also precludes the discussion of a monumentally important topic such as the war, which does affect everyone in the country. It isn't appropriate to not discuss something of national relevance! The argument the Republicans are making is hardly valid - they say that it hinders the president's agenda in Iraq to stop and debate the war, but if the majority of the American people does not support the war then why should we bow down to the president's agenda? If the point of patriotism is to not get in the way of the president's agenda, then how is that not leaning toward dictatorship? The definition of democracy is rule by the people, and when the people don't even have the right to stand up and dissent, then that is not a real democracy.

And the growing hype surrounding Iran disgusts me. We have no excuse to fight with or invade Iran, but I'm scared that that is next on Mr. Bush's agenda. This reminds me of the gradual frenzy surrounding Iraq four years ago, as "evidence" slowly began to come to light to implicate them as accessories to terrorism (because all terrorism ever has originated from Iraq), and despite the lack of facts or proof, the American people got so caught up in the scare that they immediately supported a war. I'm worried that that could happen again with Iran, but incredulous that the administration would even try it again. I hope they don't.

Labels: politics

posted by Holly @ 11:06 AM