HOME -- POLITICS -- SPORTS -- LIFE -- SCI/TECH -- OPEDS -- HELPFUL TIPS
|
Mar 10, 2003 I remember a funny song by Louis Armstrong and Ella Fitzgerald that was seemingly included in every romantic movie score during the ‘80s-- ”Tomato, to-mah-to/Potato, po-tah-to/Let’s call the whole thing off.” Can’t the Republicans follow their advice, and call this whole thing off between then and Democratic Representative Marcy Kaptur? Kaptur made what appeared to be a comparison between the patriots who fought against Great Britain in the 18th century that later founded our great nation, and Osama bin Laden and other “non-nation-state fighters.” I guess it depends on what side of the aisle in Congress you sit on as to whether she said potato or po-tah-to, isn’t it? And I guess it would depend on what side of the ocean you were on in 1776 as to whether those colonists were terrorists, dumping the King’s tea into the ocean and grumbling about taxation without representation, and not freedom fighters with a legitimate claim to self-rule. What is it about moral relevancy that allows one to be labelled freedom fighter or patriot, and brands another terrorist? To listen to talk show pundits, a country that desires to relieve a people from suffering, a country that desires to elevate a populace from their plight has the moral obligation and right to do so. Because, they reason, if your people are starving and you’re building weapons...well, isn’t that just wrong? If masses of people are unemployed and you’re busy putting together programs that costs billions of dollars, then aren’t you in need of a regime change? But whatever you do, don’t assume the United States is doing any of this. After all, we are the ones who will liberate the people of Iraq, and institute a change of leadership just like we did in Afghanistan. The women dropped their burqas and the men picked up books in that country, thanks to our war against terrorism. We aren’t the ones that, according to the United States Department of Agriculture in a 2001 survey, have over 33 million children who lived in homes with “food insecurity”--not starvation, just “food insecurity”. Which, according to the report, only means that “at some time during the year, these households were uncertain of having, or unable to acquire, enough food to meet basic needs of all their members” due to lack of money or other resources. Tomato, to-mah-to, starvation, food insecurity... I’m not advocating the old, “Well, if we can’t fix our own problems, then how can we fix someone else’s,” which would be based loosely on Jesus’ admonition of leaving someone’s speck in their eye until you remove the board in yours. I would advocate as vigorous an effort to feed more people, reduce our government and tax burden as we seem to put forth in prosecuting this upcoming war with Iraq. So, what side of the aisle are you sitting on-- was our country founded by patriots, or terrorists? What are we now? About the author: Chuck Tyler is a freelance writer and journalist based in South Bend, Indiana. His credits include coverage for the South Bend Tribune (www.SouthBendTribune.com) of a triple homicide trial and a town hall meeting of concerned citizens and local officials for the Herald-Palladium (www.HeraldPalladium.com) following 9/11. Email him at: tyler_1420@yahoo.com ------------ Comment on this column in the forum. ------------ |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
