| |
|
November 2006 Ethics Dunce
Senator John Kerry
People make mistakes and say stupid and hurtful
things, sometimes inadvertently, sometimes intentionally but without sufficient
thought. When they do, the ethical approach is to accept responsibility
and apologize. It's not easy, but it is simple. What one should not do,
and is clearly unethical, is to deny what was said and gratuitously insult
both those who called the unfortunate comment to one's attention and any
other vulnerable target available. This is Senator John Kerry's approach,
proving yet again the Scoreboard's long-held opinion that his ethical instincts
are miserable, even by the low standards of his chosen field.
Here is what Kerry said in a campaign appearance on behalf of Phil Angelides,
Democratic challenger to California's Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, at Pasadena
City College:
You know, education--if you make the most of it, you study hard,
you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, uh, you can
do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq.
Republicans and conservative pundits naturally pounced, but so did more
objective critics, who interpreted Kerry's words as denigrating the intelligence
of the soldiers in Iraq. This is certainly a reasonable interpretation
of what he said. Kerry, he implies now, was referring to George Bush and
not the soldiers as the "you" stuck in Iraq, and it's possible that this
is true. But his intended meaning doesn't matter concerning a
perceived insult, does it? A soldier, or the parents and friends
of a soldier, could reasonably take Kerry's statement as a gratuitous
insult, and Kerry is 100% responsible for his choice of words and any
misunderstanding they engender. Whatever he meant (and with Kerry it often
seems that he himself isn't sure), an apology is appropriate and necessary.
But because White House press secretary Tony Snow and partisan media
critics were among those who suggested as much, Kerry responded this way:
Statement of John Kerry
Responding to Republican Distortions, Pathetic Tony Snow Diversions and
Distractions
October 31, 2006; Washington - Senator John Kerry issued the following
statement in response to White House Press Secretary Tony Snow, assorted
right wing nut-jobs, and right wing talk show hosts desperately distorting
Kerry's comments about President Bush to divert attention from their
disastrous record:
"If anyone thinks a veteran would criticize the more than 140,000
heroes serving in Iraq and not the president who got us stuck there,
they're crazy. This is the classic G.O.P. playbook. I'm sick and tired
of these despicable Republican attacks that always seem to come from
those who never can be found to serve in war, but love to attack those
who did.
I'm not going to be lectured by a stuffed suit White House mouthpiece
standing behind a podium, or doughy Rush Limbaugh, who no doubt today
will take a break from belittling Michael J. Fox's Parkinson's disease
to start lying about me just as they have lied about Iraq. It disgusts
me that these Republican hacks, who have never worn the uniform of our
country lie and distort so blatantly and carelessly about those who
have…"
And so on. The Scoreboard actually assumed the above was a parody when
it first appeared. It's not. I hate to belabor the obvious, but just to
be clear in case there are some readers who think the above rant is reasonable
and fair, let us review the ethical fouls here.
- Whether Kerry's comments were actually intended to insult President
Bush (and if they were, they were spectacularly ambiguous, even for
a politician prone to saying things like "I voted for it before I voted
against it.") or were meant to imply that only scholastically deficient
and intellectually inferior individuals end up in the armed services,
a soldier finding them offensive and personally insulting could not
be accused of hyper-sensitivity. Thus Kerry's characterization of his
comments as being "desperately distorted" by critics is plainly contradicted
by what he actually said. Calling comments distorted when they have
been interpreted fairly and accurately is called "lying."
That's Ethics Foul #1.
- Whether Republicans and conservatives jumped on Kerry's words to "divert
attention from their disastrous record," or simply because it is
right before a closely-contested election and a supposed leader of the
Democratic party making such a foolish comment in public is like manna
from heaven for the GOP, Kerry's statement was what it was: potentially
hurtful and insulting. It is Kerry who is using irrelevancies to deflect
attention from his own mistake. The Republican record makes Kerry's
statement neither better nor worse, and doesn't lessen his obligation
to accept responsibility for it. This is an avoidance of accountability
and responsibility, which is...
…Ethics Foul #2.
- Kerry says, "If anyone thinks a veteran would criticize the more
than 140,000 heroes serving in Iraq and not the president who got us
stuck there, they're crazy. That's good, John: now say that any
soldier who was insulted by your remark is crazy. I know, I
know… anyone who would think a veteran like you would call another veteran
crazy for thinking you would criticize the more than 140,000
heroes serving in Iraq must also be crazy, right? Let's go
over this again…
Wouldn't it be a lot easier to just learn to say what you mean, if indeed
you know? I suppose anyone who actually expects someone with
the rhetorical record of Senator Kerry to express his opinions by using
clear and unambiguous English is also crazy. And, come to think of it,
they might be. Disrespectful and unfair.
And Ethics Foul #3
- Kerry's next tactic is to personally insult anyone else who had the
audacity to find his statements objectionable. Let's see: they are "nut
jobs," "crazy;" they avoid combat (or maybe they just got good grades,
right, Senator?), they are "stuffed suit mouthpieces," they are "hacks,"
they are "doughy". But the combat record of Kerry's critics is, again,
irrelevant to what he said. Tony Snow is doing his job professionally
and in support of his employer, and does not deserve to be belittled
with pejorative terms like "mouthpiece." Kerry has press spokespeople
too, and they would not appreciate being referred to in this manner;
did Kerry's Catholic upbringing omit the Golden Rule? And whenever Senator
Kerry is annoyed by a Rush Limbaugh barb, he calls Limbaugh "fat," or
some equivalent. This is indefensible conduct from any national political
figure, but especially from one who has frequently bemoaned the loss
of civility in public discourse.\
Ethics Fouls #4, #5, #6, #7, oh, who knows?
Yes, Senator, Rush Limbaugh's recent attack on Michael J. Fox was indeed
ignorant and offensive. And Limbaugh, unlike Senator Kerry, had the
decency to apologize; he also managed to do so without insulting
all those critics who condemned his mocking of Fox's involuntary movements
during a political ad. Rather than attacking Limbaugh, Kerry would do
well to learn from his example.
In all, a truly despicable ethical performance by the junior Senator
from the Bay State. It's not too late for him to apologize, but now he
has even more people to apologize to.
|
|
|