Feb. 8, 2007
Joe Biden Does Something Heroic
Contributor Lloyd Garver Looks at Public Figures And Personal Responsibility
-
Photo
Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., expressed regret for his remarks about rival Barack Obama, at the Democratic National Committee Winter Meeting in Washington, Feb. 3, 2007. (AP Photo/Haraz N. Ghanbari)
-
Photo Essay
The Year In Rehab
Their reasons were as varied as their claims to fame as many celebrities reached out for help.
-
Who's Who
2008 Democratic Hopefuls
Clinton, Obama and Edwards lead the chase for the Democratic nomination.
Why? Do I approve of making thoughtless remarks about African-Americans? Of course not. Do I think he should have thought before he spoke? You bet. But I admire him for what he didn't do. After saying something stupid and embarrassing and potentially harmful to his career, he didn't run off to a rehab center.
Biden took responsibility for his actions, didn't blame them on anything that happened in his childhood, and apologized. That kind of heroic behavior is very rare today.
When Gavin Newsom, the mayor of San Francisco, admitted to and apologized for having an affair with his best friend's wife, he didn't mention therapy or rehab either. So, two politicians in the same week didn't hide behind the counseling card. It seemed too good to be true.
It was. Newsom held out for only five days before he announced that he would be seeking treatment for "alcohol use." His office also said that this "treatment" will not take him away from any time as mayor or as a candidate for re-election. Sounds like pretty serious therapy to me.
I have great respect for alcoholics and other addicts, people with eating disorders, and those with depression and other medical problems who go into rehab or counseling and try to get help. I'm sure it takes great courage to confront these problems. However, in recent years, the "rehab center" has provided a sanctuary for famous people who have messed up. We hear too much about rehab and not enough about responsibility.
Today, people go into rehab or therapy to supposedly help them after they have spewed vile anti-Semitic, racist, or anti-gay remarks. And they go for flirting with minors over the Internet. Then after their 30 days of rehab is up, I guess we're all supposed to forgive them or forget about whatever they did.
This "quick fix" approach is particularly annoying. I'm sure that some of these people could really use psychiatric help. But let them apologize first, take responsibility for what they've done, and then recognize that they may need to be in therapy for a lot longer than a month. When they go into counseling for less time than most of their TV series last, I tend to doubt their sincerity.
Often these stays in rehab or on a psychiatrist's couch are combined with claims of alcoholism or of being mistreated as a child. Again, these are serious things for a person to deal with, but I don't see how, for example, Mel Gibson's being treated for alcoholism could help get rid of his anti-Semitism. The booze didn't put those thoughts in his head. I'm sure we all know people who've gotten drunk who don't suddenly start blaming Jews for all the wars in the world.
In this age of specialization, soon there will probably be separate rehab centers for different "conditions." There will be The Rehab Center for People Who Say Hateful Things, The Rehab Center for People Who Say They Are Addicted To Performing Sexual Acts They Wish They Didn't Do, and, of course, The Rehab Center for Celebrities Who Haven't Had Their Names in the Papers Lately.
As these places proliferate, there will be centers for "regular people," not just celebrities. So, look for people to say things like, "I know I should rinse off my own dishes, but I have a real problem. So, I'm going into rehab for 30 days." Similarly, we may be asked to forgive people who check themselves into places such as, The Rehab Center for People Who Promise to Call Back But Don't, and The Rehab Center for People Who Never Pick Up The Check.
In other words, I have the feeling that running off to rehab is just going to get worse.
I won't be surprised if President Bush and his buddies end up going the rehab route. It just might be his way out of the Iraq mess. In fact, it's perfect for him. Like so many other people these days, he won't really have to apologize or admit he's been wrong. All he and his colleagues will have to do is say they have a problem. Then they'll check into The Rehab Center for Public Officials Who Are Addicted To Exaggerating Dangers to Convince Us To Go to War.
After 30 days, he'll come out, people will forgive him, and he can start in on Iran.
Lloyd Garver has written for many television shows, ranging from "Sesame Street" to "Family Ties" to "Frasier." He has also read many books, and makes no apologies that some of them were in hardcover.
By Lloyd Garver
© MMVII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
PARTNERS
     |
- Latest in Opinion: Modern Times
- Kansas Seizes Title In A Game To Remember
- NCAA Final Four: They're Just Kids
- NCAA Final Four Update: Friday Night Fever
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 56 CommentsIn the 56 years I have been on this earth, I have NEVER been able to understand the thinking of you fascist. Your post certainly doesn't help. Is it that you freaks just never attended a history class? When we were debating Laws to stop CHILD Labor in this nation it was CONSERVATIVES who stood against those laws. When we were debating ALL the other Social Ill's of this nation Conservatives have constantly and consistently been apposed and that's alright, that's the reason the founders allowed Conservatives to be involved in our Government even though they supported the king. I just do NOT understand, concidering that this LIAR a few still call a President had the support of over 80% of America when he mislead us. Today that stands at about 28%. The "Left" is responsible for that? Debating the direction of the Country is responsible for that? Maybe if you try being an AMERICAN for a change you'd realize that BUSH is reponsible for that and everything else that's gone so wrong with this insane war.
What sets you apart and aligns you with other non-thinking conservatives is the name-calling. They've so brainwashed you that your emotional response to any suggestion other than the party line is instantaneous. And sickening. You are a disappointment to thinking citizens who care and want what's best for this country on a scale bigger than themselves.
My point was, Democrats have also given us plenty of reason to question their motives, patriotism, ideology, but they NEVER get the poison pen.
I admit guilt in my lack of judgement....it was insane of me to expect fair play from a CBS editorial, a CBS blog, and a bunch of left wing Al Frankin/Jerry Springer cool aid drinkers.
Mea Clupa
Go away crybaby.
We can't do away with free press, education or other rights that they're against. Once they'd be gone, he'd be one of the first ones discarded by his 'leaders', whether he thinks he's a christian-conservative or not.
R/
Joe Christian
Bush 1989-1993, Clinton 1993-2001, Bush 2001-2009, Clinton 2009-2018
Bush 1989-1993, Clinton 1993-2001, Bush 2001-2009, Clinton 2009-2018
By the way I do despise G.W. Bush, but not just him. I despise ALL in our government who in 2001 planned and executed THE WAR IN IRAQ.
I also despise all who "support" our president's decision to go to Iraq.
Americans were not told the truth about how little a threat Iraq posed.
Better and peaceful ways of ending what threat Iraq did pose were ignored and never given the chance.
3000+ Americans are dead in a war we didn't NEED to fight.
50,000 Americans are injured in a war we didn't NEED to fight.
100,000 Iraq civilians are dead in war that Americans caused.
2 evils caused this war; G.W. Bush and GOP/Republicans.
eh hello, we vote for our president.
Then you also have to "despise" one third of the Democratic party that voted to authorize the war. So by your thinking, it is not just the "GOP Republicans" that are "evil". Remember the saying about glass houses and throwing stones. And if your wondering, no, I am not a Rebuplican, nor a member of any other party for that matter. Not that it should matter.
Garvin can be grouped into this. His whole underlying theme in the begining was a view of our society as a whole and that the term "culpability" has lost all use in our meaning on us. Then he took it to the political junkyard to get trashed.
It has become all to common for our elected leaders and icons as a whole to make a mistake and blame something else on it. Say your sorry when you screw up. It doesn't make you less a person. And if you wronged and feel the person is sincere, accept the apology. That's how it used to be. Biden did the right for saying what he did after the gaffe and Obama in turn did the right thing for accepting it.
Peace and tolerance.
Even Barack accepted Senator Biden's appology.
The press needs to let go of this and look at all the great things he's done and is doing.
And by the way, he would make a fine President for us.
"Then you also have to "despise" one third of the Democratic party that voted to authorize the war."
You still don't get it do you?
See below:
"SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
(a) AUTHORIZATION. The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to
(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq."
Source: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/
2002/10/20021002-2.html
Please identify the UN Resolution that satisfies the second condition imposed on George Bush.
HINT: There wasn't one because France vetoed the resolution the GOP tried so hard to ramrod through the UN Security Council.
Remember "Freedom Fries"?
After which, Bozo began claiming the US needed no such authorization. And, unlawfully and without proper authority, ordered the invasion of Iraq.
Democrats had nothing to do with it since Congress did not authorize that decision.
Don't forget the twisting of intelligence reviews to fit an opinion that Iraq posed a "clear and present danger" to the US.
The American people were not given the truth, nor was Congress.
Oh I get it just fine, unless you are on the "inside" and privy to actual intel, then the only thing you have to speak from is what is reported in the news. After 9/11 and in the run up to the war, I saw operation intel as a part of my job. And it sure looked like they were hiding something to me, and everyone else in the theater of operation. When I say operational, that is raw information, notthing cherry picked orany other phrase you want to use. Believe me, as someone who had to carry out Boardinging on ships in the Arabian gulf, I would have been slightly Irate if I thought for a minute I was being sent on a fool's erand.
And don't sing the France song to me. I think it is understood that France has had a beef with the United States for a long time. And don't think for a moment that they were looking out for anything but their own interests. This is the Same France that sold them Arms during the trade embargo, took bribes from the Iraqi goernment. Remember when French commandos Sank the Rainbow Warrior pierside in New Zealand? And just recently they made the statement that Iran with a nuclear weapon is not a threat! So I would get as far away from the France defense as I could. But I will give you credit for "Freedom Fies" That was stupid.
So your opinion is that Iraq did pose a clear and present danger.
Also, that all diplomatic channels and strategies were exhausted.
Also that nearly %100 of the media world wide was wrong in their assessment of how the truth was held back or distorted to justify the invasion of Iraq.
You think the war in Iraq war justified because Saddam was "hiding something"?
What country isn't hiding something?
I am not going to use the title of a Tom Clancy (clear and present danger) to formulate an answer to your question(s). What I will say is this, based on the raw operational Intel that I saw in preparation for Meritime Interdiction Operations, yes, it looked a lot like they had Chemical Weapons. Keep in mind that this was prior to the start of the war.
But the fact of the matter is this: the media chooses to focus on certain issues while ignoring others. When was the last time you saw a story about a soldier, sailor, airmen, coastguardsman, or marine doing something good and worthwhile. I am not trying to sugar coat the situation. In my opinion the Situation sucks. But, and this is a big "but", that does not mean that I am ready to leave before we have finished the job. The job being stabalizing the country. Do you really think you would have so much hatred for the war and our countries leaders if the outcome had been like Desert Storm. a quick victory and few casualties? Imagine if we had had TV coverage durring WW2...... we would have never seen the same out come. Sure, terrible things have happened, and worse, people have died and been hurt. But that is war. If we leave now, All my fellow service members will have struggled in vain. That is just my opinion and in no way am I speaking for the sevice.
One more thing, when did the United States ever need the authorization of the United Nations anyway? Last time I checked, we were still the United States of America, and not bound by a group of Nations to determine what is in our best interest. I am an American citizen, not a global citizen. And yes, congress did vote to Authorize the use of force in Iraq. and yes, one third of Deocrats voted yes. So unitl we are a global nation, don't quote UN Resolutions to me.
"When was the last time you saw a story about a soldier, sailor, airmen, coastguardsman, or marine doing something good and worthwhile."
To you I would say, what positive stories come out of the media, period. Rarely if at all.
Regarding the war in Iraq and the media, it's hard to be positive about war. Iraqis and us are dying and for reasons that have now been disputed, like the chemical weapons issue there are many reasons Bush and CO. said we should go, but "immanent threat" is what I'm looking for when our president sends us to die in another country.
Immanent threat is NOT what Iraq was to the USA.
So while you might be in the military and looking for reasons to justify the war in Iraq, you are doing so after the fact that the voters of our country have decided that Iraq was and is not worth the deaths of any more Americans and Iraq civilians.
So what animosity you might find in my tone IS directed at The White House, and your Commander in Chief.
Don't you think there were better uses of our military? It's funny to me that because someone is in the military they need to express allegiance to a President that would send our men and women off to die in a war for reasons Americans don't understand.
Posted by NavyChief8
I think you're reaching a little over your pay grade there Chief. I was a radioman during the Vietnam conflict with a 'secret' clearance. I seriously doubt that the intel pertaining to the topics of discussion were ever anywhere near your duty station and even if they were you could only have seen them in encrypted form unless you possess a 'Need To Know'. Not many non-coms have that need. Nice try though, Bush needs all the help he can get.
I see, you're a "patriot". You just do what your told. You don't need facts. Your boss tells you what is or isn't true and that's fine by you.
Not me. I want to know that when Americans DIE and Americans KILL it is the last resort.
Your mindset follows in lockstep with a "bully mentality". You feel you're "right". You don't want to think about a world so complex that you could actually have a positive effect.
Besides, how would you feel if you pulled the trigger killing a few Iraqis or insurgents, in a war you don't understand?
You'd want to make up excuses for you being there too. Especially when you don't have a choice about being there or not.
Posted by NavyChief8
That's certainly what they said about Vietnam.
No I am not reaching over my pay grade, Intel, meaning photos of potential target areas, Vessels deamed critical contacts, these were the intel that I saw in preparation to operations my command carried out. And since I led boarding teamns onto ships, yes, I think I had a need to know as you stated. I am not debating cherry picked intel. I am talking about what was seen at the "tip of the spear". I am not debating mistakes made by the government, I am merely stating that just leaving, will not fix the situation.
Posted by NavyChief8
Ask ANY Vietnam vet. This situation cannot be fixed. You don't have to have intel to know that. We need to get our kids out of there. Don't kill another one of them for a false ideal!! Democratic Islam nation... bullsh*t!!
Vietnam was not sitting on most of the oil in the world, so leaving that country was not desabalizing to a reqion. Leving Iraq in a state of chaos and vulnerable to Iranian influance, is destabalizing in a huge way.
For all who don't understand what part the UN WAS ASKED TO PLAY in the run-up to the Iraq war.
THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS when authorizing Bush to start military operations in Iraq ASKED the UN's help and our CONGRESS ASKED that the UN create a resolution for the use of military force.
DO you get it now?
We asked the UN for a resolution, they didn't give it to us, so there for the President started his war in Iraq anyways, and regardless of the fact CONGRESS was not given what they asked for from the president.
OUR CONGRESS ASKED THE UN TO BE INVOLVED, the UN did not FORCE our hand.
I never said anything about Iraq being a Democracy, I could care less what form of Gvernment they choose. I just want it to be a stable place so that when this is done in two years, four, six, or whatever, we don't have to go back and finish the job. Again and again. And last time I checked, Men and Women were serving in Iraq, not kids. At least give us that respect!
Posted by NavyChief8
Regardless of how many more of our kids we let die for this obscene quest, when we eventually leave (whether it be today or ten years from now) the results will be the same. Those are tribal people, there is no national idenity! As soon as they feel safe to come outside, they will step out and kill someone from the other tribe. They care nothing about borders and governments. The chaos is in full swing, it has George Bush's name on it, but it is real. Things will never settle down until another strong arm leader like Saddamm gets them under control. So, what is your solution? Should we stay there for eternity, or just until our last brave soldier is killed?
"Vietnam was not sitting on most of the oil in the world"
Be careful when addressing concepts that are "neo-con" in nature.
to answer you, I have had to bare arms for my country. Fortunately, I have never had to kill anyone. To assume that I blindly follow orders, Sir or ma'am, that is an insult. I am no Bully. Have you ever had to put yourself in a dangerous, possibly lethal situation? I have. It scares the *** out of me every time. And I think about it to this day. But I am proud to serve, and will go back again if and when I am called to do so. Not because I follow blindly, but because I want this to be finished in a manner that my son does not have to go back and finish what my generation started. We are taught to qestion and not follow blindly. And I do know what this war is about. I will say it again, yes, great mistakes have been made in the execution of this conflict, but just leaving is not the answer. What is your suggestion to fix the situation?
Posted by NavyChief8
It is your leaders who care about the type of government, what exactly do you think we are doing over there? We're trying to prop up a 'Democratic' government. "Two years, four, six, or whatever." So you like the 'eternal' occupation' idea? For your information, I have a 'kid' in the Navy right now.
1. Split the country on secretarial lines, split the natural resources evenly.
or:
2. Restate the mission in Iraq to allow the US military to control Iraqi borders and airspace ONLY. Make it so the Iraqis can't say we are the cause for the civil war there, because we would no longer be on the streets killing people.
Then set a timetable for redeployment.
and:
COME TO AN UNDERSTANDING THAT IRAQI'S ARE NOT AMERICANS. They don't have a sense of allegiance to a country and borders. We should not hope to change the lives of everyday Iraq's except to bring peace to a country that we brought war.
Iraqi's are not children they can take care of themselves.
If we leave they will pick up the pieces and try to create NORMAL out of it.
I'm giving up my job to foreign offshore workers. That will mean I use less gas, as I WONT HAVE A JOB TO COMMUTE TO. Thanks, America. thansk for the vote of confidence, than you for being patriots, than you for acting with values. Thanks. What a stand-up country, we really stand up for each other. we are really patriotic in this country. Thanks. Thank yuo so much, thanks for caring about our nation and being patriots, I will appreciate it so much EATING GARBAGE OR DYING WITHOUT HEAT.
Posted by NavyChief8
I'm voting for a Democrat, any Democrat!
So we have a war in Iraq so Americans can have oil?
Important "neo-con" note:
The United States Industrial complex can compete better with the world if we continue to have cheap oil for our citizens. Forget trying to figure out new methods of creating and storing energy, because it will not be as profitable because the most likely substitutes for oil would be a RENEWABLE energy source.
Anybody checked the price of gas in England or Europe lately? We got way cheaper prices here in the US. Of course in Europe they have universal medical care almost everywhere, but then again why would Corporations want that for Americans?
"I'm voting for a Democrat, any Democrat!"
I never thought I would say that, but now I am.
The parties might not have had much difference in the past but right now they most certainly do.
Democrats all the way!
I love how the left and "newly converted left" (see Hillary Clinton and John Edwards - both exceptionally moderate and hawkish when it suits their political needs)have to assert they were lied to or exaggerated to, rather than just stating the truth; that if we were home as winners now, none of them would be commenting on how we got there or whether it was right to go in - they'd just be enjoying the victory as most Americans would (if we had won; Bush's approval rating would be in the 60s and 70's would be saying they agreed with the war and our decision to go in) Wise up lefties - Americans don't agree with your pacifist ways or passive approach to fighting terrorists or rogue states; they just don't like losing - Americans aren't all the sudden morally against the war they supported by 75%+, they're against the fact that we're losing. I find it exceptionally interesting in Hillary's case since it was her husband's administration and his CIA director (George Tenet, who said WMD were a "slam dunk" was a Clinton appointee by the way) that collected the majority of the intel we relied upon to presume Saddam was still harboring WMD...just further proof she will say ANYTHING, hold ANY position, mold to ANY audience to get the Lincoln bedroom back.
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 56 Comments