When John F. Kennedy was building his reputation, he famously said, Vietnam represents the cornerstone of the free world. The jury is out -and will always be out -on whether JFK would have gone into the conflict of Vietnam with such force and futility. JFK was, however, a champion of tax cuts, a strong national defense and an ardent anti-communist.
George W. Bush encompasses many of the democratic ideals of Henry Scoop Jackson, JFK and Harry Truman, and does not have a problem showing it off. Throughout 20th century history it seemed like the Democrats were the ones speaking about the power of freedom, the call to arms in defense of freedom and fighting for liberty. This is no longer the case.
The Democratic Party soon will rest in the bedrock of American history if it does not step up to the plate and begin to offer practical and different ideas. I say different because what they say about Iraq is basically what Bush says, but with a different PR spin. If you're going to be a party that is anti-war, just let us know. I get confused when Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., comes out and preaches his Vietnam spiel and Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. calls Condoleezza Rice a liar, while wondering what it does to further the discussion? How has what the Democrats have done in the last month (year), in the lead up to democratic elections in Iraq, moved any public discourse forward? Any Democrat showing pro-Iraq stance is not a Democrat (in the case of Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn.), some might say.
This Iraq is not Vietnam. Nor was the first Iraq War, as Kennedy wrongly predicted (this is funny coming from a man who once was part of President Johnson's truth squads that traveled around campuses touting Vietnam policy). I think that the Democratic Party does not want this war to be another Vietnam in the sense of American loss or large numbers of casualties. I give them more credit than that, but what I see is a group of Vietnam-era Democrats who lived through that conflict and saw how it shaped and galvanized policy in the modern Democratic Party. They all seem to be yearning, along with HUGE numbers of youth, to have a pinnacle moment of momentum, rather than failure, for the ideas of the progressive movement. If we pull out of Iraq like Kennedy wants, this will provide the impetus they need to move the country away from what they see as a hard right turn in American foreign politics.
I have heard numerous reports about how JKF planned to pull out of Vietnam had he not died. I don't know the answer to that question and it is the wrong question to ask, just as the wrong questions are being asked today in Iraq.
Now that we are where we are in terms of progress in Iraq, we should ask how we can win, not how can we leave. Democrats believe so strongly in the fact that we should not have gone in that they do not want to sit down and have a place at the table to move us forward.
Instead of looking for a way out, Democrats should look for a way in, back to the days of Jackson, Truman, and JFK -but I do not know if they would have had a place in the modern Democratic Party. I am a firm believer in the loyal opposition and learning from one's mistakes, but it is tough to have meaningful discussion with people still talking about past wars and do not want to join the present discussion.
-Eric Penkal, a senior political science major, is the political director for the
College Republicans. Send him an e-mail at eric.penkal@ohiou.edu.
17 Archives
The Post Editorial
