Transparency in Politics?

Woe is me! Imagine that, Rep. Boehner (R Ohio) is correct in his assessment that the report on CIA torture is ‘ideologically motivated!’ Of course, no one thinks that the Benghazi investigations had any ideological motivations. We all know that only Democrats are ideologically motivated. Republicans are just plain old down-to-earth-Honest-Abe, humble, self-effacing servants of the common citizen.

BULLSHIT!

Anyone with a modicum of common sense knows full well that political parties are the institutional manifestation of ideological motivation. What else could their purpose be? Parties are formed and continue to exist to champion ideological positions, euphemistically known as ‘party platforms.’ Of course, they also exist to keep politicians in office, but that is a pay raise to be discussed on another day.

Rep Chabot, another ‘R’ Ohioan, while acknowledging that he has not read the report, knows that “It’s probably harmful to the country to have this released. … It’s a political document” Yes it is political, that’s the essential idea, to voice political differences. Sen. Brown (D Ohio) is being political and ideologically motivated when he contends that “There’s no justification for our engaging in torture. [Engaging in torture] makes our people in uniform more vulnerable because if we’re torturing, then other countries think it’s more legitimate to torture…”

The issue is with which ideology do you identify? Are you on the side of ‘torture but deny it and keep it out of sight?’ Or is your position ‘don’t torture and make transparent your actions?’

If you opt for ‘but if other nations know what we’ve done, they’ll more likely reciprocate,’ has it not occurred to you that the the whole world has little doubt about what we’ve done? Our very transparency is a step up toward moral higher ground. Our transparency will probably not motivate any other nation to assume a similar stance, but it would bring some coincidence between our values and the face we put on in public.