Excuse me, were we talking about Iraq?

By By Tiara Fuller

By Tiara Fuller

A letter to the editor was written last week challenging my article on stem cell research. It didn’t necessarily disagree that stem cell research is unethical, but asked instead, “on what grounds is Bush qualified to determine what is ethical? Has he walked the path of an exemplary person” based on the War on Terror?

This is a trend that happens every time I write an article referring to President Bush — every issue finally comes around to a single point: Iraq.

I find it hilarious that people don’t actually debate with what I say or my views, but somehow turn everything into an “I hate Bush and we don’t belong in Iraq” tirade.

Whether or not you agree with the War on Terror has little or nothing to do with how you view Bush’s policies.

I don’t see why one’s position on Iraq should have any validity on a completely unrelated issue. We should applaud the president and any person anytime they stand up for a just cause.

Just because one can define a single act as unethical, that act doesn’t imply that every action stemming from that same person is unethical. Further, it doesn’t imply that the same person can’t support a just cause without any change in their position on the former.

I want to make it clear that I support the War on Terror. However, for the sake of argument, let’s say I didn’t. Let’s pretend that I thought it was unethical to liberate the citizens of a country under the hands of a vicious and brutal dictator. Or, that I had voted for the war but somehow was functioning under the misconception that a war could be fought and won with no bloodshed.

When that view proved to be out of touch with reality, I turned my back on the countrymen risking their lives and withdrew my support for the war.

Even then I wouldn’t turn my back on someone if they offered assistance for a cause I believed in, even if they supported something else I didn’t. That’s what life and politics are all about — compromise.

Critics of President Bush, especially the Democratic Congress, love to cite his 30 percent approval rating as some sort of way to measure his ability to do his job and a license to justify impeding his way at every turn.

I think that is ridiculous. President Bush got 53 percent of the vote during the last election and he is not doing anything other than what he promised he would do, besides that preposterous blanket amnesty bill.

But again, for the sake of argument, let’s say that President Bush’s approval rating is somehow tied to him being unfit for office. If that is the case, I suggest those same congressmen and women and senators who parade his approval ratings should take a look at their own.

According to a recent Gallup poll, the approval rating for the democratically led congress is the lowest it has ever been at 14 percent — which pretty much implies zero confidence in the way it is handling its job.

How it thinks it has a leg to stand on in criticizing President Bush and his policies, in the name of the people, is beyond me.

[email protected]