Skirting the real question
David Broder writes out against individual accountability for potential Bush-era abuses. He’s not standing with those who defend the alleged practices, just worried the costs are too high:
In times like these, the understandable desire to enforce individual accountability must be weighed against the consequences. This country is facing so many huge challenges at home and abroad that the president cannot afford to be drawn into what would undoubtedly be a major, bitter partisan battle over prosecution of Bush-era officials. The cost to the country would simply be too great.
The problem with Broder’s reasoning is that’s it’s purely question begging. What, exactly, are the consequences? We didn’t drop the atomic bomb or intern Japanese-Americans during moments of leisure. Morally questionable actions usually take place because we’re facing challenges on multiple fronts.
That’s not to say Broder is wrong. The consequences of investigation and prosection of Bush-era authorizations may well outweigh the benefits. But that’s a conclusion, not a starting place.
–Sam
Related posts:
- A question answered
- Looking backwards, moving forwards
- What’s best or what’s possible?
- An honest question for Wieseltier
- Do unto others
ShareComments
Leave a Reply
