The Two Standards

For those of you hoping to read a column about St. Ignatius and The Exercises, I'm sorry to disappoint you. This one is about the public standards for decency and factual responsibility.

Two examples:

(1) The colorful protesters outside National Cathedral during and after President Reagan's (Episcopalian) funeral. One can only imagine what the sign in the rear ("God H**** M***) might say. Do you suppose anyone who held up signs with similar sentiments about, oh, say, former senator Paul Simon would get a free pass from the media and pundits? No, me neither.

(2) This story appeared today in the World Tribune. It appeared earlier on the BBC but I didn't see anything about it in the Boston Globe. Do you suppose we'll hear about it tomorrow? No, me neither.

Let's face it folks, we are operating at a severe disadvantage here. The problem is that we have an agreement with our Creator to tell the truth (and to apologize if we fail to do so, even if by mistake), and the other side doesn't have such an agreement.

President George W. Bush is not a great communicator. He doesn't have the media savvy that Clinton and Reagan had. He's genial but doesn't give off the aura of high intelligence. With many of our friends, that's a combination that we treasure. But for some reason, it's been an invitation to our enemies to treat our President with contempt, and worse.

He's been vilified for having "stolen" the election in 2000. Nonsense. Even the pro-Gore newspapers that did a physical recount found out that Bush won the election. But our "liberal" (leftie) friends can't let facts stand in the way of good vitriol.

He's been vilified for presiding over a stumbling economy. No matter that there is a natural cyclical nature to economic trends. No matter, even, that the current economic indicators show a bustling economy and increasing jobs. Again, don't let the facts stand in the way of hatred.

Finally, he's been called (at best!) a liar for fomenting war with the excuse of WMD's in Iraq. Now even the UN confirms what Bush and the intelligence agencies said was true -- that Saddam Hussein DID indeed have long-range destructive capability.

How long do you suppose we should hold our breath waiting for an apology from those who hate him so? Or, for that matter, for mere mention of this important fact in the Globe, the Times (3), etc.?