Apologies and Principle
October 7th, 2006Today, I had a Debate Tournament. I was not around for most of the day, and now, in the eve, I shall be pitching — as in, “Baseball” — for awhile, and afterward I intend to spend sometime with a friend or two. I haven’t much time today, but I’d like to talk about a few things, first being this article abou Sienna Miller calling Pittsburgh “Shittsburgh,” something that I didn’t particularly need to read (how trivial a matter this is) but that I came across by accident and, since it asks, at the end, Do you think Sienna should have apologized or do people just need to lighten up? I thought I’d answer.
People don’t need to lighten up about this: they were insulted, and have a right to be offended. Sienna Miller needs to man up about this and say, “I don’t like this city. There aren’t enough late night party spots (that’s why they filmed parts of Queer as Folk in Toronto while claiming it was Pittsburgh!) or good places to find drugs, which I need to fulfill my petty celebrity life. Oh, the humanity!” Instead, Sienna apologized for her comments through a publicist, saying, “I want to apologize for my comments which seem to have been misconstrued and taken out of context.” Right. (I, for one, like Pittsburgh. It’s a beautiful town. I, however, hate phony apologies. People need to stand by themselves more often.)
John Warner is a guy who should stand by himself (being a Senator and all) and is, and I can say that I’m quite proud of him, at least for today, as it’s always nice to see a man criticize his President and not back down.
Speaking to reporters on Thursday after returning from a trip that included a one-day stop in Baghdad, Mr. Warner said the United States should consider “a change of course” if the violence there did not diminish soon. He did not specify what shift might be necessary, but said that the American military had done what it could to stabilize Iraq and that no policy options should be taken “off the table.”
With the blessing of the White House, a high-level commission led by James A. Baker III, the former secretary of state, is already reviewing American policy in Iraq. But the commission is not scheduled to report to Mr. Bush and Congress until after the November elections, a timeline that the White House had hoped would enable Mr. Bush to avoid public discussion of any change of course until after voters determine which party will control Congress next year.
Now, Mr. Warner’s comments are pushing up that timeline, forcing Republicans to confront the issue before some are ready. In an interview on Friday, Senator Susan Collins, a Maine Republican who has been critical of the administration’s approach in the past, said there was a “growing sense of unease” among other Republicans, which she said could deepen because of Senator Warner’s comments.
Ms. Collins, who is the chairwoman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, echoed Mr. Warner’s calls for a shift in strategy in Iraq. “When Chairman Warner, who has been a steadfast ally of this administration, calls for a new strategy,” she said, “that is clearly significant.” She said the current approach, which she attributed to Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, had not led to an overall reduction in violence or any prospect that American troop levels would come down soon. “We’ve heard over and over that as Iraqis stand up, our troops will stand down,” Ms. Collins said. “Well, there are now hundreds of thousands of Iraqi troops and security forces, and yet we have not seen any reduction in violence.”
Truth to power, Senator. Just don’t mistake that as power for you, because I don’t want you to run for President, and you don’t want it, either (you’d lose, trust me). So long as you’re speaking on principle, not on politics, I’m with you all the way.