On Morning Joe today Scarborough started off by giving bad advice to Obama regarding the big deal yesterday involving the scheduling of Obama's speech which coincided with the Republican debate -- this was a petty decision by the administration, and Boehner rightly said he would like the President to change the date of his speech, because the President was asking to hold the speech before congress. We have separation of powers regardless of the wishes of those like Scarborough who yearn for FDR and LBJ style Presidents who could roll over congress. Why even have a congress if a President can always get his/her way? It's dangerous to suggest we need a dictatorial executive, but, hey, it's macho, so there's that going for it.
Scarborough told Mika that Obama, rather than back down and change the date of his speech, should give the speech anyway during the Republican debate and then lie to the American people by saying congress doesn't appear to care about joblessness and recession, because they didn't feel it was important enough to have the speech before congress. If Obama pulled this stunt, the public would quickly see through the political gamesmanship, and it would hurt Obama's approval rating even more. Scarborough and those who pride themselves on understanding the political game don't understand that the public has changed and no one wants these silly games in DC, especially when we have serious problems that need to be dealt with. It's ridiculous advice, and if Bush had pulled something like Scarborough is advising , he would have been excoriated in the media. Now, we don't have to depend on the media to tell us which party is playing games, we can tell.
The main event on this morning's show was the interview with Dick Cheney. I don't hate Cheney like many on the Left, even though I'm a non-interventionist on foreign policy. I know that Cheney was raised in a political system inherited from WWI in which America intervenes in foreign affairs, and Cheny was part of a reaction to 9/11. It does little good to look back and assign blame in Iraq, but we can learn going forward from the mistakes, and not just learn through the events following 9/11, but from the history of our involvement in the mideast, and interventions all around the world. I'm also not one to blame America for 9/11, because people in the mideast are responsible for their actions, and national leaders are responsible for their decisions playing the Great Game with European powers going back at least to the turn of the 20th century when the major interventions took place.
Although, America is not to blame for the attack, it's incumbent upon us as a nation of people looking to build a peaceful future to reassess our history of intervention in foreign affairs and take responsibility for unintended consequences, then develope a doctrine in the 21st century which avoids the harmful interventions which prevent other nations from finding their own way. If Britain and other European powers, and America to a lesser extent then, had allowed the mideast to solve its own problems and carve out its own nations after WWI, we could possibly have a much different relationship with the mideast today. Our interventions have done little but cause resentment and waste lives and money. We can't do anything to change that, but we can do something about our present interventions and what we do going forward.