The past few months have been very telling for the state of our union. The White House press secretary has been dismissed, multiple leaks exposed and the continuing requests for the Defense Secretary’s removal has been ignored by our president. Following a stream of events where honesty, integrity and humility are at question, it’s becoming clearer that our country’s internal problems are possibly more detrimental than we had realized.

I wonder; what happens to a republic when its president is completely unwilling to accept criticism? If our “democracy” is designed to reflect the will of the people it represents, how is it just when we allow our leadership to maintain such poor relationship with the media, the main connection between the administration and the people that it works for?

Call me a cynic, but I speculate that the grounds for Press Secretary Scott McClellan’s dismissal last week were not because of his weak representation of the White House to the press, as it was said to be. If his job is to relay information from the White House to the press, then could it be that the White House didn’t supply him with enough real information to give the press?

The Bush administration has prided itself on not buckling under the pressure of the media. Bush has worked hard to maintain an image that he is strong and not easily influenced by the media. This may be commendable depending on individual viewpoints, but, doesn’t the media reflect the people?

Therefore, Bush has worked hard to not be influenced by – us.

This theory may also be portrayed in the latest leak scandal. Mary McCarthy, former White House aide and CIA employee, leaked information about the United States having secret prisons overseas. McCarthy’s job included looking into claims that the CIA was involved in torture at Iraqi prisons.

The information was given to various media sources and was used in a Pulitzer Prize-winning story in the Washington Post. The Post Executive Editor Leonard Downie Jr. told The Seattle Times that people who provide citizens with the information necessary to hold their government accountable should not be persecuted.

McCarthy was accused of meeting with various reporters and after being investigated, lost her job, her reputation and prepares to go to trial.

I do not in any shape condone breaking the law or violating the CIA’s secrecy laws. However, I do wonder why someone would risk everything if it hadn’t been their conscience that had finally worn them down and told them that honesty was vital to our country’s welfare.

This is clearly a woman who has become tired of helping the government hide information. Is it possible that Scott McClellan too, felt the discomfort of that burden?

In addition to these questions, why have government leaks become such an issue in the past year? There seems to be some major correlation between our government withholding the truth and the government employees getting canned for leaking it.

Military officials are coming forward to request that Bush remove Donald Rumsfeld from his position. This, I think, is the clearest example of our leader’s unwillingness to accept criticism. The list of generals and reasons why they deem Rumsfeld inept is becoming embarrassing. What’s even more embarrassing is that a proactive response seems to be nowhere in sight.

To recap: Rumsfeld will not be removed even though it is the wish of those who worked with him. McClellan was fired for improbable reasons, meaning that the whole truth is not likely disclosed. A woman ended her compliance to cover for the White House and will be tried for it. Multiple other investigations are underway including the “Scooter” Libby leak and the issue of Bush’s authorization to tap phone lines without warrant.

Isn’t it ironic that when a government employee provides truth to the public, they are fired and tried for it?

If our leadership doesn’t begin to listen to and start to work for the people – including the media – then how can we call our land democratic?


http://www.dailyevergreen.com/disp_story.php?storyId=17776