A Test of Kirk’s So-called Independence

yesterday, john mccain, lindsey graham, john warner and susan collins demonstrated their independence from george bush’s immoral (according to colin powell) policies on the geneva conventions and u.s. detainee policy. if someone is serious about the war of terrorism (and we all know that mark kirk would rather shutting down internet websites), then how we treat our prisoners is central to the message we are sending to the world.

mark kirk, of couse, stands with george bush. but “the world is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism,” colin powell said. george bush is wrong. mark kirk is wrong. this is not about terror suspects or detainees, but what will have to our men and women in uniform if they are captured. the military (the real military, not the rumsfeld sychophants) wants to make sure that our captured soldiers are treated in accordance with the geneva conventions, and they know that in order to assure that, we must treat those we capture the same way.

mark kirk stands against the military and our service members by supporting the misguided policies of the president. independent? not a chance. mark kirk has never been independent of this white house, and there’s no reason to expect him to be now. his efforts are aimed at strengthening the white house’s position, even when it’s wrong.

in this case, morally wrong. mark kirk, just say no to torture, and yes to the geneva conventions. not all of our soldiers get to “fight” a war from behind a pentagon desk. they are the ones who need the protections of the geneva conventions. real soldiers know that. real soldiers are independent of the white house…