Errors Compounded

Inevitably, the unavoidable and equally unpleasant task(s) of admitting error happens during our life. Doing so, according to my upbringing, contributes to wisdom and cleanses the conscience. There are others, however, who equate mistake admission as lessening manliness and is to be avoided at all costs. Paraphrasing Richard Nixon, former president, who once stated the commission of a crime is not as bad as being caught. He, of course, was caught and was forced to resign the presidency leaving a tumultuous legacy behind by never admitting wrong. If there was no wrong, then why resign the highest office in the land? Simply, the best defense is an active offense and released documents over time have shown the dark side of this former president’s disregard of the law and people. His attitude and many after him can be summed up by another Nixon statement where he stated it’s not against the law if a president states it.

The military has a unique way of correction by use of the phrase "as you were." This suspends reality, judgment and time while the originator delivers a dictate to be believed now. Consequently, even the most outrageous can be corrected by merely saying, "as you were," and then stating whatever necessary to correct/deny the moment. This belief has more credence in our society than most admit in these days of eclectic morality, veracity and values.

Newsweek admitted they may have, as you were, could have, as you were, might have, as you were, should not have placed all of their credibility into one source after severe White House criticism. The White House, however, is contracted by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who states the new story did not influence Moslem opinion as much as internal political instability did. Scott McClellan, White House press secretary, avers the national magazine is to blame, but doesn’t comment on the General’s statement. Reporters challenge McClellan who resorts to emotional appeal, always believe your president and implies government should have more control over the press. Ironically, several other news sources had reported severe abuse including Koran desecration by US military personnel in numerous locations since the conflict broke out. It’s not a new story by any means nor is white House interference in the Fourth Estate. The President, unfortunately has run out of "as you were" uses. Wasn't a single source problem the same issue the White House used to justify invading Iraq as was later disclosed? And then the on again, off again administration relationship with Chalabi....

White House diversion from breaking stories is interesting since you have to focus on what is not meant to see what is intended. In this case, the publishing of a Times of London story, May 2, 2005, which prints a classified memo citing President Bush and Prime Minister Blair planning the future Iraqi war a year before hostilities began. Plots were devised, intelligence fixed upon, policy conceived and, according to the memo, an American President ordaining military action prior to the actual event. It has received full play in the international press, but not in our Fourth Estate.

Has the Fourth Estate admitted a grievous error by not covering this breaking issue in depth? Indeed so since the press upholds a public trust seriously damaged in recent years by governmental payoffs and corporate influence. There was a time when the press felt a compelling need to inform their American constituency even when it meant looming court action. The New York Times argued successfully to the Supreme Court that it "is in the interest of the people of this country to be informed..." to justify printing the Pentagon Papers. These papers outlined the actual Vietnam War reasons undercutting numerous machinations and misinformation given to the public. A New York Times editorial, dated, June 16, 1971, ended with sterling words: "It is the effort to expose and elucidate that truth that is the very essence of freedom of the press."

It's time to wonder after where that diligent search for truth has gone after only 3 decades-will the restoration of public trust ever be fully reinstated; and if confidence in our leadership has been betrayed by misplaced ideology. Now is time for the President to step forth and admit he has made a mistake(s); the first he will have done so since stepping into the White House. It’s not less than masculine, but may save the foundering ideals this nation was based upon from being permanently impaired.