Taking the pledge

Pledge_2Uberblogger Jeff Jarvis’ Post-Election Peace Pledge expresses what I’ve been hoping to see for some time now: A nonpartisan willingness to place the commonweal ahead of ideological purity.

The commitment is straightforward:

After the election results are in, I promise to:

: Support the President, even if I didn’t vote for him.

: Criticize the President, even if I did vote for him.

: Uphold standards of civilized discourse in blogs and in media while pushing both to be better.

: Unite as a nation, putting country over party, even as we work together to make America better.

The only explicit religion angle to the pledge comes in Jarvis’ update:

Commenters ask me what I mean by “support.” Right question. I do not mean blind support, love-it-or-leave-it support, with-him-or-against-him support. I mean acknowledging that the president is the president and especially in a time of war, we need to stand together against our enemies — namely, Islamofascist terrorists — and not act, as too many have during this administration (and the one before it) that the enemy is in the White House. No, we’re on the same side.

I happily sign on to the pledge, and I invite GetReligion’s readers to criticize me if I stray from it.

Print Friendly

  • http://molly.douthett.net Molly

    We only get to criticize you? What sort of incentive is that?

  • http://getreligion.typepad.com/getreligion/2004/02/about_douglas_l.html Douglas LeBlanc

    Now, Molly, I wouldn’t want to deprive our readers of their fun. Please do criticize the president freely.

  • ken53

    How can one take a pledge to support a president that deserves, in the words of Thomas Freidman, to be ‘impeached’ for hight crimes?

    The election did not change Bush. The election did not change the war going on in America. Americans cannot in good conscience give up on that fight and pledge support to our enemy. That would be giving in to evil.

  • ken53

    Opps, sorry, that was Richard Cohen who called for Bush’s impeachment. My mistake.

  • Porter Barber

    In general the principle of supporting your government is sound and biblical. However, I’m not sure I can entirely agree with the proposition that the enemy is only islamofacism. As much as I detest terrorism and believe that Islam is, deep in its heart, violent and evil, yet we mustn’t close our eyes and ears to the evils done by our own government, and especially to the disturbing questions which remain concerning the involvement of the Bush administration in the events of September 11. There is a lot of sound and interesting work being done by various investigators about this; its just that the mainstream media ignores it, for the most part. There is serious evidence that the standard government account of this is duplicitous, and that there quite probably was some degree of complicity by the administration, presumably to advance its goals of regime change in the middle east, and of course possibly for personal reasons as well. If this is true, and I grant the need for further, open investigation, then the current administration is guilty of committing a massive fraud against the American people, as well as of murder on a massive scale, not only in Washington and New York but in Afghanistan and Iraq. Charges of treason would seem to be in order for whoever participated in this.

    Please don’t disregard this, but take a look at some the evidence first. There are undoubtedly some nuts out there retailing absurd conspiracy theories, but there are also rational invetigators, and a considerable body of evidence. Even the nutcases may be the natural consequence of the way in which the government has curtailed open and honest investigation; putative explanations which on close examination are full of discrepancies naturally lend themselve to the inspiration of wild and fantastic theories. The important thing is to get to the bottom of this soon,

    Your might start your reading with a book called “The New Pearl Harbor”, by David Griffin, which pulls together the results of research done by a number of other investigators. There are other books which you can find at your local library or on the internet, and of course there is quite a lot of discussion of this on the internet itself, although of course there you will need patience to separate the wheat from the chaff.

    In summary, if the Bush administration is complicit, then to a very large degree, the enemy really is in the White House.

    (And of course, the U.S. government has a long history of lying to the people, so don’t take their statements for granted-as Reagan said, “trust but verify”.

    Thanks for listening to this over-long post.

    Porter Barber

  • http://molly.douthett.net Molly

    Unfortunately, the written word has no vocal nuance. I did not mean to emphasize the word “you”; I meant to emphasize the word “criticize”. And don’t worry; I will be as critical of Bush as I have been the past four years although I don’t really consider it much fun. More deadly serious.

    On another note, my husband said that in the text of OBL’s messgage which he looked for on Al Jazeera this morning but could not find, OBL revealed his design to bankrupt America with our war against terrorism. With the huge deficit we are already running and the shortage of troops in Iraq, if this is truly OBL’s intention, I’d say he’s pretty much on track. IF this is the case, we are pretty much in the same shape as Israel after the death of Solomon.

    Impeachment will remove the king, but will do little to revoke the policies already in place. We are entering an even darker time.