How can Democrats criticize Bush for Guantánamo, when they can't even justify why their leaders did worse?

Question

The Mormons must be treated as enemies/Executive Order 44/extermination order"Martin Van Buren (D)1837 to 1841
45,000 American Indians were relocated to the West during AndrewJackson's (D) 1829-1837administration, who sent federal troops to round up about 17,000 Cherokees in camps before being sent to the West. Most of the deaths occurred from disease in these camps.
James k. Polk(D)During the short but furious fighting, Houston was wounded in the left ankle and Santa Anna escaped. In 18 minutes of combat, the Texan army had won, killing about 630 Mexican soldiers, wounding 208 and taking 730 prisoners.
Franklin Roosevelt (D) signed and order that allowed him to detain Japanese Americans, as well as thousands of Italian and German Americans, and send to relocation camps

Answer 1

they are the ultimate hypocrites. they will do anything for political gain.

Answer 2

There are several points here.
1. People can criticize their leaders in this country anytime they feel their leaders have done something wrong. Being a member of a party does not imply an obligation for agreement with every action by every other member. God help us if it did. All of these men were criticized for their actions at the time and after the fact both by their own party and by their opponents.
2. The goals and ideology of the parties have changed dramatically over the years. In many cases the people who identify with the republican party of today would have violently opposed it 100 years ago.
3. I don't see the connection about the Battle of San Jacinto. Polk wasn't President when that happened and it had little to do with the United States or any political party. Polk was actually considered a pretty decent president. He expanded the country in most cases without violence and achieved most of the goals he promised and retired early after he did it.
4. Its easy to condemn people for things done years ago by our standards now. But not really very fair. Jackson did practice a pretty severely heavy handed policy with the Native Americans. But, consider his position. Every time the Indians massacred a group of citizens he was held to account. The Indians were not all peace and roses. They had a well earned warrior tradition and were pretty violent on their own account on many occasions. Now we regret what we did but at the time Americans were dieing and a president took action. Isn't that why people support Bush?

However you want to view it, you know that torture is wrong or you wouldn't be looking for a justification for it in the distant past. And it is wrong by our present standards not the ones we will use in 100 years.

Answer 3

Just took an America History Class, huh?? Well yes that is all true, but If you take a class in American Government, you will see that the Old Democrats were the conservative party back then. It was the Dixiecrats that later became Republicans and then assumed the conservative mantle. So all the democrats you sighted from 100+ years ago, today would be Republicans
But if you really want me to answer your question on why things like Guantanamo are so harmful today then here it goes.
Raymond Aron, political theorist and historian wrote about America’s role in his book Imperial Republic, and he stated:

“The national interest of the United states..will not win over any state or arouse any sentiment of loyalty unless it appears jointly liable for an international order, an order of power as well as law..In the twentieth century the strength of a great power is diminished if it ceases to serve an idea.”

Twice in our history we have been able to do this with universal positive effect. In 1776 America defined the very meaning of Freedom. Then again in the 20th century America became the principle defender of Democracy against totalitarianism. Today America needs to, once again, identify itself with the quest for universal human dignity, a dignity that embodies both freedom and democracy, but also implies respect for cultural diversity and recognizes that persisting injustices in the human condition must be remedied.
You see when we ended up on the "Throne" as the Sole global superpower in 1992, it was seen by the rest of the world as our rightful place. SInce coming of age we have been that "Shining City on the Hill" and we must lead by example or run the risk of being perceived as a usurper and everything that the world thought we stood for was a lie. We cannot tell terrorists and other you can't torture and then turn around and do it ourselves.

Answer 4

I'm a Rep' But some of the events were justifiable at the time. yes Andrew Jackson sent them west Reason they fight against us twice siding with Brits with the Cherokees were thousands of black slaves they had! Read "in defense of interment"

Answer 5

You must be kidding. These events occurred 165 years ago, and Democrats you're referring to died 125 years ago. By the same reasoning, US southerners, who are now Republicans, are responsible for all of the evils of slavery.

And to answer your question, anyone, Democrat or Republican, is qualified to speak up on behalf of human rights and the US constitution.

Answer 6

Yes, those people did the same thing. Generations ago.

How does one person acting in a way contrary to the intent of the Constitution make it acceptable for someone else to do the same thing? One wrong does not justify another wrong.

And the Korematsu decision by the Supreme Court is a travesty of justice -- one of the darkest points in the history of the Bench.

Answer 7

The Democrats and the Republicans are both little more than scum who represent the interests and financial well-being of the wealthy elite. In fact, they work in concert to promote those interests even when it requires criminal acts. "Impeachment is off the table" by Nancy Pelosi in reference to the worst criminal president in our nation's history comes immediately to mind.

What we need is a rebellion of the underclass where the wealthy elite are overthrown and the interests of the working class become paramount. Such a movement is called socialism.

Here's Albert Einstein on "Why Socialism"
http://www.monthlyreview.org/598einst.htm

Answer 8

While I appreciate all of the research you must have done on this subject, I don't see the connection. There is a difference between current torture tactics and detaining prisoners illegally.

Answer 9

I think the past events are awful. I don't understand why we should continue such treatment in 2007.

Answer 10

could you imagine if Bush spoonfed the press what they could and couldn't say..like FDR did with his War Information Office?

Answer 11

Well since I didn't commit any of those crimes, vote for or support the people who did commit them I don't see why I can't criticize the president when he does something evil... I don't get your point.