When future historians write the history of the Iraq war, they will no doubt cite the speech of Pennsylvania Democratic Congressman, John Murtha, as a turning point.  An ardent and traditional military hawk, a defense specialist, Marine veteran, and traditional supporter of the President, Murtha two weeks ago called for the withdrawal of American forces from Iraq.  A loyal supporter of both the first Gulf War and of the invasion of Iraq under the present President, Murtha’s comments and his dismay about the war have been significant.  Many who had been sitting on the fence of criticism are now joining the call for withdrawal or a change in policy.  Actually, very few are calling for an immediate withdrawal, but the criticism of President Bush’s Iraq policy is mounting and it is having a significant effect.  In this perspective, I want to think with you about US/Iraq policy and bring some balance to the discussion.

• First, a word about President Bush’s leadership right now.  David Gergen, columnist for the US News and World Report, has written poignantly, “President Bush is now in a real mess—and he’s losing one of his most valuable assets for governing: public trust.  Recent polls show that more than half of the public no longer believes in his honesty and that some 57 percent believe the administration ‘deliberately misled people to make the case for war in Iraq.’  He cannot govern in this condition. . . .”  There is no question that the President must act soon to regain that commodity of trust.  Many have suggested candidly and wisely that the President should follow the example of former president Ronald Reagan.  He skillfully rebuilt his presidency after the disastrous Iran-contra scandal that nearly destroyed his ability to govern.  He spoke to the American people candidly and honestly about Iran-contra.  He reorganized his government, especially key advisors and Cabinet members, and opened up the government, providing documents and advisors to the Congress for investigation.  He worked hard to rebuild the trust and ended his presidency with the highest approval ratings of any retiring, two-term president.  President Bush must do something similar--and do it quickly.  The nation cannot afford three years of this kind of dysfunction.  My prayer is that the President will not maintain his “bunker mentality,” which could be fatal to his remaining years as president.  Listen to Gergen:  “The president’s remaining time in office is equal to the length of JFK’s entire presidency, plus four months.  Frankly, whether one is a Republican or Democrat, it would be unhealthy for the country to have a disabled president—and bitter, clawing opponents—for that long a time.”  I have always maintained great respect for President Bush and still have that.  However, no matter how one looks at it, he has lost the trust of the American people, and that distrust is growing.  No one can restore that but the President—and he must do so quickly and decisively.  While Democrats certainly deserve blame, it is the President who sets the tone of the nation and who is responsible for trust.  He alone must work to restore this or he cannot govern.  See Gergen’s editorial in US News and World Report (28 November 2005), p. 84.

• Second, a word about Murtha’s recommendation to pull out US troops from Iraq.  The debate has now changed!  It is no longer about how to prosecute the war, but how to leave Iraq!  In the debate in both the House and the Senate that followed Murtha’s speech, members of both parties argued degrees of dismay about Iraq.  Not one member of either chamber called for a more vigorous US military effort to win the war.  Politically, the debate now is over how best to get out.  Because he has credibility, Murtha touched the hearts of many in Congress and in the nation.  He makes weekly visits to Washington-area military hospitals.  He has seen firsthand the carnage the Iraq war has produced.  Criticism of Murtha cannot center on his patriotism, his military record or his integrity.  He is frustrated and sees no hope for our troops in Iraq.  So, his only option is withdrawal.  But I believe that would be unwise and disastrous.  The hard truth is that Murtha does not believe that the war against Islamic terror is the highest US national priority.  He sees Iraq as a sink hole draining the military of needed resources—both men and money.  As history will record Murtha’s speech as a turning point in the national debate over Iraq, I also believe that history will show his viewpoint is short-sighted.  Islamic terrorism is our highest national priority.  Al Qaeda sees Iraq the same way they saw the Soviet Union in Afghanistan during the 1980s.  They hope to bring down the US in Iraq the same way they brought down the USSR in Afghanistan.  Although I often disagree with him, Senator John McCain has gotten this one right!  He sees the Iraq situation and the war on Islamic terrorism in Iraq as the highest national priority.  He has even argued for more troops in Iraq to defeat this terrorist threat!  But he has no hope of ever getting that kind of policy supported.  Columnist Joe Klein has it right:  “The most passionate discussions in Washington [over the last two weeks] were about the past—whether the President intentionally misled the country into war—not the future.  They are a waste of time.  Two questions need to be addressed:  Will an American withdrawal from Iraq create more or less stability in the Middle East?  Will a withdrawal increase or decrease the threat of another terrorist attack at home?  It does not matter whether you believe the war was right or wrong.  If the answers to those questions are less stability and an empowered al Qaeda, we’d better think twice about slipping down this dangerous path.”  See Klein’s editorial in Time (28 November 2005), p. 29.

• Finally, despite these terribly significant issues, we must also keep the bigger picture in mind.  These positive developments are the facts:  Saddam Hussein is captured and on trial for war crimes.  His murderous two sons are dead.  Iraq has held free elections in which millions voted.  A new, democratic constitution has been adopted that contains an extensive bill of rights.  On 15 December 2005 Iraqis will elect their first parliament.  An independent judiciary exists in Iraq and almost all public schools are open.  Every hospital is functioning and oil sales have increased markedly.  Islamic terrorism is failing, in that it could not stop free elections.  It has not prevented Iraqi leaders from taking office.  It has not closed hospitals or schools.  It has not prevented the emergence of a free press that now involves over 170 newspapers of every political opinion.  As James Q. Wilson has written, “The progress of democracy and reconstruction has occurred faster in Iraq than it did in Germany 60 years ago, even though we have far fewer troops in the Middle East than we did in Germany after Hitler was defeated.”  Further, we must remember what has occurred in other Middle Eastern nations:  Libya has renounced nuclear weapons.  Syria has pulled out of Lebanon.  Afghanistan has produced a democratic government and economic progress for its people.  Egypt has had the beginnings of a democracy as well.  Wilson comments, “We have created a balance of power in the Middle East in which no regime can easily threaten any other.”  These are a few of the positive consequences of our war against international, Islamic terrorism.  We cannot ignore these and each one makes the American cost—in terms of lives and treasure—worth it.  See Wilson’s essay in the Wall Street Journal (26-27 November 2005).

As a nation, we are nearing the deadline for signing up for the full drug benefit passed by Congress nearly two years ago.  It adds a drug benefit for the 42 million Medicare beneficiaries.  The most difficult and controversial portion of the benefit is the so-called “donut hole” coverage it provides.  Let me explain:

Hollywood recently released its newest bio motion picture—“Walk the Line”—after last year’s “Ray.”  The former is a movie based on the life of Johnny Cash, while the latter was one based on Ray Charles.  “Walk The Line” tells a redemptive story, but it stops short of telling the whole story.  Let me explain.

The movie records the powerful story of singer Johnny Cash and his incredible rise in popularity but his equally self-destructive personal behavior.  The movie powerfully recounts the various influences on his life:  Cash’s older brother who died in childhood, his abusive father and a spiritual mother who influenced his love of hymns.  The movie recounts Cash’s first marriage and his life as a salesman.  But as he transitions to a new career—as a unique rock and roll singer—his tours take him away from home.  His marriage and family life suffer.  His life of alcohol, drugs and other women destroys his marriage and his life.  He meets June Carter, a fellow performer.  Recently divorced, Carter resists initially Cash’s advances, and marries someone else.  But Cash and Carter violate their marriage vows and begin sleeping together.  Initially, fearing any kind of commitment to a drug-addicted musician, Carter refuses Cash’s marriage proposals.  But, finally, they do marry.

What this well-done film omits is the stunning transformation of Johnny Cash resulting from his conversion to Christianity.  The film ignores the total life change that Jesus Christ brings to Johnny Cash.  One reviewer has written, “Rather than watching a story of the power of redemption, we mostly see a film about the destructiveness of sin, and of marital unfaithfulness.  In that, we learn little that we haven’t seen in numerous other films about troubled souls who find solace and peace in each other’s arms.”  The movie ends with suggestions from the lips of June Carter that God is giving Johnny “a second chance;” but that’s it!!  The beautiful story of God’s transforming grace and the power of that transformation are absent from the film. 

In short, this is the tragic shortcoming of what will probably be an Oscar-nominating performance for Joaquin Phoenix, who plays Cash, and for Reese Witherspoon, who plays June Carter.  You cannot tell the whole story of Johnny Cash if you leave out the full story of his conversion to Jesus Christ.  Jesus changed Johnny Cash and he is now in heaven because of that transformation.  Hollywood almost got it right with this new movie, but as usual it is what Hollywood leaves out that is most important.  That is the tragedy of this movie.

See Christian Hamaker’s review of the film in Crosswalk.com.