Why does the Wall Street Journal Hate America?

Scott Horton questions the WSJ’s respect for “the men and women in uniform who run [America’s] military justice system” (Harper’s). Horton summarizes three broad issues related to the military tribunals in light of the Hamdan case: (1) timing, (2) political manipulation and (3) upholding military legal traditions. And he bolsters his argument by noting that a significant number of military lawyers questioned the military tribunal system as devised by the Bush administration.

All true. However, Horton over-stretches. Just because the WSJ criticizes a position that Horton holds, and happens to share with military lawyers, does not mean that the WSJ hates America. But then again, that’s Horton’s point – to demonstrate the bizarre logic employed by those who are quick to label others as America haters.

I find the WSJ’s strawman of “lawyers” against the military justice system rather disturbing. Obviously, there is no monolithic group of bloodsucking lawyers, who gain up to undermine American justice. Creating a fictitious adversary sure makes it easier to tear them down. However, this strawman disregards the actual principles in question, namely those of Anglo-American judicial values. Hopefully, the WSJ does not believe that we should readily dispense with these values for the sake of expediency.