Baby-boomers like myself who matured during the 1960's were the cause of, and witness to, a true cultural revolution. That period in our nation's history has proven over time to be second only to the social, political, and cultural upheaval that followed in the wake of the Civil War.

Coming out of the Eisenhower post-WWII era, where the cultural icons were the families in the sitcoms Father Knows Best and Leave it to Beaver, our Mom and apple pie world would be forever changed by two dynamic events. For my generation as a whole, the most important was the assassination of John F. Kennedy. We found it incomprehensible that the youthful charismatic leader of our country could be struck down in such a violent and terrible way. And it shattered the mythical idyllic world of the so-called Pax Americana of our childhood.

The second event which for the most part primarily impacted us Roman Catholics (nevertheless a very large segment of the population) was the Second Vatican Council. Much older and more entrenched than any government or political system, the Church had always been the immutable foundation of divine truth. Or so we were taught. But Pope John the XXIII, who was elected in 1958 and was intended to be a "caretaker" pope, stunned Catholics both clergy and laity with his convening of the Second Vatican Council in 1962. The changes that resulted from the Council overturned centuries-old traditions and practices within the Church.

While these two events may seem unrelated, they are in fact the bases of the cultural revolution of the 1960's which sparked a cultural war which continues to this day. They both resulted in the destruction of the belief in constants. And if both our secular and religious could be up-ended, then why not everything else we had been brought up to believe in?

And those twin sparks would be stoked into a roaring blaze by other events both foreign and domestic. Violence against the opponents of the war in Viet Nam and violence against the proponents of civil rights epitomized by the assassinations of Robert F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr., would lead to both a literal and figurative conflagration in America.

At the same time, a new morality, if you will, was taking shape. The reasoning for many was that if the pillars of our American way of life could be so easily shattered why not than all the other customs and mores we were taught to follow and believe in? And so began the other part of the 60's revolution...sex, drugs and rock n' roll. And the motto of the movement was: "If it feels good, do it."
And in that spirit, a key part of what makes our society function was negated, a sense of personal responsibility for our actions, and concomitantly, the lack of any consequences for our individual acts.

And as our generation gradually assumed leading roles in business, finance, politics, etc., that lack of a sense of personal responsibility would prove to have severe consequences for our nation for decades to come.

Who took responsibility for the disasters in Viet Nam? Who took responsibility for Watergate? Who took responsibility for Iraq? Who took responsibility for Enron? Who took responsibility for Abu Gharib? Who took responsibility for Guantanamo Bay? Who took responsibility for Katrina?

No one.

And if the leaders of our country can evade responsibility why not your average Joe or Jane? Just think about the everyday acts of incivility and minor lawlessness that we all experience from the driver cocooned in his car and acts as he pleases to the person on the express line with a cartful of groceries. I know these things seem petty in the great scheme of things. But personal responsibility must be all encompassing from the smallest misdemeanor to the greatest crime.

And the main reason these things continue to occur is because there are no consequences for our actions. From the president of the United States to the guy at the checkout, no one gets punished. The smallest are dismissed with a shrug and the greatest are dismissed with a committee. Both equally ineffective and threat-less.

And so it was with a profound sense of disbelief, I read and marvelled at the inanity and naivete of Nicholas Kristof's column in today's New York Times.

“There is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes,” Antonio Taguba, the retired major general who investigated abuses in Iraq, declares in a powerful new report on American torture from Physicians for Human Rights. “The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account.”

The first step of accountability isn’t prosecutions. Rather, we need a national Truth Commission to lead a process of soul searching and national cleansing"

"The Truth Commission investigating these issues ideally would be a non-partisan group heavily weighted with respected military and security officials, including generals, admirals and top intelligence figures. Such backgrounds would give their findings credibility across the political spectrum — and I don’t think they would pull punches. The military and intelligence officials I know are as appalled by our abuses as any other group, in part because they realize that if our people waterboard, then our people will also be waterboarded.

Both Barack Obama and John McCain should commit to impaneling a Truth Commission early in the next administration. This commission would issue a report to help us absorb the lessons of our failings, the better to avoid them during the next crisis."

Oh, Kristof's "Truth Commission" may get to the truth or partial truth or just dissemblance. But truth can never be achieved without consequences and Kristof has omitted that part of the equation.