Category Archives: Obama administration

Social Security Cuts Straight Ahead

04 Sunday Jul 2010

Posted by in budget, Congress, economy, Obama, Obama administration, Politics, Wall Street

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Reading the road signs along the highway that leads to cutting or privatizing Social Security:

In December Blue Dog Jim Cooper, said a report which showed “that the governments unfunded liabilities are roughly $56 trillion” was “shocking.”  He called for a commission to address it.”

In January the White House signed on:

“[President] Obama said that he has made clear to his advisers that some of the difficult choices–particularly in regards to entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare – should be made on his watch. “We’ve kicked this can down the road and now we are at the end of the road,” he said.”

In February, Jane Hamsher at Firedog lake reported that:

“…people who have been briefed on the administration’s plans indicate that things like raising the retirement age and cutting benefits are under consideration.”

The president then packed the Debt Commission “with members who have an overwhelming history of support for both benefit cuts and privatization of Social Security.”

Among those are the chairman of the commission, Erskine Bowles, who sits on the board at Morgan Stanley, and whose wife sits on the board at JPMorgan Chase. Can you say conflict of interest? Seems to me both those firms stand to benefit handsomely if Wall Street gets its grubby fingers in the Social Security trust fund.

The rules are that the commission recommendation must be approves by 14 of the 18 members:

“There are certainly enough votes on the right to block any significant tax increase proposals. There certainly aren’t enough votes anywhere to propose deep spending cuts in the bloated military budget. The only real question is whether there are five votes — enough to block passage — against cutting social programs, particularly Social Security.”

And in what’s becoming a pattern in this administration, much of the commission’s work is behind closed doors. Openness and transparency, anyone?

Then last Thursday Speaker Pelosi, under the cover of funding for Afghanistan, sneaked in language calling for an up or down vote on the commission’s recommendation, by a lame duck Congress in December.

Now comes this from Crooks and Liars:

“It’s a cynical political strategy almost beyond belief, but it’s becoming obvious that President Obama and the Democratic leaders plan to let the Republicans do what they’ve tried to do since the days of FDR: Cut Social Security.

[…]

When I wrote about this last week, some readers insisted it would “never” happen, and questioned whether there was any logical reason Obama would support benefit cuts. So I talked to a couple of D.C. Social Security activists this week and posed that very question. I was told that Obama’s reelection strategy was based on allowing Social Security cuts to win over independent voters. (Apparently it polls well with the Tea Party crowd.)”

[…]

Now, seriously. How can any intelligent person convince themselves that the Obama administration isn’t backing this? The commission is stacked with deficit hawks; the national deficit is on track to be more fiscally sound if they let the Bush tax cuts expire; and Social Security, which is a tax-transfer program, doesn’t have a damned thing to do with the deficit.”

One solution I don’t see from the Debt Commission—lifting the Social Security earnings cap. According to John Irons of the Economic Policy Institute, “eliminating the cap on taxable earnings would be sufficient to fully close the projected shortfall.”

And it would only affect about 6% of the population. But then again, those are the 6% who sit on these useless (for everyone but the elites) bi-partisan commissions and who write large checks to those in Congress who vote on their recommendations.

Obstructionist Republicans and Gullible Democrats

30 Wednesday Jun 2010

Posted by in Congress, Democrats, economy, financial reform, financial regulation, Obama administration, Politics, Republicans, special interests, Wall Street

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Scott Brown is a quick learner. In his short time in the Senate he’s become a master at the game of ‘How To String Along The Gullible Democrat’ aka Lucy and the Football.

Here’s how it goes: Obstructionist Republican says, “I would vote for this particular piece of legislation except for X.” Gullible Democrat believes Obstructionist Republican (although for the life of me I can’t figure out why) and changes or takes out X. Obstructionist Republican then says, “That’s all well and good, but I also don’t like Y. If you take that out too, I may vote for said legislation.” Gullible Democrat removes Y, and the process repeat itself over and over until said legislation is either dead or too weak to do anything remotely resembling its original intention.

The latest example is the so-called financial reform bill. Brown wanted a loophole in the Volcker Rule to exempt banks in Massachusetts from being subject to limits on risky investments. With the help of Barney Frank and (surprise!)  the Treasury Department, the loophole was inserted into the legislation. (BTW, also at the insistence of Senator Brown, another loophole was added to the Volcker Rule which may delay its implementation until 2022.)

Brown’s objection to the bill then shifted to a $19 billion fee to be collected from large financial institutions, calling it a “tax.” I’m sure Brown’s opposition has absolutely nothing to do with the $450,000 he received from executives at financial institutions in the six days before the election in Massachusetts. Strictly coincidence..

Guess what? The bank fee is out now, too

“Top Democratic House and Senate negotiators who worked out a deal on a sweeping overhaul of financial regulations regrouped Tuesday to eliminate a $19 billion fee on banks that had threatened to derail the legislation.”

Brown wasn’t alone. He had two other Lucies standing with him:

“Besides Brown, Republican Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine, both of whom also voted for the Senate bill last month, said they, too, had qualms about the bank assessment that negotiators inserted into the bill last week.”

I guess the only alternative to the Democrats being gullible and naive is that they are complicit and corrupt. That they don’t really want actual reform and are just using the guise of compromising with the Republicans to play their favorite game—giving the appearance of doing something while in reality doing nothing which might upset the goose that lays the golden eggs of campaign contributions.

Gullible and naive or complicit and corrupt? Either way it doesn’t bode well for the future of the Republic.

Operation Enduring Insanity

28 Monday Jun 2010

Posted by in Afghanistan, Obama administration, Pakistan, Politics, terrorism, war on terror

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

CIA Director Leon Panetta appeared on ABC’s This Week yesterday, where he laid out some of the “problems” we face in Afghanistan along with our “fundamental purpose” there and what “winning” might look like. From Think Progress:

Too bad most, if not all, of what Panetta describes is not based in reality.

“There are some serious problems here. We’re dealing with a tribal society. We’re dealing with a country that has problems with governance, problems with corruption, problems with narcotics trafficking, problems with a Taliban insurgency.”

We’re dealing with a country that isn’t a country. Afghanistan combat veteran Wes Moore was on Meet the Press yesterday where he gave this account:

“…one of the things we did–I was with a team in Afghanistan, you go out and you give out gifts to people. And one of the things that we would, we would give out to some of the tribal leaders were cutout–were maps, which were cutouts of Afghanistan.  And literally, the most popular question was, “What is this?” And we’d say, “It’s your country.”

Problems with governance, corruption, and narcotics trafficking? The problem is that the Karzai government and his family are at the root of the corruption and narcotics trafficking. From stealing last year’s election, to his brother’s (alleged) involvement in the heroin trade, to the same brother awarding security sub-contracts to a company owned by 2 of Karzai’a cousins, to this:

“In recent months…Afghan prosecutors and investigators have been ordered to cross names off case files, prevent senior officials from being placed under arrest and disregard evidence against executives of a major financial firm suspected of helping the nation’s elite move millions of dollars overseas.

Afghanistan is awash in international aid and regarded as one of the most corrupt countries in the world. Indeed, even as the United States and its allies pour money in, U.S. officials estimate that as much as $1 billion a year is flowing out as part of a massive cash exodus.

The money, as first reported in The Washington Post in February, is often carried out in full view of customs officials at Kabul’s airport, where such transfers are legal as long as they are declared. Officials suspect much of the cash is going to the Persian Gulf emirate of Dubai, where elite Afghans, including Karzai’s older brother, have villas.”

How do we on the one hand acknowledge that government corruption is a major problem while we continue to prop up the government and the president that is hip-deep in corruption?

Back to Panetta: “But I think the fundamental key, the key to success or failure is whether the Afghans accept responsibility, are able to deploy an effective army and police force to maintain stability. If they can do that, then I think we’re going to be able to achieve the kind of progress and the kind of stability that the president is after…it is going to take the Afghan army and police to be able to accept the responsibility that we pass on to them. That’s going to be the key. ”

The size of the Afghan security forces our generals say are needed to provide that stability, about 450.000, would cost about $3 billion a year to maintain. The annual budget of Afghanistan is $600 million. They can’t do it. Care to guess who will be expected to pick up the tab?

Panetta’s definition of “winning”:

“Winning in Afghanistan is having a country that is stable enough to ensure that there is no safe haven for Al Qaida or for a militant Taliban that welcomes Al Qaida…Our purpose, our whole mission there is to make sure that Al Qaida never finds another safe haven from which to attack this country. That’s the fundamental goal of why the United States is there.”

Earlier in the interview Panetta admitted that there are only 50 to 100 members of al Qaeda in Afghanistan, “maybe less.”

Emptywheel has it exactly right:

“So 1,000 US troops per al Qaeda member, at a cost of $1 million each. That’s $1 billion a year we spend for each al Qaeda member to fight our war in Afghanistan.

This sort of adds a new twist to that old Einstein quip about the definition of insanity being doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Because we’re doing the same thing over and over again–at a cost of $1 billion a year per nominal opponent–and expecting anything other than bankruptcy.”

It all comes down to this, from a McClatchy article about Iraq but it applies to Afghanistan as well:

“…a nearly inviolable rule governs this arena: Democracy cannot be imposed on any nation unless its people and its leaders all are asking for it. Otherwise the nation’s oligarchy will fight to restore the old order of things, to protect their positions and perquisites. It happens every time.”

The Afghan Protection Racket

23 Wednesday Jun 2010

Posted by in Afghanistan, Obama administration, Politics, terrorism, war on terror

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

I thought part of the strategy of counterinsurgency in Afghanistan was to stop corruption by officials in the Karzai government, not become an active participant in it. Turns out I was wrong, there’s a Mafia-style protection racket going on there, funded by you and me, which even includes payments to our supposed enemies–-the Taliban. And of course, Hamid Karzai and some more of his crooked relatives have their hands in the pie as well. What a surprise:

“The U.S. military is funding a massive protection racket in Afghanistan, indirectly paying tens of millions of dollars to warlords, corrupt public officials and the Taliban to ensure safe passage of its supply convoys throughout the country, according to congressional investigators.

The security arrangements, part of a $2.16 billion transport contract, violate laws on the use of private contractors, as well as Defense Department regulations, and “dramatically undermine” larger U.S. objectives of curtailing corruption and strengthening effective governance in Afghanistan, a report released late Monday said.”

Not that any of this is news to the DOD:

“The report describes a Defense Department that is well aware that some of the money paid to contractors winds up in the hands of warlords and insurgents.”

What do they care, it’s our money, and there’s always plenty more where that came from.

“In testimony shortly after Obama’s strategy announcement, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said that “much of the corruption” in Afghanistan has been fueled by billions of dollars’ worth of foreign money spent there, “and one of the major sources of funding for the Taliban is the protection money.”

It must have been a momentary case of amnesia that caused Secretary Clinton to neglect to mention that the US happens to be a major source of that “foreign money.” Just an unintentional oversight, I’m sure.

But not to worry, this is what Gen. McChrystal calls “entrepreneurship.”

“Unlike in the Iraq war, the security and vast majority of the trucks are provided by Afghans, a difference that Army Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, has praised as promoting local entrepreneurship.”

And wherever there’s corruption the Karzai-leone crime family can’t be far behind:

“The report describes a system in which subcontractors — most of them well-known warlords who maintain their own militias — charge $1,500 to $15,000 per truck to supply guards and help secure safe passage through territory they control. The most powerful of them, known as Commander Ruhullah, controls passage along Highway One, the principal route between Kabul and Kandahar, under the auspices of Watan Risk Management, a company owned by two of Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s cousins.

Overall management of who wins the security subcontracts, it said, is often controlled by local political powerbrokers such as Karzai’s half brother, Ahmed Wali Karzai, head of the Kandahar provincial council.”

The Afghan warlords, the Taliban, and the Karzai family would like to express their appreciation to the American taxpayers for their continued support. And they hope we hang around another 10 or 20 years.

Supremes Refuse to Hear Torture Appeal

15 Tuesday Jun 2010

Posted by in Bill of Rights, Constitution, Justice Department, Obama administration, Supreme Court, terrorism, torture, war on terror

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

That old-fashioned notion of equal justice under the law was dealt another blow by the Supreme Court yesterday as they refused to hear the appeal of Maher Arar, a Canadian citizen who was detained, tortured, and imprisoned for over a year, without charges, because he was labeled an “al-Qaeda suspect” by the Bush administration. And in what is become an all too familiar occurrence:

“…the Obama administration chose to come to the defense of Bush administration officials, arguing that even if they conspired to send Maher Arar to torture, they should not be held accountable by the judiciary.”

Have to look forward, dontcha know. Mother Jones has a synopsis of Mr. Arar’s ordeal:

“On Sept. 26, 2002, Arar was detained by American authorities during a layover at New York’s John F. Kennedy airport. He was interrogated. Less than two weeks later, he shackled and hooded and placed on a plane bound for Jordan. Once in Jordan, he was transferred overland to Syria. While in Syria, Arar was tortured at the behest of the American government, according to a 1,200-page report released by a Canadian government inquiry that concluded up in 2006.

Here’s how Arar describes a few of his first days in Syria:

Early in the morning on October 10 Arar is taken downstairs to a basement. The guard opens the door and Arar sees for the first time the cell he will live in for the following ten months and ten days.

It is three feet wide, six feet deep and seven feet high. It has a metal door, with a small opening which does not let in light because of a piece of metal on the outside for sliding things into the cell. There is a one by two foot opening in the ceiling with iron bars. This opening is below another ceiling and lets in just a tiny shaft of light. Cats urinate through the ceiling traps of these cells, often onto the prisoners. Rats wander there too.

Early the next morning Arar is taken upstairs for intense interrogation. He is beaten on his palms, wrists, lower back and hips with a shredded black electrical cable which is about two inches in diameter.

The next day Arar is interrogated and beaten on and off for eighteen hours. Arar begs them to stop. He is asked if he received military training in Afghanistan, and he falsely confesses and says yes [another testimony to the effectiveness of “enhanced interrogation techniques”]. This is the first time Arar is ever questioned about Afghanistan. They ask at which camp, and provide him with a list, and he picks one of the camps listed.

In October 2003—more than a year after he had been sent to Syria—Arar was finally returned to Canada. He was never charged with a crime.”

And for this no one will be held accountable. But hey, at least the DOJ has their priorities straight. A federal prosecutor is investigating allegations of blood doping in the Tour de France.

America’s Longest War Drags On, and On, and On, and….

11 Friday Jun 2010

Posted by in Afghanistan, Obama administration, Politics, war on terror

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

As America’s longest war drags on, and on, and on…. the two operative phrases seem to be “ still a long way to go” and “taking longer than expected.” In Marjah (McChrystal’s “bleeding ulcer”):

“Residents of this onetime Taliban sanctuary see signs that the insurgents have regained momentum in recent weeks, despite early claims of success by U.S. Marines. The longer-than-expected effort to secure Marja is prompting alarm among top American commanders that they will not be able to change the course of the war in the time President Obama has given them.”

In the time President Obama has given them or ever, it appears.

“We’ve come a long way,” said Lt. Col. Cal Worth, the commander of one of the two Marine infantry battalions in Marja. “But there’s still a long way to go.”

In Kandahar:

“On Thursday, during a visit to NATO headquarters here, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal admitted that preparations for perhaps the most critical operation of the war — the campaign to take control of Kandahar, the Taliban’s birthplace — weren’t going as planned. He said winning support from local leaders, some of whom see the Taliban fighters not as oppressors but as their Muslim brothers, was proving tougher than expected. The military side of the campaign, originally scheduled to surge in June and finish by August, is now likely to extend into the fall.”

There’s also some backpedaling on the importance of Kandahar:

“In March, Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the U.S. military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, described Kandahar as Afghanistan’s “center of gravity” and the key to reversing the Taliban’s momentum this year, Obama’s goal when he ordered the troop surge in December.

But Gates on Wednesday made clear he believed Kandahar was one part of the equation.

“Kandahar and Helmand are important but they are not the only provinces in Afghanistan that matter in terms of the outcome of this struggle,” he said.”

“Only one part of the equation?” Derrick Crowe at Newshoggers has this chart from the Pentagon’s most recent Afghanistan report to Congress:


So which is it? Meanwhile the casualties mount, 23 Americans killed so far this month. And suicide and attempted suicide rates in every branch of the military are at all-time highs.

How much longer? How much more blood and treasure are we going to pour into this Graveyard of Empires? How long before we realize that this country that’s not really a country but just an area on the map with lines drawn around it is an unwinnable, unfixable quagmire? How long before we stop repeating history and learn from it?

Nobody seems to know.

Frank and Dodd Set to Serve Their Corporate Masters

10 Thursday Jun 2010

Posted by in Congress, Democrats, economy, financial reform, financial regulation, Obama administration, Politics, special interests, Wall Street

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

With the conference committee set to start meeting today to come up with a final version of financial reform legislation, the finance industry whores on the committee (aka Barney Frank and Chris Dodd) are doing their best to backpedal on Blanche Lincoln’s provision to force the big banks to spin off their derivatives operations.

“Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd [$3.1 million from Finance Industry PACs], a skeptic on the Lincoln plan, called it a “strong provision” and said she “was on the right track.” He did not, however, agree with his Democratic colleagues Wednesday who said Lincoln’s election win would make it harder to eliminate the provision.

And Frank [$2.3 million], who is chairing the conference committee, gave no indication Wednesday of where he intended to steer the House-Senate conference on the issue.”

No big surprise here either:

“The plan faces opposition from the administration, the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve.”

Change you can believe in.

Peeling Back the Layers of the Deepwater Horizon Onion

10 Thursday Jun 2010

Posted by in BP, Deepwater Horizon, Energy, Environment, Gulf Oil Spill, Obama administration, oil exploration, Politics

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Being a long-time fan of Seinfeld, I kind of relate things and events to memorable episodes and lines from that show. As more light continues to be shed on the ongoing  Deepwater Horizon catastrophe in Gulf of Mexico, it brings to mind the episode where George leaves the running tape recorder inside the brief case after he exits the board room. The quote is, “this thing is like an onion, the more layers you peel back the more it stinks.”

A lengthy piece  in Rolling Stone by Tim Dickinson entitled, “The Spill, The Scandal, and the President” peels back several layers of this onion. And it stinks to high heaven. It’s the kind of investigative journalism we used to get from the Washington Post during the Watergate era but is rarely seen in major news sources any more. Here are a few excerpts, but please read the entire article:

“…the disaster in the Gulf was preceded by ample warnings – yet the [Obama] administration had ignored them. Instead of cracking down on MMS, as he had vowed to do even before taking office, Obama left in place many of the top officials who oversaw the agency’s culture of corruption. He permitted it to rubber-stamp dangerous drilling operations by BP – a firm with the worst safety record of any oil company – with virtually no environmental safeguards, using industry-friendly regulations drafted during the Bush years.

[…]

Most troubling of all, the government has allowed BP to continue deep-sea production at its Atlantis rig – one of the world’s largest oil platforms. Capable of drawing 200,000 barrels a day from the seafloor, Atlantis is located only 150 miles off the coast of Louisiana, in waters nearly 2,000 feet deeper than BP drilled at Deepwater Horizon.

According to congressional documents, the platform lacks required engineering certification for as much as 90 percent of its subsea components – a flaw that internal BP documents reveal could lead to “catastrophic” errors. In a May 19th letter to [Interior Secretary Ken] Salazar, 26 congressmen called for the rig to be shut down immediately. “We are very concerned,” they wrote, “that the tragedy at Deepwater Horizon could foreshadow an accident at BP Atlantis.”

The administration’s response to the looming threat? According to an e-mail to a congressional aide from a staff member at MMS, the agency has had “zero contact” with Atlantis about its safety risks since the Deepwater rig went down.

[…]

The tale of the Deepwater Horizon disaster is, at its core, the tale of two blowout preventers: one mechanical, one regulatory. The regulatory blowout preventer failed long before BP ever started to drill – precisely because Salazar kept in place the crooked environmental guidelines the Bush administration implemented to favor the oil industry.

[…]

Nowhere was the absurdity of the policy more evident than in the application that BP submitted for its Deepwater Horizon well only two months after Obama took office. BP claims that a spill is “unlikely” and states that it anticipates “no adverse impacts” to endangered wildlife or fisheries. Should a spill occur, it says, “no significant adverse impacts are expected” for the region’s beaches, wetlands and coastal nesting birds. The company, noting that such elements are “not required” as part of the application, contains no scenario for a potential blowout, and no site-specific plan to respond to a spill.

Instead, it cites an Oil Spill Response Plan that it had prepared for the entire Gulf region. Among the sensitive species BP anticipates protecting in the semitropical Gulf? “Walruses” and other cold-water mammals, including sea otters and sea lions. The mistake appears to be the result of a sloppy cut-and-paste job from BP’s drilling plans for the Arctic.

Even worse: Among the “primary equipment providers” for “rapid deployment of spill response resources,” BP inexplicably provides the Web address of a Japanese home-shopping network. Such glaring errors expose the 582-page response “plan” as nothing more than a paperwork exercise. “It was clear that nobody read it,” says Ruch, who represents government scientists.

“This response plan is not worth the paper it is written on,” said Rick Steiner, a retired professor of marine science at the University of Alaska who helped lead the scientific response to the Valdez disaster. “Incredibly, this voluminous document never once discusses how to stop a deepwater blowout.”

The article goes on to expose the incompetence at every level of the government bureaucracy and the money-saving, corner-cutting practices of BP which put profits over people, like this about the Texas City explosion (emphasis added) :

“In 2005, 15 workers were killed and 170 injured after a tower filled with gasoline exploded at a BP refinery in Texas. Investigators found that the company had flouted its own safety procedures and illegally shut off a warning system before the blast.

An internal cost-benefit analysis conducted by BP – explicitly based on the children’s tale The Three Little Pigs – revealed that the oil giant had considered making buildings at the refinery blast-resistant to protect its workers (the pigs) from an explosion (the wolf). BP knew lives were on the line: “If the wolf blows down the house, the piggy is gobbled.” But the company determined it would be cheaper to simply pay off the families of dead pigs.”

Despicable. I need a shower.

I Read the News Today, Oh Boy

19 Wednesday May 2010

Posted by in Afghanistan, BP, Clinton, Congress, Deepwater Horizon, Energy, Environment, Gulf Oil Spill, Obama administration, oil exploration, Politics

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I read the news today:

Arlen Specter switched parties because he couldn’t win the Republican primary, now he loses the Democratic primary to Joe Sestak. This just in Arlen, it’s not about party this year, the key word is “incumbent.” You’re 80 years old, you’ve been in the Senate for 30 years. Your time is up.

Mitch McConnell’s hand-picked candidate to succeed Jim Bunning got smoked by Tea Party favorite Rand Paul in the Republican senatorial primary in Kentucky. Once again, connections to the party establishment, regardless of which party, is the kiss of death this election season.

The latest example of why the anti-incumbent mood exists. Eight-term Congressman Mark Souder announced his resignation after an affair with one of his staffers was exposed.

I defer to the experts on the Gulf oil spill, but this smells like a cover-up to me:

“The Obama administration is actively trying to dismiss media reports that vast plumes of oil lurk beneath the surface of the Gulf of Mexico, unmeasured and uncharted.

But the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, whose job it is to assess and track the damage being caused by the BP oil spill that began four weeks ago, is only monitoring what’s visible — the slick on the Gulf’s surface — and currently does not have a single research vessel taking measurements below.”

As does this:

“BP, the company in charge of the rig that exploded last month in the Gulf of Mexico, hasn’t publicly divulged the results of tests on the extent of workers’ exposure to evaporating oil or from the burning of crude over the gulf, even though researchers say that data is crucial in determining whether the conditions are safe.

Moreover, the company isn’t monitoring the extent of the spill and only reluctantly released videos of the spill site that could give scientists a clue to the amount of the oil in gulf.”

Also on the spill:

“Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano acknowledged Monday that the federal government doesn’t have the resources or expertise to deal with an oil spill 5,000 feet below the sea, and must largely depend on oil companies to deal with an incident of such magnitude.”

So if the government agencies don’t have the “resources or expertise” to deal with the consequences of offshore drilling, why do they permit it to take place and just trust that the oil companies will be to “deal with an incident of such magnitude?” Sounds to me like expecting the arsonist to help put out the fire.

And finally, a grim milestone in Afghanistan.

“On Tuesday, the toll of American dead in Afghanistan passed 1,000, after a suicide bomb in Kabul killed at least five United States service members. Having taken nearly seven years to reach the first 500 dead, the war killed the second 500 in fewer than two.”

This following General McChrystal’s assessment that “nobody is winning” in Afghanistan and Secretary of State Clinton’s pledge to Hamid Karzai of “a long-term U.S. commitment” there.

Oh boy.

“Modernizing Miranda” by Gutting the Sixth Amendment

15 Saturday May 2010

Posted by in Bill of Rights, Constitution, George W. Bush, Justice Department, Obama, Obama administration, Politics, terrorism, war on terror

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

It’s becoming clearer what Attorney General Eric Holder meant when he spoke of the need to “modernize” Miranda. (Even though he also said that “giving Miranda warnings has not had a negative impact on our ability to obtain information from terrorism suspects” ). According to this latest proposal under consideration by the Obama administration, such a “modernization” includes doing away with the Sixth Amendment rights to a speedy trial and to counsel.

“President Obama’s legal advisers are considering asking Congress to allow the government to detain terrorism suspects longer after their arrests before presenting them to a judge for an initial hearing, according to administration officials familiar with the discussions.

If approved, the idea to delay hearings would be attached to broader legislation to allow interrogators to withhold Miranda warnings from terrorism suspects for lengthy periods, as Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. proposed last week.

The goal of both measures would be to open a window of time after an arrest in which interrogators could question a terrorism suspect without an interruption that might cause the prisoner to stop talking. It is not clear how long of a delay the administration is considering seeking.”

President Obama has been criticized by civil libertarians in the past for continuing the policies of the Bush administration. This one goes further, it’s beyond Bush:

“Anthony Romero, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, assailed the Obama administration for considering such ideas. He noted that the administration of President George W. Bush, which was heavily criticized by civil-liberties groups, never proposed such modifications to criminal procedures.”

Marcy Wheeler points out how this denies the accused of their right to counsel:

“The way it works…is you’re arrested and you’re brought before the judge (either to be charged or arraigned) and if you don’t have a lawyer, the judge makes sure you have one.

[…]

“[T]he Administration wants to “modernize” Miranda. They want to postpone bringing alleged terrorists before a Court (though it’s not clear why). Are they, by delaying court appearances, trying to at the same time delay the time when alleged terrorists get assigned lawyers? Are they trying to dissuade alleged terrorists from having lawyers?”

And Jeralyn at Talk Left warns of the slippery slope:

“Taking rights taken from terror suspects today just makes it easier to take them from all of us tomorrow. It’s ironic that this is one right even the Bush Administration didn’t try and tinker with, and its our Democratic president showing so little respect for the rule of law.”

More constitutional rights and protections bite the dust in the course of carrying out the “war on terror.” But hey, whatever it takes to keep us safe, right President Bush Obama?