Category Archives: Politics

Cheney: No Room for Colin Powell in GOP

11 Monday May 2009

Posted by in Obama, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

It appears that Colin Powell has committed the unpardonable sin in the Republican Party, he dared to speak critically of Rush the Great. Thirty-five years of military service, National Security Advisor, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Secretary of State—nah, no room for that guy under the ever-shrinking tent.

No less an authority than Dick Cheney said so:

So all you former Republicans who voted for President Obama take notice, you have shown where your “loyalty” lies, and you are no longer welcome in the Party of Limbaugh and Cheney.

21…20…19…18…17…

Colin Powell vs. Rush Limbaugh

07 Thursday May 2009

Posted by in Obama, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

The Republican Party pulled of a remarkable feat yesterday. In a 24-hour time span they managed to alienate 4 different groups of voters–gays, women, moderates, and African-Americans. So much for that re-branding effort.

First, Senator John Thune of South Dakota:

“Conservative leaders have warned the nomination of a gay or lesbian justice could complicate Obama’s effort to confirm a replacement for Souter, and another Republican senator on Wednesday warned a gay nominee would be too polarizing.

“I know the administration is being pushed, but I think it would be a bridge too far right now,” said GOP Chief Deputy Whip John Thune. “It seems to me this first pick is going to be a kind of important one, and my hope is that he’ll play it a little more down the middle. A lot of people would react very negatively.”

Personally Sen. Thune, I don’t think 21% of Americans counts as “a lot of people.”

Then former Bush counselor Ed Gillespie went on The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer and said that Samuel Alito was chosen to replace Sandra Day O’Connor because “there wasn’t a woman who was of a comparable experience and skill and temperament and intellect.”

Strike two.

Last but not least was the war of words between Colin Powell and de facto GOP leader, Rush Limbaugh.

“The Republican Party is in big trouble and needs to find a way to move back to the middle of the country, former Secretary of State Colin Powell said Monday.

Powell said the GOP is “getting smaller and smaller” and “that’s not good for the nation.” He also said he hopes that emerging GOP leaders, such as House Minority Whip Cantor, will not keep repeating mantras of the far right.

“The Republican Party is in deep trouble,” Powell told corporate security executives at a conference in Washington sponsored by Fortify Software Inc. The party must realize that the country has changed, he said.

He blasted radio commentator Rush Limbaugh, saying he does not believe that Limbaugh or conservative icon Ann Coulter serve the party well. He said the party lacks a “positive” spokesperson. “I think what Rush does as an entertainer diminishes the party and intrudes or inserts into our public life a kind of nastiness that we would be better to do without.”

Rush responded by saying Powell is “just another liberal” and that “what Colin Powell needs to do is close the loop and become a Democrat.” He then topped it off by saying “the only reason” Powell endorsed Obama “was race.”

Strikes three and four. Moderate Republicans are now “liberals” and should leave the Republican Party, and African-Americans vote strictly along racial lines.

The Republicans have gone from a tent to an umbrella to….I don’t know, what’s smaller than an umbrella?

The Rule of Law or the Rule of Political Expediency

06 Wednesday May 2009

Posted by in Obama, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

I know there are those who are tired of the subject of torture and the prosecution of those who either committed, authorized, or provided legal justification for these acts, but to my mind there is no more important topic.

It gets to the heart of what the United States of America stands for. Are we a country that abides by our own laws and international treaties which we signed and pledged to uphold, or do   adherence to the law and treaty obligations cease in the aftermath of a terrorist attack and in the name of political expediency?

If we are the former and not the latter, then this should be unacceptable:

“An internal Justice Department inquiry has concluded that Bush administration lawyers committed serious lapses of judgment in writing secret memorandums authorizing brutal interrogations but that they should not be prosecuted, according to government officials briefed on its findings.

The findings, growing out of an inquiry that started in 2004, would represent a stinging rebuke of the lawyers and their legal arguments.

But they would stop short of the criminal referral sought by some human rights advocates, who have suggested that the lawyers could be prosecuted as part of a criminal conspiracy to violate the anti-torture statute.”

U.S. Code, Title 18,2340A says:

(a)  Offense.— Whoever outside the United States commits or attempts to commit torture shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both, and if death results to any person from conduct prohibited by this subsection, shall be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life.

b)  Jurisdiction.— There is jurisdiction over the activity prohibited in subsection (a) if—
(1) the alleged offender is a national of the United States; or
(2) the alleged offender is present in the United States, irrespective of the nationality of the victim or alleged offender.

(c)  Conspiracy.— A person who conspires to commit an offense under this section shall be subject to the same penalties (other than the penalty of death) as the penalties prescribed for the offense, the commission of which was the object of the conspiracy.

Article 4 of the U.N, Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment signed by President Reagan in 1988 clearly states:

“Each State Party shall ensure that all acts of torture are offences under its criminal law. The same shall apply to an attempt to commit torture and to an act by any person which constitutes complicity or participation in torture.”

Article 2 of the same document:

“No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat or war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.”

So I’ll ask again, are we a country where the rule of law prevails or not? Is the United States a country that can be trusted to keep it’s word or not? To me the answer is clear.

Remember This Number Republicans: 21

28 Tuesday Apr 2009

Posted by in Politics

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

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

Here’s a number for the Republican Party to remember for future reference, 21. Twenty-one, that’s the percentage of Americans who identify themselves as Republicans according to the latest Washington Post poll, the lowest that figure has been in 26 years.

Remember that number at the next meeting of the RNC, when you propose another stupid resolution like the one to brand the opposition as Socialists instead of Democrats.

Remember that number before you send Newt Gingrich out to say that President Obama is bowing to pressure from the “anti-American left” in considering allowing prosecution of former Bush administration officials.

Remember that when Sen. Judd Gregg says this regarding the use of the budget reconciliation process :

“I can understand shaking Hugo Chavez’s hand, but I can’t understand embracing his politics.”

Remember that number when former Senator and present radio blowhard Fred Thompson says something like this:

“And then after promising that there would be no prosecutions, [Obama] acquiesced and now opened the door for that. So I think it’s a case of naivete, ineptitude and unbelievable arrogance and lack of experience.”

Remember that number when Sen. McCain and Sen. Bond say that President Obama is turning the United States into a “banana republic.”

Remember that number the next time Congressman Eric Cantor confronts President Obama about spending cuts, then when asked by the president for a list of areas where Cantor himself would cut, responds:

“You can expect us to have something very soon.”

Ah yes, the old “we’ll get back to you” policy.

Twenty-one Republicans, great number if you’re at the blackjack tables in Las Vegas, not so good if you ever hope win another national election.

A War Crime Worse Than Torture

27 Monday Apr 2009

Posted by in Politics

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Torture is a war crime, I don’t think there’s much debate about that. The Geneva Conventions say so, the United Nations Convention Against Torture says so. What constitutes torture, and whether or not waterboarding qualifies, may be debatable for some, but that’s not the topic for today.

In my opinion, recent revelations have uncovered a greater war crimes than torture. That is the Bush administration taking this country into war in Iraq on false and concocted premises, and the lengths to which they were willing to go to make a connection between Saddam Hussein and September 11 to justify that war.

Frank Rich’s excellent op-ed in the New York Times and the chain of events in 2002 makes this clear; from the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah, to the Downing Street memo, to the Bybee memo authorizing the use of the “enhanced techniques.”

The timeline:

March to June 2002, Zubaydah was interrogated by the FBI and the CIA, using traditional methods which produced actionable intelligence, such as information on Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Jose Padilla.

But that’s not what the Bush administration wanted, as stated in the Downing Street memo from July 2002:

“There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.”

August 1, 2002 brought the Bybee memo calling Zubaydah “one of the highest ranking members of the al-Qaeda terrorist organization”,which by that time they knew was untrue, and authorizing the “increased pressure phase” because interrogators were “certain that he has information that he refuses to divulge.” Another lie.

August of 2002, Zubaydah was waterboarded 83 times, a tactic known to produce false confessions according to one of Zubaydah’s interrogators:

“There was no actionable intelligence gained from using enhanced interrogation techniques on Abu Zubaydah that wasn’t, or couldn’t have been, gained from regular tactics. In addition, I saw that using these alternative methods on other terrorists backfired on more than a few occasions — all of which are still classified. The short sightedness behind the use of these techniques ignored the unreliability of the methods..”

But the Bush administration didn’t care about the reliability, they just wanted someone to say the words establishing the link between Saddam and 9/11. Whether or not it was true, or whether the means by which they achieved that goal were in violation of U.S. or international law was irrelevant.

As Frank Rich put it:

“…the ticking time bomb was not another potential Qaeda attack on America but the Bush administration’s ticking timetable for selling a war in Iraq; it wanted to pressure Congress to pass a war resolution before the 2002 midterm elections.

But there were no links between 9/11 and Iraq, and the White House knew it. Torture may have been the last hope for coercing such bogus “intelligence” from detainees who would be tempted to say anything to stop the waterboarding.”

Attempting to sell a war based on bogus intelligence obtained through illegal means? To me, that is a war crime worse than torture.

If We Sink to the Level of the Terrorists, Haven’t They Won?

22 Wednesday Apr 2009

Posted by in Obama, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

There are a couple of articles in the news this morning that are bringing cries of ‘See, we told you so’ from the defenders of the so-called “enhanced interrogation techniques.”

One is from CNS News, which says that the waterboarding of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed yielded information that prevented a terrorist attack on Los Angeles.

The other is from the New York Times, which contains this quote from a memo sent by national intelligence director Admiral Dennis Blair to his staff:

“High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the al Qa’ida organization that was attacking this country.”

Those are headlines you are likely to see from those who seek to justify the use of torture. What you aren’t likely to read in those same places is this quote, also from Admiral Blair, also in the NYT article:

“The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means. The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security.”

So I’ll ask you, should the policy of the United States of America regarding interrogation be ‘whatever it takes?’ Do we adopt the tactics, such as waterboarding, used by Imperial Japan in WWII, tactics which were later prosecuted as war crimes, and which were common in Pol Pot’s Cambodia?

Personally, I’ll side with President Obama, who said this in his remarks to the CIA:

“What makes the United States special, and what makes you special, is precisely the fact that we are willing to uphold our values and ideals even when it’s hard — not just when it’s easy; even when we are afraid and under threat — not just when it’s expedient to do so. That’s what makes us different.”

One more question. If we sink to the level of Osama bin Laden and his followers who seek to do us harm, haven’t they won?

Prosecute The Torturers

19 Sunday Apr 2009

Posted by in Obama, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

To prosecute or not to prosecute, that is the question. With the release of the Justice Department memos last week detailing the so-called “enhanced interrogation techniques” (aka torture) used by the CIA, the debate has begun over what to do to those who were involved.

I fully understand the desire of the administration to, as the President said, “look forward and not backward.” We are facing the most serious economic crisis since the Great Depression and the President wants the focus to be on getting our economy back on a solid footing. I get that.

But at the same time I believe that the people responsible for the despicable acts described in those memos need to be held accountable. Not only the people who carried out those acts but those who approved and condoned their use.

The reason being that if we don’t hold them accountable it seems to me we are setting a dangerous precedent for (God forbid) a future administration with a vice-president like the Marquis de Cheney.

A vice-president who would have this to say about waterboarding:

“I was aware of the program, certainly, and involved in helping get the process cleared, as the agency in effect came in and wanted to know what they could and couldn’t do. And they talked to me, as well as others, to explain what they wanted to do. And I supported it. ”

And this:

“We proceeded very cautiously; we checked, we had the Justice Department issue the requisite opinions in order to know where the bright lines were that you could not cross. The professionals involved in that program were very, very cautious, very careful, wouldn’t do anything without making certain it was authorized and that it was legal. And any suggestion to the contrary is just wrong.”

“Very cautiously” and knowing “where the lines were that you could not cross.” Really? See if you think this sounds cautious and does not cross any lines.

“According to the May 30, 2005 Bradbury memo, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was waterboarded 183 times in March 2003 and Abu Zubaydah was waterboarded 83 times in August 2002″.

That’s 6 times a day, every day for a month for Mohammed. That’s cautious and not crossing lines?

A couple of conclusions with which I agree. First from Donklephant:

“The point isn’t whether or not Mohammed is a bad man. There’s no doubt he is. The point is that we can’t allow ourselves to act just as despicable as him. I mean, Bush said they hate our freedoms, right? Well what happens when we compromise our values to mirror theirs? Doesn’t that make us less free?”
And this from Emptywheel:
“The CIA wants you to believe waterboarding is effective. Yet somehow, it took them 183 applications of the waterboard in a one month period to get what they claimed was cooperation out of KSM.

That doesn’t sound very effective to me.”

So back to the question, to prosecute or not to prosecute?

Despite the possible loss of focus on economic issues, I see the option of not prosecuting having far greater repercussions than that of going forward with prosecution.

GOP: Stop This Insanity Before It’s Too Late

18 Saturday Apr 2009

Posted by in Politics

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

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

Somebody in the Republican Party please put an end to this insanity before it’s too late. Let’s look at what has happened since January 20th:

Congresswoman Michele Bachmann from Minnesota has said she wants the people of her state to be “armed and dangerous.”

Former Senator Rick Santorum wrote in an opinion piece in the Philadelphia Enquirer that President Obama “has a deep-seated antipathy toward American values and traditions.”

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich said President Obama is waging a “war against churches” and that “there’s a clear desire to replace the church with a bureaucracy, and to replace people’s right to worship together with a government-dominated system.”

Congressman Spencer Bachus from Alabama said that 17 members of the House of Representatives are “socialists.”

Rick Perry, the governor of the second largest state in the nation, is talking about the possibility of secession.

The Georgia Senate passed a resolution calling for the nullification of the Constitution and disbanding of the United States.

Congressman Mark Kirk from Illinois has suggested that the people of that state “shoot anyone” who proposes to raise their taxes.

Congressman Michael McCaul from Texas is making speeches about tyranny and oppression, citing Thomas Jefferson’s quote that “the tree of liberty will be fed with the blood of tyrants and patriots.”

Add to these the constant drumbeat from talk radio hosts about re-education camps, fascism, totalitarianism, and this administration taking away Constitutional rights.

Granted, probably 99.9% of the people who hear or read these things know it is just blowhard politicians trying to gain votes by appealing to their Republican base.

But what about the other 0.1%? What do they do? Do they get an assault rifle and kill police officers because they think their rights are being taken away? Do they fill a truck with explosives and park it in front of a federal building?

Keep this t-shirt in mind Republicans, before you quote Jefferson:

mcveigh-t-shirt

Anybody know what this is? It’s the shirt that Timothy McVeigh was wearing when he was arrested.

Republican Hypocrisy On Government Spending

13 Monday Apr 2009

Posted by in Politics

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , ,

The Republican hypocrisy train rolls on. Today’s two shining examples are Sen. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia and House Minority Leader, Mr. Spray-On Tan himself, John Boehner of Ohio. The subject is whether or not government spending creates jobs.

Here’s what Sen. Chambliss had to say in February about the economic stimulus package:

“The majority in Congress has been in runaway mode when it comes to spending taxpayer dollars. This legislation is yet another sign that Washington is more concerned with pet projects than with the welfare of taxpayers.”

But when Defense Secretary Gates announced plans last week to end production of the F-22, which just by coincidence is done at a plant in Marietta, GA, Sen. Chambliss changed his opinion of the importance of those so-called “pet projects.”

“When it comes to stimulating the economy, there’s no better way to do it than to spend it in the defense community.”

Sen. Chambliss’ fellow Georgian, Rep. Johnny Isakson, another Republican who voted against the stimulus package, added:

“I also believe that it is unacceptable that this administration wants to eliminate 2,000 jobs in Marietta and potentially 95,000 jobs nationwide at a time when unemployment rates are rising across the country. Senator Chambliss and I will be taking the case of the F-22 to members of Congress and the Appropriations Committees. The F-22 is vital to 21st century American military superiority.”

I thought part of the Republican mantra was that government spending didn’t create jobs? I guess that only holds true when the spending is done in someone else’s home state or district.

Now to Congressman Boehner, who said this in January:

“When it comes to slow-moving government spending programs, it’s clear that it doesn’t create the jobs or preserve the jobs that need to happen.”

With the possible exception of when defense contractor BAE was awarded a $71, 546, 085 no-bid contract for one of it’s subsidiaries in Fairfield, Ohio to build doors for armored vehicles.

Can we assume that no jobs were created in your district because of that contract, Congressman Boehner? Kinda doubt it.

Tell you what I’m gonna do, Republicans. I offer my services, for a reasonable fee of course, as a researcher for you guys to stop you from opening your yap and making such fools of yourselves. I feel it’s my patriotic duty.

Who’s In Charge Here, Washington or Wall Street?

06 Monday Apr 2009

Posted by in Politics

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

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

There are both encouraging and discouraging signs today in the battle over who’s in charge, Wall Street or Washington. First the good news. Finally, somebody in D.C. gets it.

“Elizabeth Warren, chief watchdog of America’s $700 billion bank bailout plan, will this week call for the removal of top executives from Citigroup, AIG and other institutions that have received government funds in a damning report that will question the administration’s approach to saving the financial system from collapse.

She declined to give more detail but confirmed that she would refer to insurance group AIG, which has received $173 billion in bailout money, and banking giant Citigroup, which has had $45 billion in funds and more than $316 billion of loan guarantees.”

With one simple sentence Warren summed up what, in my opinion, should be the consensus among those in the Obama administration.

“The very notion that anyone would infuse money into a financially troubled entity without demanding changes in management is preposterous.”

That’s the good news, now for the bad. There are some “administration officials”( I smell Larry Summers) who are busy looking for loopholes in congressional restrictions placed on financial institutions who receive bailout money.

“The Obama administration is engineering its new bailout initiatives in a way that it believes will allow firms benefitting from the programs to avoid restrictions imposed by Congress, including limits on lavish executive pay, according to government officials.

Administration officials have concluded that this approach is vital for persuading firms to participate in programs funded by the $700 billion financial rescue package.”

“Persuading”, aka bribing.

“The administration believes it can sidestep the rules because, in many cases, it has decided not to provide federal aid directly to financial companies, the sources said. Instead, the government has set up special entities that act as middlemen, channeling the bailout funds to the firms and, via this two-step process, stripping away the requirement that the restrictions be imposed, according to officials.”

“Special entities” acting as “middlemen”, aka money launderers.

Speaking of limiting executive pay, Rep. Alan Grayson’s Pay for Performance Act, which does exactly that, passed the House 247-171, with 10 Republicans voting yes.

But there’s rain on that parade, too. Rep. Melissa Bean of Illinois, one of the so-called Blue Dog Democrats, sponsored an amendment which would “allow institutions that enter into a payment schedule with Treasury on terms set by Treasury to no longer be subject to the bonus and compensation restrictions created by the Act.“

It passed 228-198 with the support of 63 Democrats, most of whom also voted for Grayson’s bill. Go figure.