HOLD BUSH AND CHENEY ACCOUNTABLE
GOP'S DISTRACTIONS ON TORTURE
The method magicians use to perform their tricks is to distract. You focus on something the magician wants you to focus on so he can create his illusion. And so it is with the right wing's distractions on torture. From what you hear in the media, you would think Nancy Pelosi orchestrated this entire reprehensible program. If Nancy Pelosi knew about torture and did nothing to stop it, that is disgusting. But the people who conceived using torture and put torture into operation are far more disgusting and far more legally liable. This commentary by Gregg Levine is at www.firedoglake.com:
Because before you get to Pelosi, or to Graham, or Jane Harman, or a host of other congressional leaders who in good time should be held accountable for their action or inaction during the Bush years—before you get to any of that—one thing had to happen. . . .
Someone had to order the torture. Someone had to sign off on the program in its design phase, someone had to render a group of detainees, hold them outside the reach of US law, and someone had to give the order to have them tortured.
I could, at this point, throw out the name George W. Bush—he was president at the time, after all—but we now have pretty good evidence that the real authority for waterboarding (to name but the most talked about of many illegally brutal “techniques”), the real orders to “do that,” and “do that again,” came from the vice president. The order to torture came from Dick Cheney.
Let me say that again: Dick Cheney ordered torture.
Not Nancy Pelosi; Dick Cheney.
Before there were any briefings of any Democrats, there was the torture—a violation in-and-of itself—and that torture was ordered by Republican Vice President Dick Cheney.
And to take it one step further, that torture wasn’t ordered up to save us from some imagined “ticking bomb” scenario (not that torture would even solve that particular problem, and not that, even if it did, it could be justified), it was ordered to make detainees produce a specific, desired piece of information (or disinformation). Dick Cheney wanted a connection between the attacks of September 11, 2001 and Iraqi leader Sadam Hussein, and so Cheney told interrogators contractors to torture detainees until they stated that there was a link between al-Qaeda and Iraq.
Showing posts with label GOP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label GOP. Show all posts
Saturday, June 23, 2007
June 23, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
GOP DEAD IN THE WATER
When it comes to guiding the ship of state the GOP is dead in the water and starting to sink. Maybe it's a good thing there are no new ideas, because Republican ideas have almost all been bad. We got into the disaster and atrocity in Iraq thanks to the "intellectuals" at PNAC and their puppet president. We got the gold standard of bad ideas in trickle down economics. We've had other winners like school vouchers and "faith based initiatives." This article by Paul Waldman is at www.prospect.org:
Two years ago, in a much-discussed cover article for The New Republic called "The Case Against New Ideas," Jonathan Chait argued that Democrats should resist the pleas of pundits to look for their political salvation in new plans and visions. But as the 2008 race gathers speed, it appears to be the Republicans who have abandoned ideas -- new or otherwise -- in a quest for the GOP nomination that has been remarkable in its utter lack of substance, even by the standards of contemporary campaigns.
Think about it this way: Can you think of a single substantive proposal consisting of more than a sentence or two that any of the GOP candidates has made on the campaign trail? I'm not even talking about some lengthy policy paper or plan for overhauling a major sector of government. But any idea to do something, anything, differently than the Bush administration has? The closest one can come is the immigration bill that Congress is debating, of which John McCain is a co-sponsor. But one gets the impression that McCain wishes no one would bring it up, at least until the primaries are over and all those pesky nativists have nowhere to go but to the Republican nominee. Is there anything else the Republican candidates are actually proposing to do? Any discernable agenda coming from any of them? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?
It's true that in practice, "ideas," particularly "new ideas," usually serve mainly as signifiers of change from the way things are currently done. This makes things harder on Republicans, as the party currently in charge of the executive branch. A Democrat can offer a relatively simplistic three-point plan for getting out of Iraq, and it sounds like a new idea. But for a Republican who still supports the war (as they all do, with the exception of Ron Paul), coming up with a "new idea" on Iraq would require some exceptional creativity. And this is not a particularly creative crew.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
GOP DEAD IN THE WATER
When it comes to guiding the ship of state the GOP is dead in the water and starting to sink. Maybe it's a good thing there are no new ideas, because Republican ideas have almost all been bad. We got into the disaster and atrocity in Iraq thanks to the "intellectuals" at PNAC and their puppet president. We got the gold standard of bad ideas in trickle down economics. We've had other winners like school vouchers and "faith based initiatives." This article by Paul Waldman is at www.prospect.org:
Two years ago, in a much-discussed cover article for The New Republic called "The Case Against New Ideas," Jonathan Chait argued that Democrats should resist the pleas of pundits to look for their political salvation in new plans and visions. But as the 2008 race gathers speed, it appears to be the Republicans who have abandoned ideas -- new or otherwise -- in a quest for the GOP nomination that has been remarkable in its utter lack of substance, even by the standards of contemporary campaigns.
Think about it this way: Can you think of a single substantive proposal consisting of more than a sentence or two that any of the GOP candidates has made on the campaign trail? I'm not even talking about some lengthy policy paper or plan for overhauling a major sector of government. But any idea to do something, anything, differently than the Bush administration has? The closest one can come is the immigration bill that Congress is debating, of which John McCain is a co-sponsor. But one gets the impression that McCain wishes no one would bring it up, at least until the primaries are over and all those pesky nativists have nowhere to go but to the Republican nominee. Is there anything else the Republican candidates are actually proposing to do? Any discernable agenda coming from any of them? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?
It's true that in practice, "ideas," particularly "new ideas," usually serve mainly as signifiers of change from the way things are currently done. This makes things harder on Republicans, as the party currently in charge of the executive branch. A Democrat can offer a relatively simplistic three-point plan for getting out of Iraq, and it sounds like a new idea. But for a Republican who still supports the war (as they all do, with the exception of Ron Paul), coming up with a "new idea" on Iraq would require some exceptional creativity. And this is not a particularly creative crew.
Friday, June 08, 2007
June 08, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
SEND IN THE CLOWNS
I guess we had another Republican "debate," which featured several rich white guys talking about the disastrous policies they would pursue if Americans are stupid enough to put any of them into the White House. How high can you build that wall between us and Mexico? How many bombs will we drop on Iran? How hot does the planet have to get before we do something about global warming? Just when do the rich really have enough wealth? Are we going to just shred that quaint little document called the Constitution? It might be entertaining if the implications weren't so serious. This editorial by Marc Cooper is at www.thenation.com:
Indeed, the first hour of the debate rather obsessively centered on which candidate was more zealously in favor of tactical nuclear war against Iran (a toss-up), most in favor of the longest and highest wall on the border (Duncan Hunter), most willing to pardon Scooter Libby (Tom Tancredo) and who was the most ardent among all the creationists (Mike Huckabee who re-assured us we were, in fact, not descended from monkeys).
I know that New Hampshire voters are infamously quirky but, somehow, I doubt that any of the above are among their election promise priorities.
Bottom line: This debate was but empty prelude. The real election – starting in the fall--is going to be about the war and one or another of these guys is gonna have to change his tune to really break out.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
SEND IN THE CLOWNS
I guess we had another Republican "debate," which featured several rich white guys talking about the disastrous policies they would pursue if Americans are stupid enough to put any of them into the White House. How high can you build that wall between us and Mexico? How many bombs will we drop on Iran? How hot does the planet have to get before we do something about global warming? Just when do the rich really have enough wealth? Are we going to just shred that quaint little document called the Constitution? It might be entertaining if the implications weren't so serious. This editorial by Marc Cooper is at www.thenation.com:
Indeed, the first hour of the debate rather obsessively centered on which candidate was more zealously in favor of tactical nuclear war against Iran (a toss-up), most in favor of the longest and highest wall on the border (Duncan Hunter), most willing to pardon Scooter Libby (Tom Tancredo) and who was the most ardent among all the creationists (Mike Huckabee who re-assured us we were, in fact, not descended from monkeys).
I know that New Hampshire voters are infamously quirky but, somehow, I doubt that any of the above are among their election promise priorities.
Bottom line: This debate was but empty prelude. The real election – starting in the fall--is going to be about the war and one or another of these guys is gonna have to change his tune to really break out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)