Lies, Damn Lies and…other lies

The cover story in last week’s Time magazine is titled The End of Cowboy Diplomacy. The article lays out the many foreign policy problems that have arisen since the implementaion of the so-called “Bush Doctrine”; President Bush’s theory which believes in unilateral engagement, pre-emtive war and the use of “hard power” to protect American interests and advance democracy. For the most part, the article paints a fairly clear picture of the failures of this particular worldview. However, one passage in the piece propagates a popular myth that the White House has advanced since the 9/11 in regards to the reasoning behind going into Iraq. In the article, White House counselor Dan Bartett made the following statement:

The impression that the doctrine of pre-emption was the only guiding foreign policy light is not true. Iraq was a unique circumstance in history, and the sense of urgency of certain decisions in the early part of the first term was reflective of a nation that had to take decisive action after being attacked.

The September 11 commission debunked the notion that Iraq played any role in the 9/11 attacks. Yet, two years after those findings were made public, a senior White House offical is found in the pages of a major American newsmagazine spreading blatant falsehoods. If Bartlett had been talking about toppling the Taliban, that would be one thing, but he conflates the justifed decision to go into Afghanistan with the unwise war of choice undertaken by the Bush Administration in Iraq. The statement is left unchallenged in the article. When controversial statements like this are made, reporters need to challenge them because not doing so confuses the public’s understanding of the issue and allows lies to masquerade as truth.

Dunce of the Day

Michelle Malkin, for her “who me?” role in releasing the personal information of some members of an anti-war group at U.C. Santa Cruz. Admittedly, the students made a mistake by including their personal information on a press release they circulated, but Malkin, by making this information available on her website (which gets considerable traffic), essentially left the ingredients for a fire in the hands of a bunch of pyromaniacs. Predictably, the students were bombarded with vile and disgusting threats. After being tossed to the lynch mob by Malkin, the students pleaded with Malkin to remove their information from her site. Instead, she posted the information again.

U.C. Santa Cruz alumni and American Prospect writer Ezra Klein pities Michelle. Ezra is a better man than I.

Some pep for your step

Somewhere in the world, at least a few people are still getting it:

• Glenn Greenwald laying waste to the pathetic reasoning behind Democrats running from Russ Feingold’s censure motion.
• A clip from Boston Legal in which James Spader runs down the ills plaguing the body politic.

Do the Right Thing

The only senator in Washington that seems worthy to carry the “D” next to his name right now is Russ Feingold (D-WI). Yesterday, Sen. Feingold introduced a resolution to censure President Bush over his role in the illegal wiretapping being carried out by the NSA. Predictably, rather than take a principled stand on the issue, other Democrats have taken to shooting the messenger, while at least one Republican senator has accused Feingold of “siding with terrorists”.

I’m not sure what is more shameful at this point…the overt political machinations being employed by Bill Frist and Arlen Specter (who, in covering the president’s tracks yesterday, actually advanced the argument that the FISA law itself is unconstitutional, which would, in turn, mean that Bush has broken no laws), or the cravenness of the collected Democrats on the Hill. Today, Feingold again spoke truth to power when he said:

I’m amazed at Democrats, cowering with this president’s numbers so low. The administration just has to raise the specter of the war and the Democrats run and hide. … Too many Democrats are going to do the same thing they did in 2000 and 2004. In the face of this, they’ll say we’d better just focus on domestic issues. … [Democrats shouldn’t] cower to the argument, that whatever you do, if you question the administration, you’re helping the terrorists.

As of March 14, 2006 President Bush has a 36% approval rating. Over 57% of Americans think that the war in Iraq was a mistake, yet the Democrats seem too scared to push back on issues of national security. I’m not sure what else they could be waiting for before the do…well, anything. So, at least until someone else finds a spine, Russ Feingold stands in the wilderness, supported only by the courage of his convictions. It would be a shame if he was left to stand alone. At this moment in time, Democrats would do well to remember the famous words of Daniel Webster:

“What is right is not always popular, what is popular is not always right.”

Right now, Russ Feingold’s stance in an unpopular one, but he is right. It’s just a shame nobody else realizes that yet.

Congess: Good for…nothing

A running theme in politics at the moment involves the way that Congress continues to abdicate its responsibilites as a check on the actions of the executive branch. This particular Congress as a whole has been especially feckless in this regard, but the shameless manner in which the Republican controlled House and Senate continue to kowtow to the White House on issues of national security is reprehensible.

The issue was again laid bare for all to see today when Republicans on the Senate Intelligence Committee today backed down from launching a full-scale investigation into the NSA/FISA scandal. Rather than do their job, the committee, lead by Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS) and under pressure from Senate Majority Leader, Bill Frist (R-TN), scrapped plans for a full investigation in favor of the creation of House and Senate subcommittees tasked with watching over terrorist surveillance.

This measure does nothing but provide cover for the White House. The White House will not be subjected to anything resembling the same level of scrutiny that a full investigation would have provided. Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D-WV), commenting on the new arrangement, pulled no punches:

“The committee is, to put it bluntly, basically under the control of the White House…”.

Rockerfeller’s words are especially interesting in light of the fact that as recently as last week, Senators Chuck Hagel (R-NE), Olympia Snowe (R-ME) and Mike DeWine (R-OH) all said they would support a full investigation. Sen. Roberts remarked that he wanted “to reach accommodation, not confrontation,” with the White House. Therein lies the real problem. While it is obviously important that all branches of government have the ability to work in concert, it is equally important for each branch to retain its autonomy and not become subservient to any other branch. Congress is not supposed to serve as a rubber stamp for any and every piece of legislation that comes from the executive branch nor should Congress create smokescreens and run interference for the executive branch when there is a compelling reason present to question the White House’s motives.

Republicans move to scuttle FISA/NSA investigations

In a letter to Senate minority leader Harry Reid (D-NV), majority leader Bill Frist (R-TN) has threatened to restructure the Senate Intelligence Committee in a blatantly partisan effort to kill the FISA/NSA probe. Frist has previously shown himself willing to abandon his ethics in favor of doing the White House’s dirty work and advancing his political career. (see his actions during the Terry Schiavo affair).

This recent move is a continuation of Frist’s shameless abandonment of principle to achieve a political end, but, more importantly, it is emblematic of the current Republican establishment in Washington. The FISA scandal is hugely important because it highlights this administration’s disturbing proclivity for disregarding any rules that hamper it from carrying out its goals. In this instance, nobody disagrees that the government needs expansive tools in fighting the war on terror. The problem, however, is that a framework (the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) currently exists to give the White House the powers it claims it needs while at the same time protecting the civil liberties of American citizens. Instead of working within the FISA framework, the Bush administration is expanding its wiretapping capabilities under a controversial theory of presidential authority known as the “unitary executive theory”. This theory essentially asserts that the President has unchecked and exclusive power to interpret and execute the laws of the United States. President Bush has put the theory into practice through his use of signing statements. Typically, signing statements have simply served to clarify how the executive branch will enforce a law once it is enacted. However, the Bush administration is using these statements to basically set aside the laws the statements are attached to; in practice this serves to cement the president’s interpretation of the law as the one true reading while rendering the law, as originally constructed, worthless. A prime (and under-reported) example of this is the signing statement issued by Bush in response to the anti-torture bill advanced by Sen. John McCain (R-AZ). Under the unitary theory, Bush can disregard the torture law if he feels unduly burdened by it.

In regards to FISA, the administration (as it has done repeatedly in the past) is using its vicars to paint those who oppose the president’s reading of the statute as un-American. Nothing could be further from the truth. There are clear prohibitions in place against the type of eavesdropping the administration has allowed the NSA to indulge in, and in allowing the surveillance to continue, the White House undermines a basic American ideal, adherence to the rule of law. It is deeply hypocritical for the Republican Party to sell itself to the public as a party grounded in moral responsibility on the one hand, but then disregard rules or rewrite them to meet political ends on the other.

Pre-war intelligence: What was disregarded

Murry Waas blasts yet another hole into the administration’s claims about Saddam’s WMD capabilities.

“We’ll be fully prepared…”

They were told it would happen…and they still didn’t do enough. Damning video obtained by the Associated Press that shows that the White House was well aware of the level of destruction that Katrina could bring. There was time to prevent this from happening…

Once again…”heckuva job.”

Updated: Ethics complaint filed against Santorum

Today, a progressive D.C. based advocacy group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), filed an ethics complaint against Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA). The complaint alleges that Santorum illegally accepted a mortgage from a bank in Philadelphia. The complaint used Will Bunch’s story as basis for the charges.

Santorum’s ethics on display

Will Bunch has a pretty damning article up at the American Prospect that highlights some of the shady practices of the political action committee under control by Sen. Rick Santorum. After finishing the piece, one wonders why the Republican leadership would even put him up to be the public face of their “lobbying reform” effort.