You may recall our aversion to any mention of the Bushmen/Republican-whipped-up pseudo-controversy over the complicity of the Democratic Speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, in the Bush Administration’s torture programme, apart from this question, “If Nancy Pelosi is an accomplice to a felony…..who are the felons?”
It appears the GOP attack dogs, the sailors on the Dick Cheney alternative ship of state, and even Karl Rove feel they have gotten as much as they can out of their diversion, so we thought we’d give it a farewell, with the proper perspective, from the superb Sam Seder:
Karl Rove, The Washington Post, 21 May 2009: “The kerfluffle over House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s CIA briefing on enhanced interrogation matters a lot. First, there’s the question of credibility.”
The Question of Credibility: Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction and Link to 9-11. The Suspended Hunt for Osama bin Laden. Federal Budget Deficits. The Firing of Justice Department Prosecutors on Political Grounds. Katrina.
I have consciously avoided all comment on the furour — whipped up by former Bush Administration officials and their supporters — over how much Nancy Pelosi (pictured), the Democratic Speaker of the House of Representatives, knew about the torture programme from 2002. I have done so not out of political bias or a lack of academic interest (for example, the limits on Congress’ oversight of illegal activity when an exclusive group of 4 or 8 legislators are given some information — and thus sworn to secrecy — over that activity). I have done so because this is a blatant attempt by those who served Bush to deflect attention from their actions.
I am still concerned that the Obama Administration’s release of four Bush-era memoranda documenting the authorisation of torture (or, as Politico insists, “interrogation techniques”) is, in part, a deflection from ongoing issues over Executive power and surveillance/rendition/indefinite detention. And I suspect we’ll be pursuing those matters in days to come.
But for today, as former members and acolytes of the Bush Administration absolve themselves in the press:
This was torture sanctioned by President Bush and his chief advisors. This was torture that was illegal, immoral, and ineffective. This was a torture that did not win the “War on Terror” but damaged US foreign policy and American standing with other countries and peoples.
This was a brute exercise of power, sanctioned by (but not actually responding directly to) the brutal attacks upon the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in September 2001. Read the rest of this entry »
In the run-up to the 44th President of the USA, there was a good deal of black comedy in the desperation of some to prevent the 43rd from taking his place in oblivion. From Karl Rove, who may just have been trying to sweep up around his own place in our memories, to Charles Krauthammer, who helped sell the notion of the “unipolar moment” that assisted the Bush Administration in its failed ambitions, to Andrew Roberts, who clung to dreams of American Empire, to Bruce Anderson, who bellowed, “History Will Vindicate Bush”, to former Dubya speechwriters, the chant went up: One Day You’ll Be Grateful for All He Did.
So, in that spirit, we’re pleased to re-print, from AlterNet, Bernie Horn’s Top10 Reasons to Remember Dubya.
So Long Worst President Ever; 10 Reasons History Will Hang You
5 p.m. Well, that’s Day 2 (so far) of the Great Obama Foreign Policy Journey. Tomorrow, we’ll attempt an assessment of the ups, downs, and in-betweens of the initial meetings and decisions.
The President’s moves not only on Guantanamo Bay but on CIA black sites were encouraging, even if they cannot be implemented soon. Less encouraging, despite all the fanfare at the State Department were the Mitchell and Holbrooke appointments, as it is not clear the Administration has really thought through its diplomatic approach. It is a blessing, at least, that Obama and Hillary Clinton did not make the situation worse by naming Dennis Ross as envoy on Iranian matters, a move only slightly less provocative than appointing Mike Tyson to keep the peace.
The emerging conflict and muddle over Iraq and Afghanistan, brought out by the Robert Gates statement and the military-White House competing briefings on Iraq, is not encouraging.
Gates, unintentionally, points to the conflict that has already broken out over troop levels in Iraq and Afghanistan, stating that “no decision on troop deployments to Afghanistan has been made”. What is even more disconcerting, however, is his explanation that the Obama Administration’s new war plan will focus on “very concrete things” such as establishing control in parts of the country, going after al Qaeda, and delivering services and security for the Afghan people.
Hmm….isn’t that what the Bush Administration was doing? Apparently not: “The goals we did have for Afghanistan [were] too broad and too far into the future, [were] too future-oriented, and [were] we need more concrete goals that can be achieved realistically within three to five years.”
That, to be blunt, is gobbledy-gook. One can only hope it is not reflective of the thinking in the NSC-military meeting yesterday.
Brad Reed’s piece, reprinted from AlterNet, is an unashamedly partisan, angry, and at times darkly comic review of the last eight years. It’s also an ideal conversation-starter for readers to chip in, either with low-lights that Reed underrated or that occurred after he wrote this in July (say Bush’s “the economy is strong” statement in October).
All in all, then, an excellent good-bye gift for our 43rd President
The 10 Most Awesomely Bad Moments of the Bush Presidency
In a lot of ways, choosing the Bush administration’s 10 greatest moments — disastrous failures, all — is about as pointless as picking out your 10 least favorite hemorrhoids: There are entirely too many of them, and taken together they all add up to a throbbing mass of pain. But unfortunately, history demands that we at least make the effort so that future generations will understand why we perform voodoo rituals cursing Bush’s memory before we go to bed every night.
Tags: Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, Nancy Pelosi, Sam Seder, Torture 
Comments Off 
Karl Rove, The Washington Post, 21 May 2009
I have consciously avoided all comment on the furour — whipped up by former Bush Administration officials and their supporters — over how much Nancy Pelosi (pictured), the Democratic Speaker of the House of Representatives, knew about the torture programme from 2002. I have done so not out of political bias or a lack of academic interest (for example, the limits on Congress’ oversight of illegal activity when an exclusive group of 4 or 8 legislators are given some information — and thus sworn to secrecy — over that activity). I have done so because this is a blatant attempt by those who served Bush to deflect attention from their actions. 
I am still concerned that the Obama Administration’s release of four Bush-era memoranda documenting the authorisation of torture (or, as Politico insists, “interrogation techniques”) is, in part, a deflection from ongoing issues over Executive power and surveillance/rendition/indefinite detention. And I suspect we’ll be pursuing those matters in days to come.
Entries (RSS)