We're All In this Together??

The most excellent Driftglass thoroughly deconstructs Andy Sullivan's latest lament that we're all in it together.

It really is too bad so many of our fellow citizens (those "masters of the universe"), who have made so much from the rest of us ("rubes"), feel that we ALL should pay for the wages of their sin and excess. It is this very lack of responsibility among our so-called elites that has led our Republic to the economic brink. It is this continuing lack of shame, guilt, fair-play and justice that allows these elites to demand that the rest of us descend deep into the bowels of their Titanic to bail them out and prolong their happy existance in the first-class lounge. Sadly, the ad-driven and marketed illusion (constantly reinforced by our horribly compromised mainstream media) that by trusting these people we will "ALL BE RICH!!" continues to send all to many of our friends, neighbors and relatives down into the bilges to drown first in the losing battle to keep the ship afloat.

Somehow, unlike the Billy Joel's soldier brothers, our nation's elites simply do not think we'll all go down together. They have their lifeboats and wealth to carry them to the next Promised Land while nearly everyone else is still bailing water. Well, you can put me down for drifty's proposed solution - pike poles for The Street. And, if we can't have the pike poles, then let's have a radical adjustment of tax rates for those much more fortunate citizens just might do.

Too bad a more progressive tax policy - one that requires those who have made (and make) the most from our government - will probably not happen.

Maybe then the pike poles will get broken out.

• d r i f t g l a s s: Two Blind Men. One Elephant.

Guess Who's Not Going to CIA

So it's breaking today that John Brennan says he's not the guy for the CIA. One "former senior intelligence official" told Washington Post's Joby Warrick that Mr. Brennan's withdrawal was "a tragedy." Seems that this unnamed source would not agree with many fellow citizens who felt that the 25-year intelligence veteran's advocacy of rendering alleged terrorists to foreign nations ("an absolutely vital tool") and the use of illegal and morally repugnant "enhanced interrogation techniques" more than disqualified him from leading the CIA.

Mr. Brennan noted in his publicly released note to the President-elect that he had "been a strong opponent of many of the policies of the Bush administration such as the pre-emptive war in Iraq and coercive interrogation tactics, to include waterboarding...the fact that I was not involved in the decision-making process for any of these controversial policies and actions has been ignored." Well, he might have opposed the Iraqi War, but his own statements, amply documented, contradict his plea that he opposed coercive interrogation techniques. At No Comment, Scott Horton gives a good analysis of Mr. Brennan's credibility problem:

As a company man, Brennan was quick to justify and support what was done. As an “independent” analyst for broadcast journalists, he also provided support and cover for practices from waterboarding to the use of psychotropic drugs. As an adviser to the Obama campaign, Brennan experienced an unconvincing epiphany and came to reject President Bush’s “program” along the same lines as his boss. The timing and circumstances of Brennan’s conversion suggest that it was dictated by political expedience and not ethics.

Perhaps Mr. Brennan is trying to salvage a portion of his legacy and credibility in the era of "teh Google." Maybe he decided that staying in business securing (or not) the passport records of U.S. citizens is much more lucrative than running the CIA. Whether Mr. Brennan pulled the plug on himself, or whether the plug was pulled for him as a result of the advocacy of psychologists, bloggers and activated, concerned citizens, his withdrawal from consideration is but a small step towards righting the horrifying wrong of detention policies in the so-called War on Terror. Either way, this is far, far from a tragedy. If you don't believe me, take some time to watch Torturing Democracy and tell me why any advocate of current policies should get a paycheck from the taxpayers.

Glen Greenwald discusses this development much more eloquently than I can -- It's a good thing that "the C.I.A.’s secret detention program remains a particularly incendiary issue" and that anyone associated with it -- let alone someone who defended it -- will have a difficult time being appointed to a position of high authority. Now let's hope that no other retreads (John McLaughlin) or morally compromised politicians (Jane Harman) get the nod to lead any portion of our intelligence community.

And that, my friends, is some change I can believe in.

(This - Gates Staying on as Defense Chief - not so much.)

"All their troubles proceed from us."

Over at the Hullabaloo, Digby absolutely nails one out of the park with her analysis on our new rump party - the GOP.

Watching some of the most tawdry and infuriating Republican Senators knife their fellow citizens over the so-called bailout of the automakers (once again spinmeisters, please use the phrase Auto Industry RESCUE, eh?) has just about put me over the edge. Jerks like Jeff (I can outdrawl any of y'all) Sessions and Mitch (I can't believe I won) McConnell whine and complain becasue they are asked to save American jobs. Funny, I didn't hear of their principled stand against auto companies when they fell all over themselves to squeeze their own citizens into giving HUGE taxbreaks and subsidies to relocate foreign automakers into thier own states. Given that states like Alabama have long lived off the proceeds of federal taxes paid by workers from Michigan, Ohio and Illinois, the venality and hypocrisy of these pearl-clutching hissy fit mongers is pretty much beyond the pale.

In a sinking economy, the failure to save jobs - any jobs - is exceptionally stupid, nay criminally negligent. Economists and industry analysts are already warning that failure among the Big Three will cost HUNDREDS of BILLIONS in economic losses, revenue shortages and costs - seems like a LOAN of some TENS of BILLIONS is more than a good deal in this situation.

And please don't cry "moral hazard" now. Congress and the Bush Administration crossed that threshold months ago when they started subsidizing banks, insurance companies, mortgage brokers (and most importantly, their extraordinarily well paid corporate leaders). Just like these titans of our unraveling economy, the Big Three are simply "too big to fail." Indeed, several HUNDRED BILLION dollars already flowed to major banks with the caveat that they should get the "credit markets working again;" yet, consumers can't get loans to buy cars and (obviously) the Big Three cannot get them either!

But the part of this entire sad, sad episode that torques me off the most has to be the shameless displays of know nothingism and aggreivement from the Rump GOP. As Digby notes, its a stench that can not be salved since "All their troubles proceed from [the rest of] us." That "us" being the rest of our progressive, fair-minded, patriotic and good natured nation. As Digby notes:

It means they are not a majority, which is the good. But it also means that it is far more conservative and consumed with a sense of its own victimization at the hands of the rest of the country. That makes them dangerous, even in their relative weakness... Losing the last of their moderating regional and ideological ballast leaves them with nothing but a 250 year old chip on their shoulders and they have quite a vivid history of acting in very destructive ways toward the nation as a whole.

Well, maybe it is time to knock that chip off some shoulders. One can only hope. But, given the spinelessness of so many of our Democratic leaders lately, its a slim hope at best.


(PS - to understand what MUST happen to auto industry leaderhsip, if the Feds get to call any "Rescue"-related shots that is, check out Driftglass' solution. Come to think of it, Drifty's idea of a "bigger axe" would work pretty well for the "federally rescued" financial industry and in Congress too!)

Well at least he's not running Veterans Affairs

Only 13 Democratic senators voted against Joe Lieberman? Are you kidding me? This guy made an absolute mockery of party loyalty - above and beyond Zell Miller and only 13 Democratic senators opposed his retention of a committee chairmanship? Much less any leadership role?

Let this be an immediate object lesson on the difference between the GOP and Democratic Party right here. Apparently, you can be forgiven almost anything - even campaigning against you own party's nominee and still keep you job when you lose. Now that is FORGIVENESS. Call me crazy, but I cannot even begin to imagine a similar outcome if the roles were reversed. And they keep telling me that they are so much more Christian than I am!

That said, I hope that Holy Joe will greatly note and forever remember (sorry Abe!) what happened today -- because I'm quite confident at least 13 of his colleagues, his new President and a whole host of howling mad citizens will not.

I'm with many of those folks. Magnanimous? More like foolish. A prodigal son? Unlikely. Frankly, I don't care about what he might bring to the future. Holy Joe should pay a greater penance for his sins of yesterday before being trusted once again in a powerful leadership position. As DDay says, "don't say you weren't warned."

I guess bottom line is this. Loyalty, it appears, is for the rubes. Maybe this is something that American automakers, their workers and the millions of others who depend on them better figure out right quick. These Americans are about to learn just how far that loyalty will get them. (Hint... its not very far....)

(Thanks Firedoglake for once again leading in an important cause.)

"I was horrified..."

One of the deepest, most profound and indeed, most damaging and damning aspects of U.S. policy since 2001 is the embrace of the "dark side" when it comes to fighting terrorism. Despite a long history of using criminal justice, both in the U.S. and around the world, to defeat those who use violent measures to solve their political problems, the U.S. walked into what can only be described as a "twilight zone" in its use of imprisonment and torture against those who fall into its hands. Even today, I can hardly believe that the country established upon the "Rule of Law" so easily abandoned its principles, its morals, and its role as a global leader when it turned its back on the Geneva Convention, international laws against cruelty and its own national laws against torture.

America's treatment of those it has captured on the global "battlefield" in the so-called "War on Terror" is perhaps the single greatest failure of policy made by the Bush Administration.

Scott Horton of Harper's Magazine recently highlighted the documentary Torturing Democracy. This important film, which was produced for PBS and available for airing since this past May, only recently started airing on a few PBS affiliated stations since the network could find "no time slot could be found for the documentary before January 21, 2009."

And no wonder. In a little less than an hour of concise, revelatory and compelling journalism, Torturing Democracy makes clear that the most senior officials of the U.S. government, including the President, Vice President, Secretary of Defense and Attorney General, demanded and approved of interrogations that at a minimum were cruel and almost certainly violated U.S. and international laws. Even more, they broke these fundemental laws all the while asserting that their policies were legal and those performing torture were immunized by President Bush's orders.

We once tried some folks who defended their actions using the very same arguments. It was called the Nuremberg Trials and the International Military Tribunal for the Far East. More than a few of those defendants were hung as a punishment for their crimes.

President-elect Obama repeatedly campaigned on a promise to end the use of torture by the United States. But, he has advising him on intelligence issues, folks that themselves have a questionable commitment to ending this illegal and immoral practice. Nevertheless, President-elect Obama reiterated this commitment in Sunday evening's 60 Minutes interview:

I have said repeatedly that I intend to close Guantanamo, and I will follow through on that. I have said repeatedly that America doesn't torture. And I'm gonna make sure that we don't torture. Those are part and parcel of an effort to regain America's moral stature in the world.

Please, please, please. Watch the documentary. Read the documents. Review the sworn testimony given to the Senate in the past few months. And LEARN what has been done in all our names over the past several years.

Finally, THINK about what happens when our Soldiers are captured, your loved one is "rendered" or your neighbor disappears into a "black site."

Then ACT to hold accountable our officials for their actions, because, if we fail to act, we citizens must hold ourselves accountable for what has been done - in our name.

(Title words spoken by Alberto Mora, former General Counsel of the U.S. Navy)
(Image from McClatchy News Service)

F the F'in Yankees!

Today would have been Steve Gilliard's 44th birthday. I've missed this patriot often over the past couple of years. And I especially missed him in this past election campaign. Somehow, I think he was still around, and the legion of followers who are "fighting back" are Steve's mark and memory in our world. Truly and often, the good die all too young.

I for one will never forget the hornet's nest he stirred when he put Michael Steel in blackface! Or his human and humane coverage of the NYC transit workers strike. Or the long treatises on history. Or the (waaay) optimistic predictions that the GOP would get its due (they finally did this year). Or the typos! To go back to Steve's archives today is to relive the agony and the ecstasy of these past Bush years - and miss all over again that wonderful voice he gave to so many of us.

The folks at the Group News Blog are keeping Steve's fighting spirit alive and well. Thanks for all that you do and reminding us today about the man we miss from our midst.

Steve, I miss ya! And yeah, F the effing Yankees!

November 11

Maybe Veteran's Day is best remembered by the poet and soldier, Wilfred Owen (1893-1918).

Strange Meeting

It seemed that out of the battle I escaped
Down some profound dull tunnel, long since scooped
Through granites which Titanic wars had groined.

Yet also there encumbered sleepers groaned,
Too fast in thought or death to be bestirred.
Then, as I probed them, one sprang up, and stared
With piteous recognition in fixed eyes,
Lifting distressful hands as if to bless.
And by his smile, I knew that sullen hall -
By his dead smile I knew we stood in Hell.

With a thousand fears that vision's face was grained;
Yet no blood reached there from the upper ground,
And no guns thumped, or down the flues made moan.
"Strange, friend," I said, "Here is no cause to mourn."
"None," said the other, "Save the undone years,
The hopelessness. Whatever hope is yours,
Was my life also; I went hunting wild
After the wildest beauty in the world,
Which lies not calm in eyes, or braided hair,
But mocks the steady running of the hour,
And if it grieves, grieves richlier than here.
For by my glee might many men have laughed,
And of my weeping something has been left,
Which must die now. I mean the truth untold,
The pity of war, the pity war distilled.
Now men will go content with what we spoiled.
Or, discontent, boil bloody, and be spilled.
They will be swift with swiftness of the tigress,
None will break ranks, though nations trek from progress.
Courage was mine, and I had mystery;
Wisdom was mine, and I had mastery;
To miss the march of this retreating world
Into vain citadels that are not walled.
Then, when much blood had clogged their chariot-wheels
I would go up and wash them from sweet wells,
Even with truths that lie too deep for taint.
I would have poured my spirit without stint
But not through wounds; not on the cess of war.
Foreheads of men have bled where no wounds were.

I am the enemy you killed, my friend.
I knew you in this dark: for so you frowned
Yesterday through me as you jabbed and killed.
I parried; but my hands were loath and cold.
Let us sleep now..."

1918
(The Poems of Wilfred Owen)

Wilfred Owen served with joined the British Army in 1915 and served as an officer on the Western Front. He was evacuated with "shell shock" in 1917, and during his hospitalization, he met Robert Graves and Siegfried Sassoon. Sassoon greatly influenced and strongly supported Owen's poetry and in 1918, five of Owen's poems were published.

In July 1918, Wilfred Owen returned to France, serving in the 2nd Manchesters. He was killed in action on November 4th while leading his company across the Sambre-Oise Canal in what was one of the Allies final victories in the war. Although his death occurred almost exactly one week to the hour before the Armistice would end the fighting on the Western Front, his mother did not learn of it until the Armistice Day itself.

In a draft preface to a collection of poems he expected to publish after the war, Owens noted that his book:

"was not about heroes. English poetry is not yet fit to speak of them.
Nor is it about deeds, or lands, nor anything about glory honour, might, majesty, dominion, or power, except War.
Above all I am not concerned with Poetry.
My subject is War, and the pity of War.
And the Poetry is in the pity.
Yet these elegies are to this generation in no sense consolatory. They may be to the next. All a poet can do today is warn. That is why true Poets must be truthful."

This Remembrance/Armistice/Veterans Day, spend a few moments considering the Pity of War. And the heroes on all sides that serve.

(Image by Michele Catania via Flickr)

I sure hope not

What a wrong way to start the new Congressional session.

(From Fighting Liberals)
Jane Hamsher reports that Lieberman was offered Chairmanship of Veterans Affairs. Joe Lieberman has always failed to support veterans. On this, Veterans Day Weekend let me just say HELL NO to that rat bastard sitting on Veterans Affairs, let alone chairmanship.

NYROB - The Co-President at Work

How to understand the last eight years....

Volume 55, Number 18 · November 20, 2008

By David Bromwich

When George W. Bush testified before the 9/11 Commission, Dick Cheney was with him in the Oval Office. What was said there remains a secret, but throughout the double session, it appears, Cheney deferred to Bush. Aides to the President afterward explained that the two men had to sit together for people to see how fully Bush was in control. A likelier motive was the obvious one: they had long exercised joint command but neither knew exactly how much the other knew, or what the other would say in response to particular questions. Bush also brought Cheney for the reason that a witness under oath before a congressional committee may bring along his lawyer. He could not risk an answer that his adviser might prefer to correct. Yet Bush would scarcely have changed the public understanding of their relationship had he sent in Cheney alone. "When you're talking to Dick Cheney," the President said in 2003, "you're talking to me."

The shallowest charge against Cheney is that he somehow inserted himself into the vice-presidency by heading the team that examined other candidates for the job. He used the position deviously, so the story goes, to sell himself to the susceptible younger Bush. The truth is both simpler and more strange. Since 1999, Cheney had been one of a group of political tutors of Bush, including Condoleezza Rice and Paul Wolfowitz; in this company, Bush found Cheney especially congenial—not least his way of asserting his influence without ever stealing a scene. Bush, too, resembled Cheney in preferring to let others speak, but he lacked the mind and patience for discussions: virtues that Cheney possessed in abundance.

(rest of the article here)