Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California -- who sits on the Senate Intelligence Committee -- said she has no objections to Hayden's nomination. "I think the most important thing is that the individual be a competent, qualified, intelligent professional, and Mike Hayden is all of those things."
She said that while she supports a civilian leader of the CIA, "I don't know a civilian that's really as well-connected and competent in the present stage of intelligence in America, and I think that's relevant."
Republicans like Sen. Arlen Specter have said that the nomination of Hayden, who oversaw the NSA warrantless eavesdropping program, presents an excellent opportunity to finally get to the bottom of how the administration has been secretly eavesdropping on Americans:
"There is no doubt there's an enormous threat from terrorism, but the president does not have a blank check," Specter said on "Fox News Sunday." "Now, with General Hayden up for confirmation, this will give us an opportunity to try to find out."
But fortunately for the President, Democratic Rep. Jane Harman is having none of it, as the CNN reports:
Rep. Jane Harman, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, warned against making the wiretapping the focus of hearings.
"His confirmation should not be about whether you're for or against the NSA program," said Harman, D-California. "It should be about whether he's the best man to transform the CIA into the premier clandestine service for the 21st century.
After The New York Times disclosed the warrantless NSA program, Harman ran around for a few weeks -- or rather, was paraded around on FOX News for a few weeks -- in order to say over and over, like some hynoptic mantra, that the program was "legal and necessary." That enabled her to be the lucky beneficiary of posts like this one from Michelle Malkin disciple A.J. Strata, who said that Harman was a Democrat he could vote for becasue she "exemplifies credibility and seriousness about national security."
Yesterday, Harman helpfully warned that the mere fact that Hayden oversaw, and became one of the principal defenders of, the administration's illegal eavesdropping on American citizens is completely irrelevant to whether he should be come Director of the CIA. In fact, Harman can barely think of an issue more irrelevant to Hayden's confirmation than the illegal eavesdropping program he implemented and continues to defend.
Some Democrats have said they object to Hayden's appointment -- both on grounds that it would give excess control over intelligence to the military and because of his ties to the illegal NSA program. But Feinstein and Harman now disagree, thus ensuring that Democrats, as usual, have a muddled, conflicting message -- a speciality of both Feinstein and Harman.
So, to recap: the extremely unpopular Bush nominates as CIA Director (a) an active military general who (b) is a close ally of Dick Cheney, (c) is the person most responsible for, and associated with, the illegal NSA program, and (d) has caused a serious break between Bush and his most reliable Congressional allies. And the first instinct of Democrats like Feinstein and Harman is to prevent any Democratic message unity on this issue and to jump to the defense of the President by defending his pick and insisting that the NSA scandal not even be talked about.
The only thing Feinstein and Harman gain from this is that they get to be patted on their heads as the "reasonable, serious Democrats" for the week - complete with a nice, guaranteed FOX News appearance -- until next week, that is, when they will once again be the subversive, anti-American, liberal Friends of the Terrorists. But it's nice that they're so pleased with the President's choice. I'm sure he appreciates their support at this difficult time for him.
I believe Carter's CIA director was Admiral Stansfield Turner.
ReplyDeleteI also believe that Harmon and Feinstein are in the select group that has been breifed on the NSA program, and consequently know something we don't. Perhaps they should be listened to.
I wonder if Harman of Feinstein have any connection to any of the contractors who are doing the illegal wiretapping?
ReplyDeleteThat's one reason I try to avoid identifying with one party and being a "team player" as opposed to identifying the issues that I feel are important and trying to find like minded people. I'm sure Ron Paul wouldn't be rolling over and playing dead were he on this particular committee.
ReplyDeleteI do not know what to feel worse about: Hayden as CIA chief, or those with a wet-noodle backbone--those such as Harman and Feinstein.
ReplyDeleteWhat can they possibly be thinking? If ever a fine opportunity to display cohesion, these two put a spike in our upbeating hearts.
With friends like these...
And shooter242, there are a hell of a lot more members on the Senate Select Intelligence Committee who were SUPPOSED to be briefed on the NSA wiretapping issue (and fully at that), than just a handful. The fact that they have not been, as required by law, is the pink elephant in the room that should be listened to. Based on past performance, I am not of a mind to sit idly by and hope that these two "know of something that we don't" instead of getting to the bottom of this issue. I'd imagine the other, non-briefed members of the Committee feel the same way.
Is this what Stockholm Syndrome looks like? Or just a fixed game? Prominent Republicans in shaky positions (read Arlen Spector) get to put distance between themselves and a rapidly-sinking President, but secure Democrats step in to fill the void. Maybe Nader was right and there's no difference after all.
ReplyDeleteWhen will California voters dump these Bush-enablers?
ReplyDeleteOh I don't know maybe it has something to do with this:
ReplyDeleteWar brings business to Feinstein spouse
Blum's firms win multimillion-dollar defense contracts in Iraq, Afghanistan
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/04/27/BA284459.DTL
Harman
http://www.house.gov/harman/press/releases/2001/121901PR_Approps.html
Voting record - http://www.winogradforcongress.com/harmanvoting.htm
I live in LA - these sellouts aren't getting my vote ever again.
This lady is getting my vote:
http://www.winogradforcongress.com/index.htm
My father and law became a regular letter writer to Fienstein as she is our Senator way out here in the West. His bone of contention with her was that she consistently voted to support the war even in the face of...well we know what the intelligence "failure" (lying) that is Iraq.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, the responses were less than satisfactory. He ended up writing his last letter to her to thank her for freeing him to now vote for an actual democrat. The final response from her office was well "we can agree to disagree."
This is exactly the response that is about to cost Lieberman his seat.
I'm coming to believe that the Democrats in congress are as much to blame for the excesses of the Bush regime as the Republicans.
ReplyDeleteWhen the history of this era is written - with its unparalleled ineptidue, corruption, and abuses of power - the Democrats (with very rare and noble exception) will be seen as passive enablers of all of this.
Many Republicans knew there was serious wrongdoing and that things had gone extremely amiss, but said nothing because it benefitted them politically to go along. That is true of most Democrats as well, and it is no more noble or understandable when done by one rather than the other.
Hayden is seriously bad news.
ReplyDeleteBenjamin Hellie has a nice link to and comments on an article about the press and how big business "turns" leftists into talking heads for the ruling regime.
ReplyDeleteWhat Hellie does not mention is that GE is one of the largest defense contractors in the US military-industrial complex. This only adds one facet to why at least NBC would want a leftist-turned-neocon talking head like Russert.
These comments apply to the Dems as well. Defense industry contractors are some of the largest contributors to both parties.
In private, Welch was proud to have personally cultivated Tim Russert from a "lefty" to a responsible representative of GE interests. Welch sincerely believed that all liberals were phonies. He took great pleasure in "buying their leftist souls", watching in satisfaction as former Democrats like Russert and MSNBC's Chris Matthews eagerly discarded the baggage of their former progressive beliefs in exchange for cold hard GE cash. Russert was now an especially obedient and model employee in whom the company could take pride.
It's a question of who/what frightens you more. Feinstein & Harman are frightened of terrorism and of change. I'm frightened of this President who has issued hundreds of signing statements which clearly say that he decides which laws are valid for him. I think that this country is overly militarized. If Hayden gets in, the winner will be delightful Donald Rumsfeld. I say vote out all who support signing statements and unregulated NSA spying. Congress needs shock therapy.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I'm not sure why Diane Feinstein is even on the committees in the first place. The questions she poses during the hearing that I have listened to seem to indicate that she lacks any in-depth understanding of the subject matters under discussion.
ReplyDeleteTherefore, her understanding of the briefings on the NSA program do not fill me with any great confidence.
Gallup just proclaimed chimpy has 31 percent support, so he is losing backwash. When the margin of error is taken into account, he is reaching nixonian level.
ReplyDeleteThe real question is, will the lying liars that released polls showing chimpy was going to win 2004 by a landslide actually report polling data that indicated support in the 20s.
After all, then his defenders would clearly look like the lunatic fringe.
If all covert activities get moved to the Pentagon, does it allow a successful end-run of Congress' mandate disallowing CIA operations on US soil and citizens?
ReplyDeleteAt the least, I suspect it more easily allows Bush to invoke the 'Commander in Chief' defense to justify and/or hide such activity from Congressional oversight.
Feinstein and Harmon, like Leiberman, have been in Washington too long.
Douglas Feith to Teach National Security at Georgetown
ReplyDeleteSure. Brainwash the upcoming leaders also. For some good links on who Doublas Feith is, follow the links in this article. Here's one, and note how frighteningly this touches upon the General Hayden story of today:
The Pentagon Muzzles the CIA
Devising bad intelligence to promote bad policy
(written in 2002)
Even as it prepares for war against Iraq, the Pentagon is already engaged on a second front: its war against the Central Intelligence Agency. The Pentagon is bringing relentless pressure to bear on the agency to produce intelligence reports more supportive of war with Iraq, according to former CIA officials. Key officials of the Department of Defense are also producing their own unverified intelligence reports to justify war. Much of the questionable information comes from Iraqi exiles long regarded with suspicion by CIA professionals. A parallel, ad hoc intelligence operation, in the office of Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith, collects the information from the exiles and scours other raw intelligence for useful tidbits to make the case for preemptive war. These morsels sometimes go directly to the president.
It will be the War Party Democrats and Republicans who work most diligently to pin it all on Bush (in my opinion with his full co-operation---he can't run anymore, remember?). Pin it on Bush so the real criminals never have to face trial. That would be POLICIES AND TACTICS of the War Party including NSA spying, legal(?) and illegal, blanket nationwide surveillance to identify and squash opposition and protest, the suspension of habeas corpus to shut up any witnesses to abuses, the chucking of the Geneva Conventions and the Constitution itself, Hotel Halliburton, Abu Graib, black room gulags, national ID cards, rings of steel, rings of fear, FBI agents at anti-war and vegan gatherings, well---you know the list.
Can we all forget about Bush and Bill Clinton? They both were very willing tools, each in an entirely different way, of the War Party.
A better place to start pointing the finger would be at George Bush Sr.
He's no tool.
BTW, can we forget about all this Emperor stuff too? The War Party doesn't genuflec to anyone. It is their ring everyone has to kiss.
George Bush is a tool, not an Emperor. He's just warming up the throne for when the Devil himself gets to sit in it---whoever that will be.
From what I remember of Hayden's and Gonzales' testimony, they revealed almost nothing about what they had been up to.
ReplyDeleteHow are we to judge Hayden's suitability for the diminishing job of heading the CIA? We know nothing about his recent performanc, but we have reason to believe that he takes a very flexible and ill-informed approach to constitutional constraints.
And who (Bush? Cheney? Gonzales? Negroponte? Rumsfeld?) would be inclined to keep him within bounds?
Is there any way (e.g., congressional backbone) to ensure that we at least have a better idea about who Hayden is and how he intends to conduct himself in this new position?
Should the Air Force be put in charge of the CIA?
There are lots of questions, not many answers.
shooter242 said:
ReplyDelete"..Perhaps they should be listened to."
-----------------------
Why? Just because Harmon and Feinstein were "briefed" on the Program (and I use that term loosely), doesn't make the Program suddenly legal. If they knew something that would miraculously change the legality of the Program, they would have said something by now.
>the Democrats (with very rare and noble exception) will be seen as passive enablers of all of this.<
ReplyDeleteI think much of the problem can be attributed as well to the apathy of the general public. Just watch a Jay-walking segment on Jay Leno if you don't know what I'm talking about. James Bovard adresses the problem admirably in his recent book "Attention Deficit Democracy"
I would certainly recommend that anyone who reads this blog would also be interested in his poiunt of view.
Feinstein has a vested interest in supporting Bush, her base be damned. It's time for her to go. All of the vichy dems must go.
ReplyDeleteHow is it a man with a 31% approval rating can get Republicans to support anything he wants, much less dems?
Feingold is the only Senator I can think of who had the courage of his convictions when Bush was at 80%. That tells ya something.
The war over intelligence is a critical part of a broader offensive by the party of war within the Bush administration against virtually the entire expert Middle East establishment in the United States -- including State Department, Pentagon and CIA area specialists and leading military officers. Inside the foreign-policy, defense and intelligence agencies, nearly the whole rank and file, along with many senior officials, are opposed to invading Iraq. But because the less than two dozen neoconservatives leading the war party have the support of Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, they are able to marginalize that opposition.
ReplyDeleteYou know what the absolute ultimate irony of this whole thing is?
You can never talk about the "War Party" or the neo-cons or who is behind everything because you are accused of being anti-semitic.
This is one of the great hoaxes of all time, and one of the most damning commentaries on human intelligence.
The War Party's use of this ruse has been devised so incredibly brilliantly that everyone is so blinded that they forget one simple little fact: THEY ARE NOT JEWISH.
I can't believe how easy people are to deceive.
The War Party goes out of its way to employ Jews so they can hide behind the Anti-Semitism defense if anyone ever critizes their high ranking employees like the Jewish neo-cons and AIPEC.
It's mind blowing. I am not saying the Jewish neo-cons and AIPEC are not very hard working, careerist employees with plans, schemes and their own self-interests always in mind as ambitious careerists always have.
But they are not the Boss and they never have been.
Even the above quote doesn't really get it right.
But because the less than two dozen neoconservatives leading the war party have the support of Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, they are able to marginalize that opposition.
It should read
but because the leaders of the war party Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and their shareholders have the support of the neoconservatvies they are able to marginalize that opposition.
When I write "shareholders" I am not using the word in its literal sense. These "shareholders" have been around since before the first company was ever incorporation.
All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players:
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts
-William Shakespeare
Glenn:
ReplyDeleteApart from snarking about the gall of individual Elephants and Donkeys to disagree with their leadership about issues, do you have anything to add or subtract about whether this nominee is qualified for the post?
Can anybody tell me why it wouldn't work as a link.
ReplyDeletelink
Don't know. Sometimes if there's a space in it that will mess it up.
Here's an example. On the same day Bush formally picks Hayden, this story is released:
ReplyDeleteBush's Best Moment in Office? It's a Fish Story
Bush is now going to act the role of a clown to draw fire away from the caravan as it continues to move on.
Don't fall for this ploy. Bush is beyond the point now.
PS. Keep your eye on the Democratic Party (as Glenn points out today.) They're on one of the front camels.
All of a sudden, Joe was going on Fox News and undercutting the Democrats on the president's plan for Social Security reform. He went from someone who was just voting with Bush to someone who was actually attacking the [Democratic] base," Ivler said.
ReplyDeleteFrom here
That's the problem, see. These people disregard and attack us, and up until now, they have had no reason to fear will have to pay for their actions, unlike the Republican who fear their base. It's time to turn the tables.
>do you have anything to add or subtract about whether this nominee is qualified for the post?<
ReplyDeletebart... you know better than that. Can anybody say NSA? 4th amendment? probable cause? FISA?
Gen. Michael Hayden is sort right smack dab in the middle of why this blog exists in the first place.
But then again, you knew that.
Glenn, I gather you've had your share of disillusionment and have become very angry as you've drifted from centrist/uninvolved thinking as a result of concrete experiences and greater awareness.
ReplyDeleteYou're trodding in well-worn footsteps. To illustrate, I am including the following quote:
"In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends."
Martin Luther King Jr.
US black civil rights leader & clergyman (1929 - 1968)
The "silence of our friends" speaks eloquently.
PhD9 said... I'm sure Ron Paul wouldn't be rolling over and playing dead were he on this particular committee.
ReplyDeleteRon Paul voted against Katrina and Rita aid in a coastal district with 200 miles of coastline. There are other issues about Ron Paul that do not allow me to endorse him in any way, just because he is anti-Bush monarchism. He's a racist, a homophobe and anti-abortion. He's a John Birch style wingnut like our own Hyfascia. In spite of what the old Arab proverb says, the enemy of your enemy is not always your friend.
Jane Harman is my congressperson, here in ultra-liberal Venice (CA-36). Her pro-war, pro-unfettered-surveillance positions would be perfectly fine were she a Republican representing Ogden, UT. But she's a Democrat, representing Venice, CA! Venice, for heck's sakes!
ReplyDeleteThe last time I called her office to bitch about a position of Jane's (in that case, it was Harman's decision to co-author a constitutional amendment to ban flag-buring), I told her phone answerer much the same as the above: Jane's supposed to be representing Venice, for crap's sakes! Her phone answerer responded, "Well, she also represents El Segundo" (a sleepy military-contractor community with about 1/3rd the population of Venice).
That was when I finally understood Jane Harman about as well as I ever will: she's much more comfortable representing the quasi-conservative suburban pockets of her precinct than she is in representing the very-liberal, highly-populated urban centers. She loves her some military contractors, and they love her back (6 of her 7 top campaign donors are military contractors). The rest of us (you know, the actual voters she's supposed to be representing) can go jump in the bay.
It pisses me off.
I've lately decided I had to do something about it. Though I, personally, don't happen to belong to the Democratic Party (I'm a registered Green), I've jumped with both feet into volunteering for the campaign of Jane's Democratic Primary challenger: Marcy Winograd. Additionally, I sent Marcy the biggest check I could afford, after first photocopying it and sending that copy to Jane's office, along with a note explaining why I'm donating to her opponent (a little strategy I heard Daniel Ellsberg suggest at a peace march back in '03).
If Marcy Winograd is elected to Jane's current seat, Marcy would vote to recall our troops from Iraq. She'd vote to restore the civil liberties that have been taken from us via the Patriot Act. And she'd vote to impeach the president. These are all things Jane Harman would never do, but they're all things that the citizens of CA-36 avidly support. Not that that matters or anything.
>the enemy of your enemy is not always your friend.<
ReplyDeleteBut the friend of my enemy is a DINO.
DiFi is a DINO.
ReplyDeleteShe's a member of the same club made up by Cousin Kerry, Joementum, Hillary the Hawk, Joe "MBNA" Biden, John "goodhair" Edwards, and Barack Obama.
Also, her husband has engaged in war profiteering in Iraq.
I wonder exactly what would then be relevant enough to a candidate to warrant concern by Harman?
ReplyDeleteOr is there anything about Hayden that she doesn't know that might cause her to withdraw her support?
DiFi is a DINO.
ReplyDeleteShe's a member of the same club made up by Cousin Kerry, Joementum, Hillary the Hawk, Joe "MBNA" Biden, John "goodhair" Edwards, and Barack Obama.
Also, her husband has engaged in war profiteering in Iraq.
Almost every last one of them is DINO. And a move to third party candidates may just keep the GOP in power. If you liked Clinton, don't forget to thank Ross Perot, you know. I am quite certain that nothing is more like sweet music to the ears of the GOP than talk of not voting for the DINO incumbents. With detestable DiFi, the alternatives are a Green and a Peace and Freedom party and a Repuke that really is a Repuke.
The last time I called her office to bitch about a position of Jane's (in that case, it was Harman's decision to co-author a constitutional amendment to ban flag-buring), I told her phone answerer much the same as the above: Jane's supposed to be representing Venice, for crap's sakes! Her phone answerer responded, "Well, she also represents El Segundo" (a sleepy military-contractor community with about 1/3rd the population of Venice).
ReplyDeleteRedistricting, gerrymandering... I wish I knew what to do about that. And dump the electoral college, that public financing of elections and a verifiable paper ballot.
BART THE MORON ASKED GLENN:
ReplyDeletedo you have anything to add or subtract about whether this nominee is qualified for the post?
Glenn has pointed out every day since it was clear Hayden would be nominated that Hayden is the person who implemented and vigorously defended the illegal NSA program.
Therefore, if you wrack your decayed brain very hard, might you be able to come up with some inferences about possible grounds Glenn would have for opposing this nomination?
I honestly don't mind that you are a Bush drone who comes here and parrots those veiws. What bugs me about you is that you really are quite stupid, but your painfully unwarranted arrogance prevents you from recognizing that, and it always will.
ReplyDeletebart said...
Glenn:
Apart from snarking about the gall of individual Elephants and Donkeys to disagree with their leadership about issues, do you have anything to add or subtract about whether this nominee is qualified for the post?
5:29 PM
I dunno, perhaps there is someone in this country of 300,000,000 people that is also qualified to run the CIA, but isn't neck-deep in a scandal over illegal spying?
Just saying, if you really cared about the security of the United States, wouldn't it be a good idea to put the most-qualified, clean-living, straight-shooting person in there?
Not in the Bush Monarchy. Just shuffle the next greasy, corrupted courtier into place. No need to look outside The Royal Court for new blood or credibility.
Patrick I really wish you would post more.
ReplyDeleteAs I think I said before, I honestly think Patrick should record those calls and then post them on a website -- as a model for how citizens should hold their representatives -- their public servants -- accountable.
I admit that I find his accounts extremely amusing, but only because I know it must drive the targets of his well-informed and tenacious interrogations insane. But that, in turn, is only because these Washington staff people are so accustomed to being treated with great deference, as though they are part of some royal court. To hear them being taken to task by someone who is highly informed and a skillful questioner -- not to mention hilariously relentless -- is both encouraging and entertaining.
these Washington staff people are so accustomed to being treated with great deference, as though they are part of some royal court. To hear them being taken to task by someone who is highly informed and a skillful questioner -- not to mention hilariously relentless -- is both encouraging and entertaining.
ReplyDeleteWhence comes the Colbert Affair, Glenn.
Simple confirmation question: yes or no, have you ever authorized the wiretapping, without a warrant, of any American journalists, or American political enemies of the President?
ReplyDeleteIf that's not relevant to running CIA, I don't know what is. CIA's "Chinese Walls" prohibiting it from acting within the US are the same as those at the NSA.
Democrats sue the Secret Service.
ReplyDeleteI wish someone would explain this to me.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060508
/ap_on_go_pr_wh/abramoff_white_
house
"I don't know a civilian that's really as well-connected and competent in the present stage of intelligence in America, and I think that's relevant."
ReplyDeleteIf you want to attack her, provide three alternative names showing this quote wrong.
If I'm ever able to master the link "situation" on this new-fangled contraption, I will throw a party.
ReplyDeletehttp://news.yahoo.com/s/ap
/20060508/ap_on_go_pr_wh/abramoff
_white_house
Thanks, Patrick. I was about to post about Marcy Winograd when I read your comment. I'll do it anyway.
ReplyDeleteMarcy, for those who don't know her (and she has very little visibility outside of the 36th) is an amazing candidate, She's extremely bright, informed, charismatic, poised and a terrific speaker.
I, too sent her a check and got others to as well. If she had the resources (read money) she could knock of Jane in this very blue district. Go to one of her events and see hundreds of wildly enthusiastic people. It takes something to achieve that in a primary. She also had the endorsement of PDA, Gore Vidal, Rev Lennox Yearwood of the HipHop Caucus and Cindy Sheehan, who recently appeared with her.
Even if you are out of the district you can help at www.winogradforcongress.com
She's worth it.
Phoenician in a time of Romans said...
ReplyDelete"I don't know a civilian that's really as well-connected and competent in the present stage of intelligence in America, and I think that's relevant."
If you want to attack her, provide three alternative names showing this quote wrong.
Phoenician, you're really not paying attention, are you?
Bart actually asks a relevant question. What is it that might disbar Ge. Hayden from serving as CIA chief?
ReplyDeleteThere seem to be two relevant threas in the media about Hayden. First, there's the notion that he's a Negroponte man. In this version of a turf war, Goss got canned because he didn't back the Big N's plans for integrating CIA into DHS enough.
Now, the report's go, Hayden's coming in to carry through on Negroponte's plan of action for the CIA; that is, making it more "flexible, adaptive," (insert techno-militaristic-corporate buzzword here), etc.
With his professionalism and intelligence-gathering expertise, Hayden is supposedly going to improve the morale of the troops at the CIA--sorely shocked by Goss--and bring the CIA into the 21st century, whatever that might mean.
The second thread in the media is the critical one thrown out by some (House) Republicans and House and Senate Democrats. This thread talks about Hayden's military rank and his still being in the service. There's not a lot of discussion about why that might be a problem, except for the fact that the CIA's always been run by a civilian, etc.
For my money, this thread is the money trail. But people need to follow that trail deeper than just the simple fact that he's a military man. Nothing wrong with that on the face of it. No, the big story here is that his military background and reported closeness to Rumsfeld and Cheney imply that the defense intelligence arm of the government might gain influence over both overseas intelligence gathering activities and domestic activities.
That's the big story here. Hayden is a systems guy, which in techno parlance means he knows how to integarte various computer networking solutions and make them talk to each other. In a recent US News and World Report, this very project of integrating the domestic and the overseas intelligence capacities is investigated. The report is good at presenting the pro and con of this effort in the intelligence community.
I don't have that link available to-hand. I'm begging alms much of this evening and my access to a computer is limited.
In a nutshell, the brunt of this Hayden story and its leading threads are not those being reported in the mainstream media. The big story here is finding out whose guy Hayden is;;Negroponte's or Rumsfeld's? My money's on Rumsfeld.
Well wouldn't you know it. I mention it in one comment and I turn on RawStory and there my idea is--in big red letters: Pentagon Is Winner Over CIA
ReplyDeleteHere ya go Bart, a reporter tells Deathsquad-oponte in his presser today why Hayden shouldn't run the CIA.
ReplyDeleteNegroponte spins the answer like a college slacker trying to spin a Dairy Queen assistant managership to a Wall Street recruiter. "He taught ROTC at a college for 4 years! C'mon, that alone qualifies him...and...and...and he was posted in a country we spied on!"
Pathetic. Next courtier, please.
*******************************
Q Mr. Ambassador, can I ask you about the other strain of criticism coming off the Hill that General Hayden's expertise is primarily in technical intelligence-gathering and that he has not spent, obviously, any time in the field as an operative, and you have a guy running the CIA who is not as familiar with that at a time when it most needs it?
AMBASSADOR NEGROPONTE: Well, here's the answer to that one: First of all, Mike is not personally a techy. As you know, or may know from looking at his resume, he has a -- he's an historian; he has a master's degree, both a bachelor's and master's in history. Secondly, he has served in other than technical aspects federal intelligence. He was an attache in Bulgaria during the Cold War, so he was actually an intelligence collector out there as a defense attache. He's been an instructor at a civilian institution, ROTC institution for a four-year period. So I think that he's got great breadth of experience with respect to the different intelligence disciplines that exist out there.
********************
*Ahem*. Feinstein is a shill for the many, many defence contractors in California. How much did they give to her campaign? Her husband, too, made millions at Bechtel, and IIRC they still both own tons of stock in Bechtel.
ReplyDeleteIf Feinstein had any ethics at all, should shut the hell up and recuse herself on this matter.
Note: she is facing a primary in 3 weeks, so if you're annoyed, vote against her. Two candidates: Church and Felder, are running against her.
Democrats sue
ReplyDeletethe Secret Service.
The party's tonight.
Are there any commies here?
ReplyDeleteender said...
ReplyDeleteThis is unbelievable to me. WTF? Who does BushCo think they are kidding? I do not know what else to say. The spin never rests.
What?
The USDA on Iraq: Everything's Coming Up Rosy
Everything is coming up the blood red color of the rose. What? Did I miss a party meeting? Red... Red! Commies! Eeeek!
>Hayden is a systems guy, which in techno parlance means he knows how to integarte various computer networking solutions and make them talk to each other.<
ReplyDeleteI frequently get the feeling that one of the reasons that the US is doing so poorly in world standing is what I like to call the "boys with toys" syndrome. We're so enamored with high-tech solutions (think missle-armed Predators) that we forget that what we need are people on the ground who can speak the native language, blend in with the populace and be "on our side". What's the easiest way to get people "on our side"? How about by DOING THE RIGHT THING
That's why I think that these ****tards who simply assert that we are bombing hard enough are such morons.
Public Notice:
ReplyDeleteFor those who thought the last thread was dead, “jao” just slapped the silly out of our persistent little legal troll – and did so slowly, methodically, and mercilessly using logic and law as a fine scalpel leaving poor Bart shredded in little embarrassing pieces, gasping for breath and calling the home office for support. It is something to behold.
(Warning: Eviscerated troll ahead, proceed with caution.)
Here's my opinion but I won't elaborate too much on it now.
ReplyDeleteThe script seems to have undergone a re-write from necessity, but one that was anticipated as maybe being necessary from the start.
The role of "Bush, wannbe Emperor" has been shifted to "Bush, unpopular Clown."
Same plot, different dialogue.
I see now why every post from Gedalyia and Bart in the earlier days contained the words "Bush-haters" or "hate-Bush."
That was just contingency planning. In case the curtain ever slipped aside enough to reveal some dirty stuff backstage, it would be handy to have all the attention stay on the fight in the parking lot so nobody would wander inside the bank and see that the vault was being robbed.
Good thinking, scriptwriters.
More and more polls saying how unpopular Bush is, more and more truly bizarre statements and actions on the part of Bush, more and more attempts by Bush to alienate just about everyone, more and more effort to keep him center stage by encouraging debates of whether he is a conservative or a liberal, more and more attempts to keep people from noticing that the caravan keeps moving on.
Re-writing Bush's role as villain rather than hero is very ingenious indeed.
Deceiving Americans Into Socialism
ReplyDeleteWoe unto you, lawyers! for you have taken away the key of knowledge:
you entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in you hindered. (Luke 11:52)
Who knows
ReplyDeletePerhaps Feinstein and Harman know that the nomination of Hayden is doomed anyway, might as well let the Repugs carry the water on that one, while they sit it out to garner creds for moderation and bipartisanship with whatever segment of their electorates values such. Perhaps they know that the Hayden for Goss switch is merely the tip of the iceberg in some deep underlying intrigue (over war with Iran?) in which Hayden is on the side of the angels (or at least the less devilish side). Perhaps their support for Hayden is a sort of trap, designed to string out a process they know, because they know something about Hayden that we don't, will embarrass the President the longer it plays out.
I offer these explanations, not because I find any of them particularly convincing (it probably is just good old fashioned gutlessness), but because the fact that we no longer transact the public business in public means that we'll never know the players because we'll never get a program. And we got here, not because secret services, though they conflict with the openness required by democracy, are an unfortunate necessity, but because politicians in our democracy have simply found the cover that official secrecy provides too attractively inertial an alternative to the trouble of actually wrestling with the issues. They can hide behind any or all of the theories offered by the media, or by respondents in this space, or dozens of other rationales you might invent for them, and not have to wiorry about being fact-checked, because all the facts (or lack thereof) are classified. They do not have to face their own gutlessness or inertia, and that happy state of unconsciousness is more gratifying than NSA wiretaps are frightening, and that by a country mile.
If the problem were just NSA wiretaps, and we had an otherwise functional republican form of government, we would already have gotten closure on the FISA bypass. The Congress, whichever party were in the majority, would have been so incensed by the contempt displayed for its will, that Bush would have been impeached, convicted, and arrested before the sun set. This would not have required legislators of unusual virtue or integrity, but simply ordinary men and women quite ordinarily protective of their turf. But the NSA wiretaps happened in an elected dictatorship, in which the elected representatives of the people had long since traded the power of public reason for the security of government by secret intigue. The FISA that Bush had to bypass, like the War Powers Act in response to Vietnam, was itself a monument to the surrender of the republic, rather than any sort of bulwark against Presidential abuse of power. We expect FISA judges not themselves accountable and open to public scrutiny of their actions, to hold the administration accountable for establishing probable cause? Is anyone surprised that they turned down only 4 or 5 out of tens of thousands of wiretap requests? Does anyone imagine they enforced anything close to probable cause on these tens of thousands? Why ever would we expect a President to treat this farcical excuse for a court as anything but a meaningless finger-drill, and expendable impediment? So, of course, there is no rush by those who set up the farce of FISA merely as a face-saving gesture, to treat the bypass of this joke as anything at all serious.
The FISA bypass, and all the other scandals this maladroit administration (yes, somewhere in Texas a village is missing its idiot) has stumbled into, may yet bring it down. Without denigrating the importance of such an outcome, if all we do is bring down just this hapless fool of a President, and fail to use this teachable moment to rid ourselves of the security state, and move back to the republic with which that state is incompatible, we will have gained nothing lasting. Just going back to FISA, and the War Powers Act, will just leave the field open to the next idiot on a white horse. Only next time, maybe he won't be an idiot, he'll be someone of real talent, a Napoleon or even a Hitler (No, I am not equating Bush to Hitler. Hitler was far more talented, though less so than Napoleon. Bush lacks the ability to accomplish so much evil.), and we won't find it so easy to rid ourselves of the dictator.
So, yes, impeach and convict BushCo for bypassing FISA. But then repeal FISA. Treat wiretaps as wiretaps across the board. The government gets them only by presenting probable cause to an ordinary, publicly accountable, judge. Period. Get rid of the CIA, NSA, DIA, and any other of these bypasses to conducting the public business in public that we don't even know about because their very existence is classified. They are more of a threat to our republic than any foreign power. Many more of our current lot of anaerobic legislators than just Harman and Feinstein will not be able to survive in the oxygen-rich environment that will ensue.
>Get rid of the CIA, NSA, DIA, and any other of these bypasses to conducting the public business in public that we don't even know about because their very existence is classified.<
ReplyDeleteGee, even with my hopelessly pacifistic worldview, I would call that going too far.
The key to not doing really stupid things is to gather the best information you can. Unfortunatly for our current regime, the other key is to, upon having gathered the very best information available, is to beleive it.
I actually suspect that if I thought the NSA program was doing what we've been told it is, I might even be inclined to support it. But the available evidence suggests that since the administration had decided that presenting it to Congress in the form of an amendment to the Patriot act would NOT have resulted in its passage, I can safely conclude that if I knew the details I would most certainly disapprove. (My uneducated guess is that they saw the reaction to the Poindexter TIA initiative and decided that since THAT wasn't going to happen, that they would just do it anyway but not tell anyone.)
I guess the point I'm trying to make is that I feel the work our clandestine services provide is important. I just don't want them to run amok. And as we speak we are dismantling the only controls we have to prevent said running amok.
Get rid of the CIA, NSA, DIA, and any other of these bypasses to conducting the public business in public that we don't even know about because their very existence is classified.
ReplyDeleteGee, even with my hopelessly pacifistic worldview, I would call that going too far.
With the exception of some of the work of the CIA, most of what these guys do is pretty passive. I don't want to pluck out my eyes because they offend thee or me.
Rockin' post, Patrick. Hat tip, buddy.
ReplyDeleteHayden's nomination should be opposed by any politicians in Washington who value the rule of law. If you are a reader of Glenn's blog, you should have no doubts about that.
I agree with Glenn's sentiments about the corruption of democrats, but how about we get the plunderers out of Washington before we go after the petty thieves. It is rare to find any republican who isn't twice as compromised as the worst of the democrats.
According to 27B Stroke6:
ReplyDeleteThe FCC's bizarre effort to unilaterally force broadband ISPs to make their networks wiretap friendly drew open derision from the bench on its first court hearing today.
One of the judges hearing the case called the FCC's argument "gobbledygook," the AP reports.
"Your argument makes no sense," U.S. Circuit Judge Harry T. Edwards told the lawyer for the Federal Communications Commission, Jacob Lewis. "When you go back to the office, have a big chuckle. I'm not missing this. This is ridiculous. Counsel!"
Edwards was one of a three judge panel hearing a challenge to the FCC's decision at the U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Columbia.
Armagednoutahere:
ReplyDelete"Can anybody tell me why it wouldn't work as a link."
There was an extra, spurious forward-slash at the end of the URL. Computers can be annoyingly picky!
Empire Breeds the Emperor
ReplyDeleteBush's excesses and how to correct them
Judiciary Committee member Russ Feingold of Wisconsin – the only senator to vote against the PATRIOT Act – also backs the endeavor.
That really was amazing. Of course it's possible he's the only Senator who even bothered to read it, because have you ever read it?
Anyone who read that whole thing and still voted for it is by definition a "bad guy" who can never be trusted again either because he's too stupid to be in office or he was willing to sell out this country for whatever reasons.
and
Despite what narrow-minded Bush-bashers might think, changing the president alone will not solve the problem. Unless the country's leaders desist from empire-building and return to the republic – and so that more humble foreign policy then-candidate Bush promised six long years ago – America will continue the imperial slide, going the way of all empires before it, perhaps even before the completion of that imperial palace now being erected in the sands of ancient Babylon.
Today is the first day that I sense that we are all, as a community led by Glenn, getting closer to the real truth.
All of us, each in our own way, have, imo, been led off track along the way and it's perfectly understandable considering what masters of disguise we are up against.
The Democrats are no better than the Republicans. That's clear. That doesn't mean they are worse either. Who knows?
Martin Luther King did not say the ones who were silent were worse than the enemies. He said he'd remember both.
(By the way I grew up thinking Martin Luther King had been a communist. That's what I read. Anyway, maybe he was, maybe he wasn't, but when I started reading his words there were few whose words I found more thrilling. I am really glad they were not able to "marginalize" him because there are a few other black leaders whose words I often find extremely thrilling but I am even afraid to mention their names here because they have been so "marginalized." Maybe rightly, maybe wrongly, I don't know enough facts to know. But few people speak more eloquently and that is a treasure all in itself.)
So although I think "passive" and "spineless" are entirely the wrong words to use about the Democrats (they are anything but spineless--and they are so strong and confident that they don't give a damn what any of their constituents say as Patrick often exposes---they know the "system" has their backs covered), they are hardly the main problem.
The "system" and who is responsible for its creation and endurance are the points. What have they done, what are they doing, what are they planning to do, why are they doing it, how are they doing it, and can we stop it?
The link Ender put up at 7:51 is a terrific example of the simply mindblowing lengths they go to.
The quote above on "Empire" is very on target, but it is written from the point of view of an author concentrating on the concept of "empire."
I agree with that myself, but "empire" doesn't even tell the whole story.
It's not the desire to wage wars and the money and power those wars provide that is "behind everything", imo.
It's something else.
Anyway, does anyone have easy access to some background info on Gen. Hayden that would tell the following:
1) Where he went to high school and college.
2) What he majored in?
3) His father's schooling and profession?
If so, thanks.
Kovie, phd9, patrick, actually almost everyone, great posts and great links today. And of course Glenn. Great post. Thanks!
PS. The Military.
They are coming into the spotlight now.
Are there any historians on this site? I would like to ask the following question:
What countries in modern history were actually ruled by the Military? And in those cases, is it known who was "behind the military"?
Finally, is everyone watching "24"?
Simply and utterly amazing. There are no words.
I think I know what's coming in the finale and if I am right, I may have to just kill myself after that last program and get it over with (as President Logan almost did tonight before a "careerist"---a man with no ideology and no motivation except his own career and his desire to advance it stepped in to save him about two seconds before the President shot himself because the President had agreed to "take the fall" to avoid the real truth from coming out about who was behind the "conspiracy" and what they had all done) because I don't think I am going to be able to live through that for an entire season if what I think is coming is right.
My nerves may not be able to take it.
For anyone not watching (and if you are not, you should institutionalize yourself because you are insane) there was this incredible moment in tonight's show where Jack Bauer, the hero, finally gets the proof that President Logan has been involved in a conspiracy against the country for which he has committed murder and treason and even worse, and one of the hero's allies who is the head of the Department of Homeland Security, who has recently been won over to Jack Bauer's side is asked:
"What are you going to do with the proof when you get it into your hands"?
And she answers "Turn it over to the Attorney General."
Ya.
bart said...
ReplyDelete"Apart from snarking about the gall of individual Elephants and Donkeys to disagree with their leadership about issues, do you have anything to add or subtract about whether this nominee is qualified for the post?"
Yup, Hayden is a Karl Rove look alike. They could be fraternal twins, and on that basis alone Hayden should be disqualified.
:-)
Former CIA agent and current intelligence consultant Larry Johnson thinks that Negroponte and Hayden will dismantle the CIA completely:
ReplyDeleteIf the New York Times is correct, John Negroponte and Michael Hayden are hell bent on shifting critical analytical functions from the CIA to some other part of government (perhaps a stand-alone entity). If true, the death knell for the CIA is sounding, and an important national security capability will disappear if they are permitted to institute this madness. While right-wing crazies, convinced that the CIA is part of an elaborate plot to undermine the Bush administration, will celebrate this pyrrhic victory, sane Americans should hit the panic button.
ender said...
ReplyDeleteLike I said before if you all haven't seen it you should. Hayden was just following orders concerning the NSA illegal wiretapping after all.
Too bad we can't tattoo the fourth amendment on his forehead in reverse so that he could see it every morning when he looks in the mirror to comb his hair.
OOPS!! Guess that wouldn't work either. :-)
Harman was special counsel to the Department of Defense before entering the House.
ReplyDeleteHarman is also a member of the Blue dog Democrats. She's not a DINO, she's a conservative.
ReplyDeleteThe militarization of the civillian arms of government
ReplyDelete(diplomacy, intelligence)
The military's silent takeover of U.S. diplomacy
And this essay that continues to makes rounds...
The Origins of the American Military Coup of 2012
excerpt
Clearly, the curious tapestry of military authoritarianism and combat ineffectiveness that we see today was not yet woven in 1992. But the threads were there. Knowing what I know now, here's the advice I would have given the War College Class of 1992 had I been their graduation speaker:
Demand that the armed forces focus exclusively on indisputably military duties. We must not diffuse our energies away from our fundamental responsibility for warfighting. To send ill-trained troops into combat makes us accomplices to murder.
Acknowledge that national security does have economic, social, educational, and environmental dimensions, but insist that this doesn't necessarily mean the problems in those areas are the responsibility of the military to correct. Stylishly designating efforts to solve national ills as "wars" doesn't convert them into something appropriate for the employment of military forces.
Readily cede budgetary resources to those agencies whose business it is to address the non-military issues the armed forces are presently asked to fix. We are not the DEA, EPA, Peace Corps, Department of Education, or Red Cross--nor should we be. It has never been easy to give up resources, but in the long term we--and the nation--will be better served by a smaller but appropriately focused military.
Divest the defense budget of perception-skewing expenses. Narcotics interdiction, environmental cleanup, humanitarian relief, and other costs tangential to actual combat capability should be assigned to the budgets of DEA, EPA, State, and so forth. As long as these expensive programs are hidden in the defense budget, the taxpayer understandably--but mistakenly--will continue to believe he's buying military readiness.
Continue to press for the elimination of superfluous, resource-draining Guard and Reserve units. Increase the training tempo, responsibilities, and compensation of those that remain.
Educate the public to the sophisticated training requirements occasioned by the complexities of modern warfare. It's imperative we rid the public of the misperception that soldiers in peacetime are essentially unemployed and therefore free to assume new missions.[94]
Resist unification of the services not only on operational grounds, but also because unification would be inimical to the checks and balances that underpin democratic government. Slow the pace of fiscally driven consolidation so that the impact on less quantifiable aspects of military effectiveness can be scrutinized.
Assure that officer accessions from the service academies correspond with overall force reductions (but maintain separate service academies) and keep ROTC on a wide diversity of campuses. If necessary, resort to litigation to maintain ROTC campus diversity.
Orient recruiting resources and campaigns toward ensuring that all echelons of society are represented in the military, without compromising standards.[95] Accept that this kind of recruiting may increase costs. It's worth it.
Work to moderate the base-as-an-island syndrome by providing improved incentives for military members and families to assimilate into civilian communities. Within the information programs for our force of all-volunteer professionals (increasingly US-based), strengthen the emphasis upon such themes as the inviolability of the Constitution, ascendancy of our civilian leadership over the military, and citizens' responsibilities.
Finally, I would tell our classmates that democracy is a fragile institution that must be continuously nurtured and scrupulously protected. I would also tell them that they must speak out when they see the institution threatened; indeed, it is their duty to do so. Richard Gabriel aptly observed in his book To Serve with Honor that
when one discusses dissent, loyalty, and the limits of military obligations, the central problem is that the military represents a threat to civil order not because it will usurp authority, but because it does not speak out on critical policy decisions. The soldier fails to live up to his oath to serve the country if he does not speak out when he sees his civilian or military superiors executing policies he feels to be wrong.[96]
Gabriel was wrong when he dismissed the military's potential to threaten civil order, but he was right when he described our responsibilities. The catastrophe that occurred on our watch took place because we failed to speak out against policies we knew were wrong. It's too late for me to do any more. But it's not for you.
Best regards,
Prisoner 222305759
Fantastic idea Paul Rosenberg about a site to document those calls to elected representatives.
ReplyDeleteI wish someone would organize that. Or could we persuade Patrick to be that someone if we raised money to fund his efforts?
I am going to find out more about Ron Paul. If he's for real, he sounds incredibly good.
The Fading US Economy
ReplyDeleteAmerican economists have failed their country as badly as have the Republican and Democratic parties. The sad fact is that there is no leader in sight capable of reversing the rapid decline of the United States of America.
I am going to shift my focus a bit from now on as I actually believe we are not going to get out of this whole thing intact. We can still try as we have been doing, but the odds are definitely against it. This is no ordinary Goliath.
So my focus is going to be on the light side. I am starting my own Schadenfreud Party and I and myself are going to have a big laugh.
Because the one thing all these evil geniuses haven't figured out yet is that when we go down, they're going with us.
I find that oddly comforting. I know it's not much, but at least it's something. As a matter of fact, it's almost hilarious. Couldn't happen to nicer people.
Throughout the ages as they kept the caravan going they thought they would always be protected by the advantages the rigged system had put in place to protect them.
But there were two things they failed to anticipate. More about that another day.
In the meantime, this may be Dark, but ha ha ho ho hee hee. It's a real thigh slapper.
Apres-vous, Alphonse.
Eyes WIde Open said...
ReplyDeleteI am going to find out more about Ron Paul. If he's for real, he sounds incredibly good.
6:42 AM
He's a total moron and wingnut. You'll love him.
Ron's had a good scrubbing lately too. But here are a few choice quotes from his "Freedom Watch" newsletter:
ReplyDelete"If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."
"Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e., support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action."
"Politically sensible blacks are outnumbered as decent people...I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city (Washington) are semi-criminal or entirely criminal."
"We don't think a child of 13 should be held responsible as a man of 23. That's true for most people, but black males age 13 who have been raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such."
That's just the stuff on blacks. He loves gays and Jews, too.
I love the internets...
ReplyDeleteRon Paul gets the Rush Limbaugh Award for Excellence in Conservative Hypocrisy.
Conservatives are such stupid people. But even in Texas, some people have brains.
One Hand Giveth the Finger, The Other Taketh Away
Aside from the double-edged sword of having more idiots to make fun of (and sadly more idiots to annoy me), one of the few good things about my having moved to Victoria, Texas is that there are no major radio stations here that play Rush Limbaugh. Odd considering that this is the very heart of the buckle of the Bible belt, the opening to the salt-of-the-earth-folk mine.
Then again, Victoria seems to have bred a very special kind of conservative. The kind that we all gasp at in horror on the news. The kind of large browed ditto-monkey that would make it's own children lie in the driveway of an abortion clinic to keep innocent children from being slaughtered by their careless parents. The kind of people who refuse to vote for Bob Dole because he's too liberal. Victoria is the largest city in the district that twice, TWICE mind you! Twice elected Ron Paul onto the Hill. Ron Paul, the 1988 Libertarian Presidential Candidate, affectionately known by his colleagues as "Dr. No". Ron Paul who claims to fight for the rights of all people, while representing only a few rabid loudmouths.
Paul is one of President Clinton's most outspoken critics. Be it giving a speech or declaring war on Iraq, it seems that Clinton cannot make a move without Paul saying he's wrong. Like most of the GOP, Paul is completely out of touch with reality and honestly believes that most people are "immoral and confused" if they would rather have a sleezeball President who can keep the budget balanced than a senile old man who can't keep his own balance (physically, or financially).
First of all, Paul, a doctor, doesn't seem to have much interest in his patients since he has been one of the most ferocious fighters in the battle against HMO reform and Clinton's Bill Of Patient's Rights. He's also voted against allocating more money for research into breast cancer and many infant diseases, all while giving his famous rallying cry for why he votes against many things... "If it's not in the Constitution, I don't vote for it!"
Secondly, Paul has for several years, voted to cut funding for FEMA. Even this past year, when Victoria, Cuero and many other towns in his district were suffering severe flooding, even as FEMA was waiting for the flood waters to recede so they could survey the damage, Ron Paul was on the Hill, insisting that Disaster Relief be cut even more. And then he had the gaul to drive around Victoria, having his picture taken with people who had lost their homes (and if Paul had his way, would not ever have one again) and talk about what a great tragedy it is. Amazingly, he got re-elected. You'd think he's have lost a few rich white folks votes. Then again, I guess since the Country Club Golf Course dried up after a week, the rich didn't have much to complain about.
He also was one of a handful who voted to cut $102 million from the agricultural appropriations bill: a cut that would put more burdens upon an already hard-hit costal farming district which Paul (serves.
With service like this... Third, I'd have serious doubts about anybody who bases his entire campaign on a slogan that does little more then make fun of his opponents name. For a time, the local TV stations would play his ad every five minutes, of a kindly old woman saying "I'd be leery of voting for Sneary." Thankfully Loy Sneary was a tasteful enough man not to respond with the traditional response of "Nanny-Nanny-Boo-Boo, Stick You Head in Doo-Doo" or to use a slogan of his own. I'm apPAULed by Ron Paul comes readily to mind.
Fourth, Paul is a racist and is almost certainly a Nazi. In his newsletter, Paul has called for the destruction of the Federal Government
The right of secession should be ingrained in a free society. There is nothing sacred about large units of government. And there is nothing wrong with loosely banding together small units of government. With the disintegration of the Soviet Union, we too should consider it. Why not think about getting rid of the federal government, returning to the system of our Founders and breaking up the United States into smaller government units?"
Paul's Newsletter, Freedom Watch, is also on a list published by the Canadian-based Heritage Front listing "racialists" that included Paul's political newsletter with the American Nazi Party, the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan and various Aryan groups. Here are a few choice quotes from Paul's writings.
"If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."
"Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e., support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action."
"Politically sensible blacks are outnumbered as decent people... I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city [Washington] are semi-criminal or entirely criminal."
"We don't think a child of 13 should be held responsible as a man of 23. That's true for most people, but black males age 13 who have been raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such."
"By far the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the Israeli government and that the goal of the Zionist movement is to stifle criticism."
Inexplicably, Paul was also voted against awarding Rosa Parks (the African American woman who helped start the civil rights revolution for refusing to go to the back of a bus) a Congressional Gold Medal.
Fifth, Paul claims, on his own webpage that he "was the first person in modern history to author term limits legislation, then lived under them by stepping down from his seat in 1984 " Well, he must not have been too strict about the term limits since he ran again in 96' and again in 98'. He says he will run again in 00'.
UPDATE! 12/23/00: Ron did run again and will soon be starting his third term as a US Rep in Texas. Like most of the Freshman of 1994, he's ignoring his apparently deep held belief in term limits.
He still continues to vote no, even on things which no reasonable person could object to. The most grevious example of this, which netted him a "Bum Steer" award from Texas Monthly Magazine, was his being the only member of the House to vote against awarding a Congressional Medal of Honor to the late and great Charles M. Schulz.
Now granted, this is not nearly as grevious an offense as voting against numerous agriculture relief bills in a time of drought in the area he represents... but you have to wonder about what reason someone could have against giving an award to a good man who brought so much joy and hope to others through his cartoons.
What a Hypocrite! Ron, you well deserve this award... and we're sorry you didn't beat out Rush in the contest to name the award. But rest assured that if I ever see your mobile office drive past, I'll show my respect to Dr. No by giving you the Goldfinger salute.
According to AlterNet:
ReplyDeleteFive months after news of the NSA's warrantless spying program broke, and after we've learned numerous details of the program's extent, a Portland, Ore., attorney may have finally obtained hard evidence of illegal wiretaps by the government.
Thomas Nelson has been practicing administrative law for most of his professional life, but after Sept. 11 he first began offering pro bono work for immigrants detained in broad FBI terrorism sweeps. He is currently leading a little-discussed case that may contain the first documented evidence of an illegal wiretap and believes that, as a result, he himself has been subjected to warrantless -- and therefore illegal -- wiretaps and physical searches, the kind of clandestine operation that Nixon referred to as "black bag jobs." And as a result of extreme carelessness by the FBI, Nelson may have his hands on the only solid evidence of these searches.
armagedn: This is from the link CL put up about the Oregon lawyer. Its something that should be required reading these days.
ReplyDeleteWhat's interesting to note is how many people knew the FBI was doing this: the security guards, the buildig manager, the alarm company. Not only is the govt. spying on this guy, they're getting his neighbors to be complicit in the illegal activity...
That type of mind-set, where people allow illegal activities by the govt. to occur without saying anything, for fear of reprisal strikes me as being particularly insidous. Or is it just normal for people to go along with what the govt says?
I wonder what the govt would do if these other people substantiated the lawyer's suspicions. Take them to court? But wouldn't that risk publicity? Would they put them in jail without a warrant or charges?
The possibilities here border on the absurd.
Pelosi,too-Video where she says she has serious concerns but the spying shouldn't be looked into at the confirmation hearing-from MTP, clipped on CanOFun
ReplyDelete"The only thing Feinstein and Harman gain from this is that they get to be patted on their heads as the "reasonable, serious Democrats" for the week"
ReplyDeleteAre you sure about that Glenn? The ONLY thing???? somehow i doubt it. i think there is soething else motivating them that never gets mentioned somehow......
You know what we need in this country? We need a guy from humble origins whose family has no "connections" and whose poor mother spends her time cooking and bringing hot mails to prisoners at the local jail and whose parents constantly drummed into him the importance of judging people as individuals. In such a house there would be no more grievous sin than a racial slur or other evidence of religious or racial intolerance. Someone whose father had learned what discrimination was like firsthand and who raised his children with the lesson that "Judge everyone by how they act, not what they are."
ReplyDeleteA guy who gets no "hand-outs" in life and works for every penny he makes and is a Democrat and union organizer.
Someone who eats at McDonald's.
If we could get such a guy then when he gets to be President we could call him a filthy White Republican elitist and proof that capitalism is an evil system.
Wait. We already did that. Drat.
Okay, next case.
Reagan 'Busted' at Ala. McDonald's
Customers will get more than a burger and fries at the Northport McDonald's where President Reagan chomped down on a Big Mac during a 1984 stop.
They'll get to see a bronze bust of the former president, inside a case with a halogen light shining on it 24 hours a day. Along with a plaque, there's a framed photo showing Reagan biting down on his Big Mac.
James Carville's "nay" on Gen. Hayden is one for the history books. He really is a classic.
ReplyDeleteIn short, he said he was against it, but, well, not really, and, like, he is qualified after all, although ::cynical snark:: they all are just shoe shiners anyway in this administration.
Yeah, Negroponte and Hayden are just "shoe shiners".
Remember to count your toes after they shine your shoes, that is if you have any left.
Then Carville gets to his real message and scoffs dismissively at the idiotic notion that this is about illegal NSA spying, etc. He urges sheeple, I mean people to focus their attention on the real issue: the "hooker" scandal and smoking cigars in a no smoking area.
Actually, 'ole Jimmy boy looked strangely familiar. Where did I just see him?
Oh yeah. On "24" last night.
I'd like to second Patrick starting a site/blog where he posts a transcript of his conversations with representatives and their staff.
ReplyDeleteI believe it would be a great benefit.
Glenn Greenwald commented: I'm coming to believe that the Democrats in congress are as much to blame for the excesses of the Bush regime as the Republicans
ReplyDeleteon some issues, such as this critical one that goes to the heart of our constitution and democracy I agree