Which do you think is the greater threat to American values: the protester who burns an American flag, or a President who, by all indications, has consistently and flagrantly violated U.S. laws and international treaties? From the righteous speeches by Republican Senators in support of a constitutional amendment to prohibit desecration of the flag, you would think it was the former.
Would that these same “defenders” of our constitution were equally vigorous in protecting us from the excesses of the Bush administration’s grab for unchecked executive power. Whether it involves warrantless domestic spying, secret investigation of Americans’ phone and banking records, claiming (and exercising) the right to imprison anybody, indefinitely, with no right to due process, or condoning torture, the Republican Congress has acquiesced, even defended, President Bush’s desire to do virtually anything he wants in the war on terror, unchecked by Congressional oversight or judicial review.
To me, that is far more sinister than the individual who chooses to burn the American flag, as unseemly as that is. But the Republican Congress is more intent on finding ways to call its opponents unpatriotic – for anybody who dares to disagree with it – than it is on taking President Bush to task for the enormous damage he has done to our country’s values and reputation.
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
Friday, March 17, 2006
Impeach Bush? Not yet.
On the one hand, I would welcome the opportunity see President Bush impeached. Through his willful manipulation of intelligence, condoning of torture and violation of constitutional protections of due process and privacy, he has done more to destroy the integrity of the United States than any president since President Nixon. President Clinton may have embarrassed the office, but he did not threaten our institutions.
However, impeachment is a misplaced fantasy at this time, just as is Senator Russell Feingold’s call for censure of President Bush. What Democrats, and Republicans, should be calling for is a vigorous examination of the facts – which the Republican leadership has been thwarting for months.
Congressional energy should be directed towards getting Senator Pat Roberts, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, to fulfill his promise to investigate administration misuse of intelligence in the war on terror. Roberts has been stalling the conclusion of his investigation for months. He is a disgrace to the principle of an independent legislative branch of government.
Rather than doing deals to legitimize the NSA domestic spying program, the Republican leadership, and Senator Arlen Specter, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, should be demanding a full investigation of that program to determine whether Bush has violated constitutional protections, as the current evidence strongly suggests.
Only then can we know whether censure, or more, is the appropriate response.
However, impeachment is a misplaced fantasy at this time, just as is Senator Russell Feingold’s call for censure of President Bush. What Democrats, and Republicans, should be calling for is a vigorous examination of the facts – which the Republican leadership has been thwarting for months.
Congressional energy should be directed towards getting Senator Pat Roberts, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, to fulfill his promise to investigate administration misuse of intelligence in the war on terror. Roberts has been stalling the conclusion of his investigation for months. He is a disgrace to the principle of an independent legislative branch of government.
Rather than doing deals to legitimize the NSA domestic spying program, the Republican leadership, and Senator Arlen Specter, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, should be demanding a full investigation of that program to determine whether Bush has violated constitutional protections, as the current evidence strongly suggests.
Only then can we know whether censure, or more, is the appropriate response.
Monday, January 23, 2006
How much more Bush can we take?
President Clinton was impeached for lying about highly inappropriate personal behavior which had nothing to do with how he governed or protected our nation. Fast forward to today, when nearly three-quarters of Americans believe President Bush was “hiding something” or “mostly lying” about the evidence for weapons of mass destruction, and half of Americans believe he “intentionally misled” us into the war in Iraq (The New York Times/CBS News Poll 12/8/05).
That alone should be enough for the Congress to start asking some tough questions about possible deception by the Bush Administration.
Yet this high level of mistrust was before it was disclosed that President Bush secretly authorized the N.S.A. to conduct wiretaps of communications with Americans without court order. There is widespread belief, across the political spectrum, that this program may be illegal. At the very least, Bush has continued to lie to the American people about his conduct of the war on terror. How else to explain a remark he made in Buffalo, NY in 2004 that “a wiretap requires a court order”? That was made more than two years after he authorized the N.S.A. activity.
If that doesn’t send a chill down your back, how about the repeated assertions by President Bush, Vice President Cheney and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld that terrorism detainees are being treated “humanely” – despite case after case of abuse, torture and even death, many too gruesome to mention. The Bush administration claims that this is just the work of a few errant soldiers, yet the ACLU has obtained over 70,000 pages of government documents covering what surely is a much more pervasive problem, for which President Bush is holding no senior officials accountable. In one specific instance, the CIA inspector general found in 2004 that some aspects of his agency’s treatment of detainees might constitute cruel and inhuman treatment as defined by an international treaty to which the U.S. is a signatory.
While Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice was busy last December trying to convince Europeans that “the United States does not condone torture,” the Administration was doing all it could to keep the Congress from passing an amendment prohibiting torture. What does that tell you about the President’s commitment to human rights and the truth?
On these critical issues of national security and fundamental American values, it is time for Congress to aggressively and tirelessly work to uncover the facts about whether President Bush has lied and broken the law in prosecuting the war on terror.
Indeed, Congress should go a step further and appoint an independent counsel to conduct this inquiry. It tolerated a 10-year, $20 million Independent Counsel investigation of a Clinton cabinet secretary, Henry Cisneros, for lying about payments to his mistress. Surely it can find the wherewithal to investigate an Administration that is quite clearly taking enormous liberties with the truth, and perhaps more.
That alone should be enough for the Congress to start asking some tough questions about possible deception by the Bush Administration.
Yet this high level of mistrust was before it was disclosed that President Bush secretly authorized the N.S.A. to conduct wiretaps of communications with Americans without court order. There is widespread belief, across the political spectrum, that this program may be illegal. At the very least, Bush has continued to lie to the American people about his conduct of the war on terror. How else to explain a remark he made in Buffalo, NY in 2004 that “a wiretap requires a court order”? That was made more than two years after he authorized the N.S.A. activity.
If that doesn’t send a chill down your back, how about the repeated assertions by President Bush, Vice President Cheney and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld that terrorism detainees are being treated “humanely” – despite case after case of abuse, torture and even death, many too gruesome to mention. The Bush administration claims that this is just the work of a few errant soldiers, yet the ACLU has obtained over 70,000 pages of government documents covering what surely is a much more pervasive problem, for which President Bush is holding no senior officials accountable. In one specific instance, the CIA inspector general found in 2004 that some aspects of his agency’s treatment of detainees might constitute cruel and inhuman treatment as defined by an international treaty to which the U.S. is a signatory.
While Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice was busy last December trying to convince Europeans that “the United States does not condone torture,” the Administration was doing all it could to keep the Congress from passing an amendment prohibiting torture. What does that tell you about the President’s commitment to human rights and the truth?
On these critical issues of national security and fundamental American values, it is time for Congress to aggressively and tirelessly work to uncover the facts about whether President Bush has lied and broken the law in prosecuting the war on terror.
Indeed, Congress should go a step further and appoint an independent counsel to conduct this inquiry. It tolerated a 10-year, $20 million Independent Counsel investigation of a Clinton cabinet secretary, Henry Cisneros, for lying about payments to his mistress. Surely it can find the wherewithal to investigate an Administration that is quite clearly taking enormous liberties with the truth, and perhaps more.
Sunday, September 25, 2005
What is happening to our country?
It is time for Americans to start asking ourselves, “what is happening to our country?” As I look around, there are so many signs that President Bush, his administration and the Republican leadership are systematically destroying the values and well-being of our nation through their arrogance, greed and incompetence.
Facing a cost of $200 billion for reconstruction in the aftermath of Katrina, Bush refuses to reconsider his ideological obsession with tax cuts for the wealthy. Don’t be fooled – “no tax increases” doesn’t just mean no new taxes, it means sticking with his plan to make earlier rounds of tax cuts permanent. Burdening future generations with the cost of his largess to the wealthy, through record-breaking deficits, doesn’t seem to concern him. How can we trust a political party where 222 of its congressmen and 46 of its senators have categorically refused to raise taxes (by signing Grover Norquist’s tax pledge)? How is that a sign of fiscal responsibility?
At the core of some of our most challenging security and economic issues is our lack of energy independence. But Bush has shown zero leadership on energy – his is a policy of avoidance – looking for a few barrels of oil in Alaska and relaxing environmental standards. Instead of sending people to Mars (as NASA wants to do), our national quest should be a radical reduction in our dependence on oil, using economic incentives – including a national gas tax – to fund research and encourage conservation.
I am concerned with more than just economic security. Bush policies have deeply damaged the credibility of the United States as a protector of human rights. The very values we are fighting for in the war on terror are being systematically violated. Widespread abuse and torture of prisoners is met with indifference and no accountability, even as it turns those who might be sympathetic to the U.S. away from us. Wholesale disregard for due process (we have held prisoners in Guantanamo for more than three years without bringing charges) is acceptable, because President Bush and Donald Rumsfeld have decided they are guilty. Through “extraordinary rendition”, we secretly send suspects, including our own citizens, for interrogation to countries, including Syria, that we know engage in torture.
We agonize about how we are going to protect ourselves against terrorist attacks on our soil, yet the Republicans whom we have put in charge of our executive and legislative, and soon perhaps, judicial, branches of government are beholden to the National Rifle Association, which stymies every reasonable way to restrict access by criminals (including terrorists) to firearms. That’s an organization which invites speakers who profess, “I want burglars dead…no court case. No parole. No early release. I want ‘em dead. Get a gun, and when they attack you shoot ‘em.” (as quoted in The New Yorker, 8/1/05). It is disgraceful that our president, and the majority of our national leaders (Democrats included), take their direction from an organization with so little respect for our values.
If you are disturbed by where our country is heading, I urge you to speak out.
Facing a cost of $200 billion for reconstruction in the aftermath of Katrina, Bush refuses to reconsider his ideological obsession with tax cuts for the wealthy. Don’t be fooled – “no tax increases” doesn’t just mean no new taxes, it means sticking with his plan to make earlier rounds of tax cuts permanent. Burdening future generations with the cost of his largess to the wealthy, through record-breaking deficits, doesn’t seem to concern him. How can we trust a political party where 222 of its congressmen and 46 of its senators have categorically refused to raise taxes (by signing Grover Norquist’s tax pledge)? How is that a sign of fiscal responsibility?
At the core of some of our most challenging security and economic issues is our lack of energy independence. But Bush has shown zero leadership on energy – his is a policy of avoidance – looking for a few barrels of oil in Alaska and relaxing environmental standards. Instead of sending people to Mars (as NASA wants to do), our national quest should be a radical reduction in our dependence on oil, using economic incentives – including a national gas tax – to fund research and encourage conservation.
I am concerned with more than just economic security. Bush policies have deeply damaged the credibility of the United States as a protector of human rights. The very values we are fighting for in the war on terror are being systematically violated. Widespread abuse and torture of prisoners is met with indifference and no accountability, even as it turns those who might be sympathetic to the U.S. away from us. Wholesale disregard for due process (we have held prisoners in Guantanamo for more than three years without bringing charges) is acceptable, because President Bush and Donald Rumsfeld have decided they are guilty. Through “extraordinary rendition”, we secretly send suspects, including our own citizens, for interrogation to countries, including Syria, that we know engage in torture.
We agonize about how we are going to protect ourselves against terrorist attacks on our soil, yet the Republicans whom we have put in charge of our executive and legislative, and soon perhaps, judicial, branches of government are beholden to the National Rifle Association, which stymies every reasonable way to restrict access by criminals (including terrorists) to firearms. That’s an organization which invites speakers who profess, “I want burglars dead…no court case. No parole. No early release. I want ‘em dead. Get a gun, and when they attack you shoot ‘em.” (as quoted in The New Yorker, 8/1/05). It is disgraceful that our president, and the majority of our national leaders (Democrats included), take their direction from an organization with so little respect for our values.
If you are disturbed by where our country is heading, I urge you to speak out.
Thursday, September 1, 2005
Katrina getting in the way of tax cuts, no way!
President Bush stated that the federal government will do its share to help the victims of the Hurricane Katrina disaster. But, he also spoke of the importance of having the American people do their share by contributing privately.
While I support charitable contributions, and have myself contributed to the relief effort, perhaps the need for private support would not be so great if President Bush had not given billions of dollars of tax breaks to the very wealthiest Americans, gutting federal resources. As if a deficit exceeding $400 billion (one of the highest on record) is not enough of a wake up call for more prudent fiscal management, the administration and Republican leadership is still pushing for a permanent repeal of the estate tax, an additional $745 billion gift over ten years to the richest Americans.
The next time Bush calls for private support, perhaps he should address just the recipients of his largess, since for the vast majority of Americans, household incomes have failed to increase over the past five years, as reported by the Census Bureau. That’s a new record, neatly coinciding with the term of the Bush presidency.
While I support charitable contributions, and have myself contributed to the relief effort, perhaps the need for private support would not be so great if President Bush had not given billions of dollars of tax breaks to the very wealthiest Americans, gutting federal resources. As if a deficit exceeding $400 billion (one of the highest on record) is not enough of a wake up call for more prudent fiscal management, the administration and Republican leadership is still pushing for a permanent repeal of the estate tax, an additional $745 billion gift over ten years to the richest Americans.
The next time Bush calls for private support, perhaps he should address just the recipients of his largess, since for the vast majority of Americans, household incomes have failed to increase over the past five years, as reported by the Census Bureau. That’s a new record, neatly coinciding with the term of the Bush presidency.
Tuesday, March 1, 2005
Bush report on human rights. Look in the mirror.
Dear President Bush:
I read with astonishment the findings of the State Department's report on human rights, which calls attention to abuses by the Iraqi Government. Your policies and actions in regard to human rights, juxtaposed against
this report, represent the height of hypocrisy. While you point the finger at other countries' human rights violations, you are engaged in similar, if not as egregious, activities.
You send individuals to the very countries cited for torture (Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia) in secrecy, with no due process. You have held a US citizen in detention for almost three years without bringing any charges. You are holding hundreds of foreigners at Guantanamo as virtual prisoners of war with little to no evidence that they were in fact involved in terrorist activities.
I want the United States to take an extremely aggressive stand on the war on terror. Yet your arrogant disregard for the values of our country are doing irreparable harm to my country's ability to push for human rights around the world, and are bringing into question the very meaning of being an American. Meanwhile, your obsession with Iraq has left our homeland dangerously unprotected, as evidenced by the recent report on port security.
Court after court have repudiated your belief that the United States can flout the Constitution as you prosecute the war on terror. Yet, oblivious to why your actions are so repugnant, you continue on.
I urge you to reflect on what it means to protect the values of the United States that you insist you are fighting for. You should call for an immediate end to extraordinary rendition, lack of due process and
interrogation techniques that rely on torture. And, you should hold those who have propagated these practices to account, including your Secretary of Defense and newly appointed Attorney General. It is a disgrace to the
reputation of the United States that you would even consider including these two men in your administration, let alone cite them for their service to the nation.
I read with astonishment the findings of the State Department's report on human rights, which calls attention to abuses by the Iraqi Government. Your policies and actions in regard to human rights, juxtaposed against
this report, represent the height of hypocrisy. While you point the finger at other countries' human rights violations, you are engaged in similar, if not as egregious, activities.
You send individuals to the very countries cited for torture (Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia) in secrecy, with no due process. You have held a US citizen in detention for almost three years without bringing any charges. You are holding hundreds of foreigners at Guantanamo as virtual prisoners of war with little to no evidence that they were in fact involved in terrorist activities.
I want the United States to take an extremely aggressive stand on the war on terror. Yet your arrogant disregard for the values of our country are doing irreparable harm to my country's ability to push for human rights around the world, and are bringing into question the very meaning of being an American. Meanwhile, your obsession with Iraq has left our homeland dangerously unprotected, as evidenced by the recent report on port security.
Court after court have repudiated your belief that the United States can flout the Constitution as you prosecute the war on terror. Yet, oblivious to why your actions are so repugnant, you continue on.
I urge you to reflect on what it means to protect the values of the United States that you insist you are fighting for. You should call for an immediate end to extraordinary rendition, lack of due process and
interrogation techniques that rely on torture. And, you should hold those who have propagated these practices to account, including your Secretary of Defense and newly appointed Attorney General. It is a disgrace to the
reputation of the United States that you would even consider including these two men in your administration, let alone cite them for their service to the nation.
Thursday, January 6, 2005
Oppose Gonzales Nomination
A letter I sent to my CT Senators...
I am writing to urge you to do everything in your power to deny confirmation to President Bush’s nomination of Alberto Gonzales as attorney general of the United States.
It as an absolute disgrace for the Senate to have to even consider the nomination of an administration official who has so little regard for the values embodied in our constitution. While Mr. Gonzales’ exact role is still unclear, it is without doubt that he was party to the deliberations and policies of the Bush administration that created a climate leading to widespread and continuing abuse and torture of prisoners captured in Iraq and Afghanistan. And practices at Guantanamo in which detainees may be held forever without access to due process.
As a recent Op-Ed column in The New York Times stated, “By using torture, the country relinquishes the very ideological advantage – the promotion of democracy, freedom and human rights – that the president has so persistently claimed is America’s most powerful weapon in defeating Islamic extremism.”
Granted, the war on terror requires new ways of prosecuting war to be successful. But to subvert the very ideals that we are fighting to protect is not an option.
It is clear that President Bush will not hold members of his administration accountable for their moral, strategic and tactical errors. Nor is it likely that the Republican leadership will force Bush to do so. It is incumbent upon you to bring this administration to account for its moral lapses, and for the tremendous harm it has done to the reputation and integrity of the United States.
You can begin that process by denying confirmation to Alberto Gonzales for attorney general.
I am writing to urge you to do everything in your power to deny confirmation to President Bush’s nomination of Alberto Gonzales as attorney general of the United States.
It as an absolute disgrace for the Senate to have to even consider the nomination of an administration official who has so little regard for the values embodied in our constitution. While Mr. Gonzales’ exact role is still unclear, it is without doubt that he was party to the deliberations and policies of the Bush administration that created a climate leading to widespread and continuing abuse and torture of prisoners captured in Iraq and Afghanistan. And practices at Guantanamo in which detainees may be held forever without access to due process.
As a recent Op-Ed column in The New York Times stated, “By using torture, the country relinquishes the very ideological advantage – the promotion of democracy, freedom and human rights – that the president has so persistently claimed is America’s most powerful weapon in defeating Islamic extremism.”
Granted, the war on terror requires new ways of prosecuting war to be successful. But to subvert the very ideals that we are fighting to protect is not an option.
It is clear that President Bush will not hold members of his administration accountable for their moral, strategic and tactical errors. Nor is it likely that the Republican leadership will force Bush to do so. It is incumbent upon you to bring this administration to account for its moral lapses, and for the tremendous harm it has done to the reputation and integrity of the United States.
You can begin that process by denying confirmation to Alberto Gonzales for attorney general.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
