Month: October 2007

"Sullivan was one of the very few conservatives who repudiated Bush and the Bush movement when Bush was still popular… The Conservative Soul highlights the true philosophical and psychological roots of the Bush movement – its first principles – and reveals just how rotted those fundamentalist roots are. It does this as well as, if not better than, any other book has done," – Glenn Greenwald, Salon.

"[Sullivan] is concerned with the essence of ideas — less the parade of personalities and more the transformation of political discourse… Like a good conservative, he is concerned about loss, specifically the alarmingly rapid disappearance of a conservative tradition — which could be reflected in different constellations by Eisenhower, Goldwater and Reagan — almost immediately after it was being judged politically triumphant. Sullivan saw, earlier and far more keenly than most, the rupture in American conservatism between the Theocons and the small-government, balanced-budget, personal-freedom conservatism that characterized Goldwater," – Scott Horton, Harper’s.

The book is available for purchase here.

He won’t say if the Khmer Rouge technique is torture, i.e. the infliction of "severe mental or physical pain or suffering" to elicit information. Also: if the sky is blue, it’s blue.

"You don’t have money to fund the war or children. But you’re going to spend it to blow up innocent people if we can get enough kids to grow old enough for you to send to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the President’s amusement," – Democratic Congressman Pete Stark.

Dahlia Lithwick tackles the latest, astonishing claim by the Bush administration on military detainees:

The only thing more terrifying than convictions based on secret evidence is the possibility that when it comes time to fight those convictions, the secret evidence might just disappear.

Yes, it’s true:

In a petition filed last Friday in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, the DoJ argues that it cannot possibly comply with the federal appeals court’s order of last July to turn over this evidence. Reasoning: 1) Disclosure could "seriously disrupt the Nation’s intelligence-gathering programs" and cause "exceptionally grave damage to national security." No surprise there. But it also argues that 2) the information used against the detainees at the CSRTs "is not readily available, nor can it be reasonably recompiled."

You will recall that the critical DVD that threatened to verify Jose Padilla’s accusations of torture in US custody … also was mysteriously "lost" by the government when it finally came to trial:

The missing DVD dates from March 2, 2004. It contains a video of the last interrogation session of Padilla, then a declared ‘enemy combatant’ under an order from President Bush, while he was being held in military custody at a U.S. Navy brig in Charleston, S.C. But in recent days, in the course of an unusual court hearing about Padilla’s mental condition, a government lawyer disclosed to a surprised courtroom that the Defense Intelligence Agency — which had custody of the evidence — was no longer able to locate the DVD. As a result, it was not included in a packet of classified DVDs that was recently turned over to defense lawyers under orders from Judge Cooke.

Yes, this is America. 

Philip Klein explains the analogy.

Yes, the condemnations of torture were a relief. But, of course, on close reading in full context the day after, this reader is correct:

Just pretend it’s Hillary Clinton testifying rather than a right-wing Republican. If it were, you’d be ranting and raving and comparing her to Josef Mengele by now. There are so many holes in his testimony that you could drive any kind of torture through them – as Bush most certainly will. That’s why he was chosen.

He gave no commitment to ruling that the current interrogation techniques – clearly torture under the plain meaning of the law – will be regarded as such by the incoming attorney-general. But he seems clearly committed to the rule of law in the Goldsmith mold. Which means, one hopes, that the worst excesses might be contained. Look: what else can we do? The Congress cannot stop it – because Bush will simply add a signing statement saying the Congress is irrelevant. We’re left with the AG.

A reader is aghast at my failing to make this point:

I’m bascially a libertarian. I try to keep everyone honest. When Larry Craig was snared, I was neither happy nor sad. But I snickered at first because, hey, toilet seat flirtations are just funny. But as the case became clear, I got a chill– What if the actions of Larry Craig weren’t the actions of a married, repressed, homosexual politician? What if Barney Frank did them? And had no wife to "hypocritically" keep it a secret from? What if Barney Frank went into a public restroom and showed a ring to the man next to him in a stall, as an ambiguous signal? What if Barney Frank spread his legs wide enough to touch the other man’s foot? But Barney Frank never verbally said that he wanted homosexual sex? And certainly never said he wanted the sex in public?

Craig’s only crime is that he hinted at a desire for sex with another man, which, if given the opportunity, he may even have asked for at a hotel across the street. To prosecute him is to threaten the same for a straight man stopping to ask a prostitute for directions with a smile. A smile, the cretin! He saw how high her skirt was! He KNEW what he was getting into!

When I read the facts of the case, I figured Larry Craig was eventually going to win a HUGE settlement. The government has overreacted by endorsing sting operations that tag gay men as guilty before they even vocalize an intent to commit an actual crime.

Another writes:

Yes, he’s a ‘product of his age.’ I wonder, though, where many of us over the age of 50 would be if we had not experienced/taken advantage of/benefited and advanced  from the Stonewall awakening and the seventies.   Obviously, Sen. Craig was not able to find sufficient strength to overcome his inner struggle(s).  But to see him simply/merely as a hypocrite is not good enough.

How tortured must he have been – extremely panicked, not simply embarrassed – by his Minneapolis arrest?  His exposure on so many levels.  How many of us have been forced to face the same struggle (and its potential consequences) in similar circumstances?

There’s a story behind the senator’s story that needs to be told, understood and appreciated.  There but for our fortunate place in history – and a good amount of inner strength – go so many of us.

Our dynasticism deepens with hoopla over one of the younger Bushes endorsing Giuliani. Also: Connie Mack, Jr. Yes, we need to worry about the next generation of dauphins now, as well.