Thursday, January 6, 2011

Two Years of Bush Officials Looking Over their Shoulders

Before I get started I have to say that Obama's choice of Daley for his Chief of Staff is it. $#^!& Obama. He just shot himself in the foot.

Now, back to our regularly scheduled programming....

Remember two years ago, when Obama was coming into office, we wondered if the new administration would hold Bush administration officials accountable for their crimes? Crimes like illegal wiretapping and surveillance, placing Republican Party operatives into US attorney positions in line for future federal judge positions, various instances of obstructing justice and misleading Congress, like intentionally under estimating the cost of the prescription drug law? Oh yea, starting a war of aggression on false pretext, again misleading Congress, renditions, torture. The only one we ever hear about these days is torture as if all the other supposedly 269 broken laws are just too petty to deal with.

All of the above citations are from the Jan/Feb 2009 issue of Mother Jones. Karen Greenberg wrote an article called "The People vs. Dick Cheney," that raised the question and the options for "bringing the Bushies to account."

Just to look back a little, here are the ways Greenberg identified Bush could be brought to account:

  • A Rouge District Attorney: Based on a legal strategy by the famous prosecutor, Vincent Bugliosi, any county of the approximately 2,700 district attorneys, at any time in the future (multiply 2,700 by 10 as different individuals are cycled thru over the coming years) could prosecute Bush for the deaths of soldiers in the DA's county that died in Iraq.
  • Ticked-off Lawyers: Bush administration lawyers, John Yoo, David Addington, Alberto Gonzolez, Jay Bybee brought shame to the profession. Many in the legal community would like to re-establish the credibility of the profession. If they can't make criminal charges stick, they can seek to have Bush lawyers de-barred, and in the case of Jay Bybee, impeached from the federal judgeship he currently holds.
  • The United Nations: Secretary General Kofi Annan said, explicitly, the Iraq war was illegal. The UN could find crimes were committed, as it did in the case of US dirty war against Nicaragua (mining its harbors); however, enforcement of the findings lies with the UN Security Council. Still, it's a way of bringing out the facts.
  • International Criminal Court: Another long shot, but it is a potential forum.
  • The Garzon Factor: Spanish judge Baltizar Garzon went after Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet, having him arrested in Britain. The same could occur some day to various Bush officials. We saw the gears of that process start turning on CIA agents involved in renditions and Guantanamo torture, only to be stopped under intense political pressure according to recently leaked State Department cables.


Many of these avenues don't require Obama to do anything except stay out of the way. A gutsy local DA, a determined foreign judge could start a legal process. Each simple, incremental step would stand on its own merits, leading to its own logical conclusion, taking on a life of its own. Bush officials know this, which is why they've hired lawyers, bought legal insurance, etcetera. They will live the rest of their lives looking over their shoulders.

gdaeman_scroll_small

Monday, January 3, 2011

Pakistan's Inflation

I'm not claiming to know enough about how Pakistan's economy is linked to the rest of the global economy to say what it's inflation problem means for the US, but it apparently has an inflation problem. According to the Associated Press:

The Muttahida Quami Movement, the second largest party in the ruling coalition, said Sunday it would join the opposition because of fuel price hikes, inflation and the Ruling Pakistan People's Party's general poor performance.

Charles Goyette, conservative libertarian noted for his strong anti-war views, has a New York Times best-selling book out now called The Dollar Meltdown. In an interview last week he said that by Spring 2011 we can expect to see TV news crews standing outside of grocery stores doing the story on how much less your dollar can buy.

Not sure I trust the timing of his prediction, but it does prompt me to get going on locking down a loan for some home improvement work I'm planning... one without an adjustable rate.

gdaeman_scroll_small

Saturday, January 1, 2011

Who Rules in the World?

Reading the intro to Robert McChesney's "Communications Revolution"* today I was reminded of the following quote. It's from "The Revolt of the Masses" by Ortega y Gasset*, chapter 14 entitled, "Who Rules in the World?":

"It is necessary to distinguish between a process of aggression and a state of rule. Rule is the normal exercise of authority, and is always based on public opinion, today as a thousand years ago, amongst the English as amongst the bushmen. Never has anyone ruled on this earth by basing his rule essentially on any other thing than public opinion."

Not sure I buy much else written by Ortega y Gasset, but this resonated.

McChesney observes that the communications system is going through a transition that we can influence. In simple terms, the outcome of that transition will a media system that either "emphasizes democratic values" or "corporate profits." The default will be greater corporate domination, or "rule," over every facet of our lives and the future of our republic.

McChesney calls on us to seize "an unprecedented opportunity in the coming generation..."

... to create a communication system that will be a powerful imptus to a dramatically more egalitarian, humane, sustainable, and creative society, where justice and self-government are the order of the day.

He warns that

This window of opportunity -- what I call "a critical juncture" -- will not be open for long. We will be opposed by very powerful entrenched corporate and political interests. We will need all hands on deck to win the fight.

If we fail, the outcome of "who rules in the world" is predictable.

Sources:

Communications Revolution: Critical Junctures and the Future of Media, Robert M. McChesney, the New Press, (2007).

gdaeman_scroll_small

Friday, December 31, 2010

GDAE Podcast - Episode 40

Episode 40 - December 30, 2010

The Right Critiquing the Right?

Part of the series on the left and right joining forces to challenge the establishment (See Below).
  • Libertarian Critique of Republicans: "The Persistence of Red-State Facism," by Anthony Gregory.

  • Prosecute Bush: Scott Horton on State Department cables that expose US
    obstruction of justice in Spain and Germany to suppress their
    investigations of extraordinary rendition, torture and illegal
    activities associated with the Guantanamo prisons.






Click to Download Episode 39.

Recent Series: Can the Populist Left & Right Unite to Challenge the Establishment and Regain Control of Our Republic?

The answer is "yes," as history has proven. Check out the 9-part GDAE Podcast series that explores how common people across the political spectrum can come to the aid of our democracy.

GDAE Podcast Episode 29
  • Motivation for reaching out to the conservatives, from a progressive perspective

GDAE Podcast Episode 30
  • The Power of Ordinary People

GDAE Podcast Episode 31
  • Left & Right Populists Working Together: to fix our flawed democracy
  • What is a "principled" conservative: Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone magazine has some thoughts
  • Audit the Fed: Bernie Sanders leads the Left & Right to push for Senate Unanimous vote on Amendment to "audit the Fed."

GDAE Podcast Episode 32
  • Left & Right Populists: The American Populist movement of the 1800s with Jim Hightower (Bill Moyer's Journal).
  • Left & Right United: The Tenth Amendment with Michael Boldin (Mother Jones Magazine).

GDAE Podcast Episode 33
  • Principled and Unprincipled Conservatives: Will Bunch, Author of "The Backlash: Right-Wing Radicals, High-Def Hucksters, and Paranoid Politics in the Age of Obama," on the Tea Party movement and the recent primary elections.
  • Principled and Unprincipled Liberals: Glenn Greenwald, former constitutional and civil rights litigator now writer and blogger.

GDAE Podcast Episode 34
  • Conversation with Vince Tola: Perspectives on the potential of principled people on the left and right to join forces and reassert the power of the people over our democratic institutions. Vince is a public school teacher and Maryland Green Party organizer.

GDAE Podcast Episode 35
  • Case-study from Electoral Politics: David Sirota on Tea-party-backed candidate for US Senate in Colorado, Ken Buck.
  • Shared Left/Right Populist Anger: CNN interview with David Sirota explains Bush & Obama failure on Financial Bailout.

GDAE Podcast Episode 36
  • Motivation for Reaching out to the Political Right on Issues of Common Concern: Preventing the Drift toward "Barbarism".
  • Right-Wing TV/Radio Incitement: The case of Byron Williams who attempted to murder eleven people in San Francisco after listening to Glenn Beck and others.
  • Walden Bello: A historical perspective on the Drift toward "Barbarism" and its relation to the Moviation to reach out to genuine conservatives.
  • 2006 Conservative Essay: "Now Is the Time for a Left-Right Alliance: A rebel alliance already exists that could stop Bush administration attacks on the Constitution."

GDAE Podcast Episode 37
  • History: Demagogues take advantage of bad economic times for political gains including the use of government to enrich themselves.
  • Three economists see three futures: Pretty Bad, Very Bad and Absolutely Catastrophic.
  • Call for unity among principled conservatives and progressives: Unite to counter-act dangers of demagogues during the coming hard times.

Source:

GDAEman.Com

gdaeman_scroll_small

Wednesday, December 29, 2010

The Eroding Justice

Many western foreign ministers, including Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, are voicing concern about the equal application of justice in Russia after the conviction of oil tycoon Mikhail Khodorkovsky. They say it's retribution for Khodorkovsky's funding of opposition political candidates to Putin and his resistance to a Russian oil pipeline monopoly, both of which are true.

But, if I'm not mistaken, Khodorkovsky gained his position through organized crime, and he is not alone. Many years ago Putin cut a deal with powerful organized crime figures; they stay out of politics and the Kremlin looks the other way. Khodorkovsky reneged on the deal and now he's paying the price. Sounds like big boy street justice to me... he could have simply been shot or blown up.

That aside, the US has an eroded moral foundation for its criticism of Russian justice. The US was just caught obstructing German and Spanish justice systems by using extortion tactics to stop their investigations into illegal renditions and torture at Guantanamo... all of this thanks to leaked State Department cables.

But we didn't need the cables to know that the US beacon of justice is eroding. Guantanamo itself is right in our faces... so big and obvious it's easy to forget. The, the irony.... Bradley Manning, the army private presumed to have leaked the cables, is being held without charge in conditions designed to erode his senses. Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks founder, is facing very uneven treatment by the western justice system, there is even talk of retroactively creating a law to go after Assange; we've recently seen laws that retroactively erase crimes (war crimes, privacy crimes by ATT and other telecom corporations) but creating a law to make a past act illegal... that rings new to me. Meanwhile very serious criminal behavior, by George Bush and his cohorts, can't be addressed because we have to look forward, not backwards. Never mind the Wall Street tycoons who walk free and the litany of other examples.

WARNING: Step back and look at the big picture. The world is loosing its moral compass; some would say "has lost." People are now rolling their eyes at the United States' criticism of Russia and US officials will bristle at this. But over time US officials could become used to such criticisms. Given a little more time on this path of our eroding justice system and they might admit they are in no position to make such criticisms. Gradually, with only a small number of people jumping up and down waiving their arms trying to warn others, we will become an undeniable police state; some would say "have become."


gdaeman_scroll_small

Thursday, December 23, 2010

January 5th Senate Rules Opportunity

Due to abuse of the U.S. Senate filibuster procedure, any major issue now requires a 60% majority vote to pass (super-majority).

In the past, all Senate business would stop during a filibuster; however, some time ago the Senate adopted a two-track process that allows business to continue while a filibuster is occurring. This means that there is no price for conducting a filibuster, so it can be used willy nilly. This has to stop.

January 5th, the U.S. Senate adopts its rules for the next two years. It's critical that they fix this problem on that single day. Contact your Senators and insist that they support Colorado Sen. Mark Udall's proposed rules change, or similar measure, to fix the filibuster problem.

Thanks

For Your Convenience:

gdaeman_scroll_small

Monday, December 20, 2010

Debate Continues on Obama Tax Deal

Below is a comment of mine on the December 17 Episode of "WakeUp AM" podcast (Episode 239). Brian of WakeUp AM had taken the position that Obama's tax deal with the Republicans was effectively the only pragmatic alternative. I, and others, took an alternative view:

Good discussion on the tax legislation. Brian made an argument worth noting; if the economy continues to do poorly in two years, then the Republicans would blame it on Obama for raising taxes on upper income earners.

Brian is right that the ultimate outcome was that the Republicans would get tax cuts for the rich; however, we could have done better, both in substance and in process (MLK would argue that process matters and I'll leave it at that for process).

On substance, he didn't drive a good bargain. For example, Obama could have sought to decouple the upper and lower income tax cuts by giving a three-year cut to lower earners and two-years for upper earners. Decoupling the two taxes would allow Democrats to vote separately on extending tax cuts for high-earners. This would avoid the potential for hostage-taking.

So, it might be true that tax cuts for the rich were inevitable, but Obama caved way too early. As you alluded, Obama might have been pissed at Congressional leaders for not using the tax cut legislation as a campaign issue; he might feel this was partly to blame for the bad mid-term election results. He might be unwilling to let it happen again. However, I think he erred in judgment on this one.

gdaeman_scroll_small