Tuesday, March 30, 2004

This Isn't America

Paul Krugman, NY Times
March 30, 2004

Last week an opinion piece in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz about the killing of Sheik Ahmed Yassin said, “This isn’t America; the government did not invent intelligence material nor exaggerate the description of the threat to justify their attack.”

So even in Israel, George Bush’s America has become a byword for deception and abuse of power. And the administration’s reaction to Richard Clarke’s “Against All Enemies” provides more evidence of something rotten in the state of our government.

The truth is that among experts, what Mr. Clarke says about Mr. Bush’s terrorism policy isn’t controversial. The facts that terrorism was placed on the back burner before 9/11 and that Mr. Bush blamed Iraq despite the lack of evidence are confirmed by many sources — including “Bush at War,” by Bob Woodward.

And new evidence keeps emerging for Mr. Clarke’s main charge, that the Iraq obsession undermined the pursuit of Al Qaeda. From yesterday’s USA Today: “In 2002, troops from the Fifth Special Forces Group who specialize in the Middle East were pulled out of the hunt for Osama bin Laden to prepare for their next assignment: Iraq. Their replacements were troops with expertise in Spanish cultures.”

That’s why the administration responded to Mr. Clarke the way it responds to anyone who reveals inconvenient facts: with a campaign of character assassination.

Some journalists seem, finally, to have caught on. Last week an Associated Press news analysis noted that such personal attacks were “standard operating procedure” for this administration and cited “a behind-the-scenes campaign to discredit Richard Foster,” the Medicare actuary who revealed how the administration had deceived Congress about the cost of its prescription drug bill.

But other journalists apparently remain ready to be used. On CNN, Wolf Blitzer told his viewers that unnamed officials were saying that Mr. Clarke “wants to make a few bucks, and that [in] his own personal life, they’re also suggesting that there are some weird aspects in his life as well.”

This administration’s reliance on smear tactics is unprecedented in modern U.S. politics — even compared with Nixon’s. Even more disturbing is its readiness to abuse power — to use its control of the government to intimidate potential critics.

To be fair, Senator Bill Frist’s suggestion that Mr. Clarke might be charged with perjury may have been his own idea. But his move reminded everyone of the White House’s reaction to revelations by the former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill: an immediate investigation into whether he had revealed classified information. The alacrity with which this investigation was opened was, of course, in sharp contrast with the administration’s evident lack of interest in finding out who leaked the identity of the C.I.A. operative Valerie Plame to Bob Novak.

And there are many other cases of apparent abuse of power by the administration and its Congressional allies. A few examples: according to The Hill, Republican lawmakers threatened to cut off funds for the General Accounting Office unless it dropped its lawsuit against Dick Cheney. The Washington Post says Representative Michael Oxley told lobbyists that “a Congressional probe might ease if it replaced its Democratic lobbyist with a Republican.” Tom DeLay used the Homeland Security Department to track down Democrats trying to prevent redistricting in Texas. And Medicare is spending millions of dollars on misleading ads for the new drug benefit — ads that look like news reports and also serve as commercials for the Bush campaign.

On the terrorism front, here’s one story that deserves special mention. One of the few successful post-9/11 terror prosecutions — a case in Detroit — seems to be unraveling. The government withheld information from the defense, and witnesses unfavorable to the prosecution were deported (by accident, the government says). After the former lead prosecutor complained about the Justice Department’s handling of the case, he suddenly found himself facing an internal investigation — and someone leaked the fact that he was under investigation to the press.

Where will it end? In his new book, “Worse Than Watergate,” John Dean, of Watergate fame, says, “I’ve been watching all the elements fall into place for two possible political catastrophes, one that will take the air out of the Bush-Cheney balloon and the other, far more disquieting, that will take the air out of democracy." 

Friday, March 26, 2004

Senator Tom Daschle On the Administration's Treatment of Richard Clarke

Delivered on the Senate Floor, March 25, 2004.

I have a simple request for the President today.

Please ask the people around you to stop the character attacks they are waging against Richard Clarke. Ask them to stop their attempts to conceal information and confuse facts. Ask them to stop the long effort that has made the 9-11 Commission’s work more difficult than it should be.

Regardless of whether one agrees or disagrees with Mr. Clarke’s facts, he set an eloquent example for all of us yesterday. He accepted responsibility for September 11. He made himself accountable and he tried, in my view, to help us understand what happened in the months and years before September 11.

I couldn’t be more disappointed in the White House’s response. They have known for months what Mr. Clarke was going to say. Instead of dealing with it factually, they’ve launched a shrill attack to destroy Mr. Clarke’s credibility.

I know something about those attacks. On several occasions I’ve been on the receiving end of White House broadsides. I saw the White House’s ferocity firsthand.

I also saw the people around the President attack John McCain, when he ran for President in 2000. I will never forget the distortions, the recklessness, and the viciousness of those attacks. They were wrong, and they impugned one of our great patriots.

I saw that same viciousness two years ago, when Senator Max Cleland, a man who served when called during the Vietnam war, had his reputation and patriotism smeared in his reelection campaign. The idea that a man who gave so much to his country could be smeared by those who were willing to give so little haunted me then, as it haunts me now.

There are some things that simply ought not to be done in politics, and that line was crossed by the attacks on both Senator McCain and Senator Cleland.

Last year I watched the people around the President set their sights on Ambassador Joe Wilson, when he stepped forward to tell the truth about the President’s claims on Iraq, Niger and uranium. The White House didn’t battle Ambassador Wilson on the facts – instead, they put his wife’s life in danger by disclosing publicly that she was a deep cover CIA agent.

That was a grossly irresponsible act done for the worst of reasons – to avoid accountability and unwelcome political consequences. It ought never have happened. It was shameful. And it crossed a line that had never been crossed before.

Now, when I watch what the people around the President are trying to do to Richard Clarke, I think it’s past time to say enough is enough. The President came to Washington four years ago promising to change the tone here. The people around him have done that – they’ve changed it for the worse. They are doing things that have never been done before and should never be done.

What they need to do, what we need to do, is put politics aside and put the American people and their security first. I know how difficult that is in an election year. But we all, every one of us, need to do that. Some things are more important than politics, and September 11 is at the top of the list. We need the facts on September 11, not spin and character assassination. We need this Administration and everyone involved to follow Mr. Clarke’s example and accept responsibility and accountability.

We need Condoleezza Rice, who seems to have time to appear on every television show, to make time to appear publicly before the 9-11 Commission. She is not constrained by precedent from doing that, as the White House has argued. As the Congressional Research Service documented, two of her predecessors have given testimony in open session and on matters much less important than September 11. I’ve reluctantly reached the conclusion that what really constrains Ms.  Rice’s full cooperation is political considerations.

The September 11 families deserve better than that and, just as importantly, our country deserves better than that. There is only one person who can change what’s going on at the White House, and that’s the President. So I appeal to President Bush to change it.

He deserves better than the tactics his staff are using. And, as I’ve said, the September 11 families and our country deserve better.

Thursday, March 25, 2004

Lies and Truth

Virtually everything George Bush has told us for the last 4 years has been a lie. He didn’t tell us the truth about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, about how many jobs would be created by his massive tax cuts, instead of the nearly 3 million jobs lost, about the economy, and the deficits after the tax cuts, about the true cost of his Medicare prescription drug plan, about Social Security.

So can you believe a word of anything else he’s said?

Like the attempted character assassination of person after person who’s come forward to tell the truth about what’s really going on. They can only pull that one out of their bag of tricks so many times before it loses it’s effectiveness. You can only cry wolf so many times before no one believes you anymore. You can only tell the world so many blatant lies before your former allies write you off as irrelevant or worse, a rogue president leading a rogue nation.

In the last few days, Teflon George has finally lost the trust of much of the American public. Richard Clarke has finally put paid to about the only thing Bush had left to run on - the “war on terrorism”. He doesn’t dare run on the economy, or job creation, about how well the war in Iraq was going, or any number of social issues. He only could wrap himself in the flag and “act Presidential”, but it was just that - an act.

Richard Clarke is the latest of several former officials who have come forward to tell what happened when Bush took office. First order of business? Iraq. When the subject of terrorism was brought up, they brushed it aside, right up until 9/11. When it happened, who did they want to attack first? Iraq. Even when all evidence pointed to the contrary they still planned, deceived the Congress and public, and carried out this obsession with attacking Iraq. Triumph of The Will, and all that.

Clarke merely corroborated what Bush’s former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill and several others have said. The blinders were on at the White House, and they only would look at information that agreed with their pre-determined goals. The attack dogs were unleashed on Clarke, but his bona fides are impressive - he is a Republican and served in both Reagan and Bush’s father’s administrations in the role of counter-terrorism adviser. They can’t dismiss him as not being “in the loop” or knowing what he’s talking about, nor accuse him of doing this for partisan purposes. I don’t think they can make these attacks stick, not after using the same tactics again and again.

Clarke had the guts to do what nobody in this sorry excuse for an administration would. He had the simple humanity and humility to apologize to the families of those who were killed on 9/11. Bush and Rice “couldn’t spare the time” and “didn’t want to set a precedent” by testifying under oath, despite repeated requests by both the committee and the families. This is after 2 1/2 years of stonewalling and opposing this investigation at every turn.

The thing that impressed me the most about his testimony wasn’t the bombshell that Clarke dropped into Bush’s campaign, welcome though that was. It was his heartfelt sorrow at having failed, despite years of trying. And the response of the families - after his testimony, they crowded around him, hugging him, shaking his hand and thanking him for trying and his testimony. Because he had the decency to do what no one in the White House would do.

To tell the truth.

- Bob Woods

Saturday, March 20, 2004

Rites of Spring

It was gloriously sunny and warm on the first day of spring. I rode my hybrid bike downtown. There were many other bicyclists going downtown as well, in fact there were more bicyclists on the Hawthorne Bridge than cars, and the police were at each of the first four intersections coming off the bridge. I had a lot of questions about my pedal/electric powered bike from the other bicyclists. I figured I might as well take advantage of all the police, and locked my bike to a parking meter directly in front of where they were set up across from Pioneer Square. Nobody messed with it.

I found the square was filled to overflowing and people were backed up onto the surrounding streets, letting the light rail trains pass as needed. Then the march started about 1:30 or so. There had to be well over 20,000 people marching, Northwest Cable News said 25,000, but KGW said only 5-6000 and the AP estimate was only 2000. But after I left Pioneer Square to go up Broadway, I looked to our left and way down on 3rd, the march was going by, about 15 blocks ahead of us on our route. When I reached the top of the hill in front of the Oregonian building on Broadway, I looked back behind me and the march was still coming out of Pioneer Square. That made the march well over a mile long, and it filled the street.

The rally and march were peaceful, and there was none of the tension that pervaded last year’s actions. Many families were there with their children, and hope and joy were in the air, along with a passionate determination that it’s time for action and justice.

This wasn’t a bunch of fringe radicals, I even talked to some Republicans who feel betrayed and who will not vote for Bush this time. The nation has grown tired of constantly shifting lies, justifications and excuses for Bush’s policies and their results. Revelations now come like a drumbeat, one after another, reinforcing that the White House ignored the warning signs of 9/11, again and again that Bush was obsessed with invading Iraq, that there were no WMDs, vengeful outing of CIA agents, exploding budget deficits, bogus Medicaid costs and on and on…

The Republicans were mostly upset over economic issues. So I had to ask them, “are you better off than 4 years ago?” to quote an old Reagan line. No, they’ve lost benefits and they’re worried about losing their jobs. I understand, half my friends are out of work, some of them for well over a year, and now I’m amongst them myself. When leaving Pioneer Square on the march, I walked past Fox Tower, where 2 months ago I had a $50K a year job, until I was laid off in yet another round of downsizing. Now my wife and I have lost 60% of our income, and we’re trying to make up some of the difference from savings. So much for the resurgent economy.

But the message everyone had today was absolutely clear. Bush has to go. No ifs, ands, or buts. It’s time to reclaim our country from the liars and the zealots. The deep anger of last year was still there, but today it was focused on one thing, getting Bush out of office, and the breadth of diversity and cohesion among all the different groups represented today was inspiring. People finally are waking up to the fact that they’ve been lied to over and over, and it’s time that “we the people” put a stop to it. And in November, we will.

- Bob Woods

Monday, March 08, 2004

The War President

Our nation is currently having a debate about the wisdom of fighting two wars at the same time, particularly when the President has led us into these wars through deceit and dissembling, as a way of diverting attention from this administration’s massive failure.

Of course, I’m talking about the culture war and the class war this time, instead of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Bush has decided to attempt to write discrimination into the Constitution via an amendment prohibiting gay marriage. For many of us, whether straight or gay, marriage is a civil institution, not a religious one. But in his speech announcing this, over and over, he used the words “sacred’ and “sanctity’. Who elected him Pope? Or President, for that matter?

This is just another salvo in the “culture war”, the never-ending series of battles about who can touch who where, which particular intoxicants are approved or not, who can watch what, whether in public or in the privacy of their homes. Constant attempts to undermine women’s rights, reproductive rights, labor rights, gender rights, the environment, education, and freedom of speech and religion. The drive to replace our democracy with a theocracy.

Much of this is done out of sight via executive orders, often done in the evening at the beginning of a weekend or holiday, when people are least likely to notice. Via amendments to totally unrelated spending legislation and massive sweeping changes like the so-called “Patriot” Act, which most members of Congress were not able to read, or even debate before it was rammed through both houses of Congress and gleefully signed. Via faith-based programs that sneer at the separation of church and state. Via deliberate under-funding of the noble-sounding initiatives he’s announced, after he thinks no one is looking any longer. Via non-enforcement of environmental laws, or by “redefining” what is pollution, or wetlands, or wilderness.

There’s been a lot of whining from the Right in the last year about how the Democrats are stirring up “class warfare” by daring to question Bush’s tax cuts for the rich. After 80% of the tax savings went to the top 5% in income. And since the last tax cut didn’t seem to revive the economy, why then, let’s cut them some more, for those poor down-trodden folks who have to pay such an obscene amount of taxes on inheritances, dividends, capital gains and other things pretty much exclusive to the top few percent. After the massive tax cuts for the already wealthy, Greenspan says that the budget deficits will be so bad in a few years that we’ll have to slash Social Security and Medicare. That the rich won’t need, but you and I will.

How else to describe this, but as “take from the poor and give to the rich”?
How “Reverse Robin Hood”.
How cynical.

For someone who pledged to be “a uniter, not a divider”, he’s done about as well on that pledge as on all the others. This country has been split into diametrically opposed camps that I don’t think will ever be reunited. The repeated use of “wedge issues” to open up cracks in the electorate has succeeded to the point of opening chasms that can hardly be bridged anymore, let alone be healed. It’s tearing the country apart.

Someday, this most uncivil war will be a civil war.
And these are the people you’ll be fighting.

- Bob Woods