Category Archives: Bush administration

The conservative prophecy, self-fulfilled

Conservatives in general and Republicans in particular have chosen to bet the farm on the idea that government in and of itself is a bad thing. And every time they are voted into power, they do everything within their means to make that abstraction a reality.

Government is inefficient, they say, and then create odious budget deficits to prove their point.

Government cannot support itself, they say, and then explode the national debt to prove their point.

Government is bad for the economy, they say, and then destroy American jobs to prove their point.

For Chrissakes, they famously declared their intent to “drown government in a bathtub.” Why on earth would you ever choose them to run your government?

And yet we do. And are invariably surprised to reap the whirlwind.

In today’s New York Times, Paul Krugman illustrates how the BP oil spill exemplifies this phenomenon. The jury is still out on a comprehensive picture of the causes of the spill. But it’s clear even now that the destruction of common sense regulation during the Bush administration played a huge role.

[T]here is a common thread running through Katrina and the gulf spill — namely, the collapse in government competence and effectiveness that took place during the Bush years.

The full story of the Deepwater Horizon blowout is still emerging. But it’s already obvious both that BP failed to take adequate precautions, and that federal regulators made no effort to ensure that such precautions were taken.

For years, the Minerals Management Service, the arm of the Interior Department that oversees drilling in the gulf, minimized the environmental risks of drilling. It failed to require a backup shutdown system that is standard in much of the rest of the world, even though its own staff declared such a system necessary. It exempted many offshore drillers from the requirement that they file plans to deal with major oil spills. And it specifically allowed BP to drill Deepwater Horizon without a detailed environmental analysis.

Surely, however, none of this — except, possibly, that last exemption, granted early in the Obama administration — surprises anyone who followed the history of the Interior Department during the Bush years.

For the Bush administration was, to a large degree, run by and for the extractive industries — and I’m not just talking about Dick Cheney’s energy task force. Crucially, management of Interior was turned over to lobbyists, most notably J. Steven Griles, a coal-industry lobbyist who became deputy secretary and effectively ran the department. (In 2007 Mr. Griles pleaded guilty to lying to Congress about his ties to Jack Abramoff.)

Given this history, it’s not surprising that the Minerals Management Service became subservient to the oil industry — although what actually happened is almost too lurid to believe. According to reports by Interior’s inspector general, abuses at the agency went beyond undue influence: there was “a culture of substance abuse and promiscuity” — cocaine, sexual relationships with industry representatives, and more. Protecting the environment was presumably the last thing on these government employees’ minds.

In any case, now is the time to make that break — and I don’t just mean by cleaning house at the Minerals Management Service. What really needs to change is our whole attitude toward government. For the troubles at Interior weren’t unique: they were part of a broader pattern that includes the failure of banking regulation and the transformation of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, a much-admired organization during the Clinton years, into a cruel joke. And the common theme in all these stories is the degradation of effective government by antigovernment ideology.

Conservatives in general and Republicans in particular have no interest in the success of our government. Knowing that, we should never allow them to be in charge of it.

Never again.

Fuck the Republicans

No, really. Fuck ‘em.

Despite their protestations to the contrary, they are the single worst thing that’s ever happened to the American economy.

In addition to being the reigning champs at creating gargantuan budget deficits and exploding the national debt, they are also reprehensible job killers.

But don’t take my word for it. Try the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

The next time you hear a Republican use the term “fiscal responsibility,” try not to hurt yourself laughing.

Tuesday roundup

Poor Mitt Romney. He’s going to be reading ledes like this one every day between now and the day that he concedes the 2012 Republican primary race:

Mitt Romney on RomneyCare: The former Massachusetts governor talks about the subtle differences between his state’s health care reform and that signed by President Obama.

And Poor John McCain.

Yes, it’s still true: Republicans are despicable. Even to their own people.

Did you know that promiscuous women cause earthquakes?

I can’t think of a better argument for drug legalization than this one.

Lucy gets her football ready – again:

“I’m optimistic that maybe the Democrats won’t go forward with the [Financial Reform] bill as it is,” [Sen. Olympia] Snowe [R-Maine] told reporters outside her office. “Over the next few days, hopefully, something will change to make that possible. I don’t see why it would be impossible because frankly I think that there isn’t that much of a gap.”

Would such an agreement be possible within the week, to keep within the Democrats’ preferred timeframe?

“I think it certainly could be, absolutely,” Snowe said. “I’m always willing to be the only Republican if it’s the right thing, and it’s important to do the right thing on this.

As she’s said before, when history calls, history calls.

Governor Rick Perry (R-Texastan) thinks W was the Best. President. Evah.

At the end of the day, when the history books are written, I think George W. Bush will go down as a very, very good President. Approaching great? I don’t know yet because I don’t know if we’ve seen the –

A year and a half since he’s been out of office, this may be a little bit early to write George’s history. But here’s why he was an incredibly good President: because this man kept America safe. […]

Anyone who is not a rank political hack, who has an agenda, and looks at this President’s efforts — I mean, there are two things that I think people judge Presidents on: their safety and the economy.

No doubt. One of the most epic terrorist attacks in world history, a soaring deficit, and a near-economic collapse later, George’s posterity is sitting pretty.

Speaking of keeping America safe:

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki and US officials say two leaders of al-Qaeda in Iraq have been killed in a joint Iraqi-US operation.

Mr Maliki said on national TV that the Iraqi al-Qaeda leader Abu Ayyub al-Masri and Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, who led an affiliate group, were dead.

US Vice-President Joe Biden said their deaths were “potentially devastating blows” to al-Qaeda in Iraq.

You know – the “al-Qaeda in Iraq” that didn’t even exist until Rick Perry’s BFF invaded the country.

Ah, chastity:

When Pat Bond told her lover Henry Willenborg, a Franciscan priest, that she was pregnant, he urged her to have an abortion.

Bond, who was 28, had a miscarriage and then became pregnant again. This time Willenborg’s superiors urged her to give up the child for adoption.

Bond, from Missouri, kept the child but agreed to a vow of silence. In a signed contract with the Catholic Church, she undertook to keep the priest’s identity secret in exchange for financial support for her son, Nathan.

In America, Britain, Ireland, Germany, France, Italy and Austria,women made pregnant by priests have signed such pledges in exchange for hush money from the church.

Deus vult, and all that.

Looks like Jews for Sarah Palin may have launched their web site a little too soon:

Hearing any leader declare that America isn’t a Christian nation and poking at allies like Israel in the eye — it is mind-boggling to see some of our nation’s actions recently, but politics truly is a topic for another day,” Palin said.

In some ways the really noteworthy thing here is that Palin specifically combined her denunciation of religious minority groups with an attack on Barack Obama’s insufficient fealty to Israeli government policies. The two themes were in the very same sentence.

Jim Crow is alive and well in Arizona. Thanks to the Arizona legislature, having brown skin is the only probable cause police now need to pull you over and ask for your papers. Jawohl!

This is pretty much all you need to know about the Republicans’ loyalties when it comes to passing meaningful financial reform.

The Douchebag Council at Pat Robertson’s Liberty University argue that unless employers are allowed to discriminate on the basis of sexual preference, deviant sex offenders are going to rape the bloody stumps of paraplegic veterans.

For Mitch McConnell, telling lies is like breathing:

CANDY CROWLEY (CNN, Sunday): The president says you are being deceptive in describing this bill.

MCCONNELL: Well, Candy … there is a bailout fund in the bill that was reported out of the Banking Committee, the partisan bill that came out of committee on a party-line vote.

CROWLEY: But that still does not–

MCCONNELL: I don’t think that’s in dispute.

CROWLEY: But that bailout is funded by the banks themselves, is it not? It is not a taxpayer bailout?

MCCONNELL: Well, Robert Reich, who was Bill Clinton’s secretary of labor, says it is a bailout fund.

***

When Mitch McConnell has to misquote me to find evidence he’s telling the truth, he is desperate. No, Senator, I never said Dodd’s finance reform bill contains a bailout fund. The fund in the Dodd bill is a $50 billion liquidation fund designed to keep the creditors of distressed banks from jumping ship so fast they’d cause widespread financial panic before the bank’s operations could be wound down. And the cost of that liquidation fund would be paid entirely by Wall Street’s biggest banks. So it’s not, I repeat not, a bailout fund.

As always, Eugene Robinson nails it:

The overhyped Tea Party phenomenon is more about symbolism and screaming than anything else. A “movement” that encompasses gun nuts, tax protesters, devotees of the gold standard, Sarah Palin, insurance company lobbyists, “constitutionalists” who have not read the Constitution, Medicare recipients who oppose government-run health care, crazy “birthers” who claim President Obama was born in another country, a contingent of outright racists (come on, people, let’s be real) and a bunch of fat-cat professional politicians pretending to be “outsiders” is not a coherent intellectual or political force.

Speaking of the incoherence of the Tea People:

Tea party activists are divided roughly into two camps, according to a new POLITICO/TargetPoint poll: one that’s libertarian-minded and largely indifferent to hot-button values issues and another that’s culturally conservative and equally concerned about social and fiscal issues.

The results, however, suggest a distinct fault line that runs through the tea party activist base, characterized by two wings led by the politicians who ranked highest when respondents were asked who “best exemplifies the goals of the tea party movement” — former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), a former GOP presidential candidate.

Call it the Dingbat/Wingnut split.

Finally, there is much to criticize about the Obama administration. Thinking that America’s success is measured by how much the rest of the world hates us is not one of them.

Criminals

A shocker from The Times today: Lawrence Wilkerson, Colin Powell’s chief of staff, goes on the record to say that George W Bush, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld were aware that hundreds of innocent men were being detained at Guantanamo and that they covered it up for fear of discrediting the Guantanamo detention program:

George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld covered up that hundreds of innocent men were sent to the Guantánamo Bay prison camp because they feared that releasing them would harm the push for war in Iraq and the broader War on Terror, according to a new document obtained by The Times.

The accusations were made by Lawrence Wilkerson, a top aide to Colin Powell, the former Republican Secretary of State, in a signed declaration to support a lawsuit filed by a Guantánamo detainee. It is the first time that such allegations have been made by a senior member of the Bush Administration.

Colonel Wilkerson, who was General Powell’s chief of staff when he ran the State Department, was most critical of Mr Cheney and Mr Rumsfeld. He claimed that the former Vice-President and Defence Secretary knew that the majority of the initial 742 detainees sent to Guantánamo in 2002 were innocent but believed that it was “politically impossible to release them”.

Colonel Wilkerson, a long-time critic of the Bush Administration’s approach to counter-terrorism and the war in Iraq, claimed that the majority of detainees — children as young as 12 and men as old as 93, he said — never saw a US soldier when they were captured. He said that many were turned over by Afghans and Pakistanis for up to $5,000. Little or no evidence was produced as to why they had been taken.

He also claimed that one reason Mr Cheney and Mr Rumsfeld did not want the innocent detainees released was because “the detention efforts would be revealed as the incredibly confused operation that they were”. This was “not acceptable to the Administration and would have been severely detrimental to the leadership at DoD [Mr Rumsfeld at the Defence Department]”.

Mr Cheney and Mr Rumsfeld, Colonel Wilkerson said, deemed the incarceration of innocent men acceptable if some genuine militants were captured, leading to a better intelligence picture of Iraq at a time when the Bush Administration was desperate to find a link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11, “thus justifying the Administration’s plans for war with that country”.

He signed the declaration in support of Adel Hassan Hamad, a Sudanese man who was held at Guantánamo Bay from March 2003 until December 2007. Mr Hamad claims that he was tortured by US agents while in custody and yesterday filed a damages action against a list of American officials.

When do the Bush administration criminal trials start?

Oh, right

For those of you keeping score at home

U.S. job loss / growth per month, updated for March.

Is it wrong of me to want to torture John Yoo?

From today’s L.A. Times:

The former Bush administration lawyer who drafted what his critics call the “torture memos” is reviled by many in this liberal East Bay academic enclave [Berkeley], a feeling that is mutual though not, Yoo insists, wholly unpleasant.

I think of myself as being West Berlin during the Cold War, a shining beacon of capitalism and democracy surrounded by a sea of Marxism,” Yoo observes, sipping iced tea in the faculty club lounge, a wan smile registering the discomfort of colleagues walking by en route to the bar.

He sees his neighbors as the human figures of “a natural history museum of the 1960s,” the Telegraph Avenue tableau of a graying, long-haired, pot-smoking counterculture stuck in the ideology’s half-century-old heyday.

It’s like looking at the panoramic displays of troglodytes sitting around the campfire with their clubs. Here, it’s tie-dye and marijuana. It’s just like the 1960s, with the Vietnam War still to protest.

Silly hippies. They think it’s wrong to torture people!

A Republican speaks his mind

Be honest and call in on the right line, folks.

How we got here: the Republican budget deficit

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities recently published an analysis of U.S. budget deficits through the next decade, based largely upon CBO reporting. It’s worth having a look at it, because it illustrates very clearly which major budget components will be contributing to the deficit during that period.

Although the modern Svengali we call the GOP has mesmerized half the electorate into believing that Democratic programs like the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 and the Health Care Reform bill that just passed Congress make up for the majority of the deficit, even a cursory review of the attached graph guts that assumption like a dead fish. In fact, our projected budget deficits for the next decade break down pretty unflatteringly for our Republican friends:

Some critics charge that the new policies pursued by President Obama and the 111th Congress caused the huge federal budget deficits that the nation now faces. In fact, the tax cuts enacted under President George W. Bush, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the economic downturn together explain virtually the entire deficit over the next ten years (see Figure 1).

If not for the tax cuts enacted during the presidency of George W. Bush that Congress did not pay for, the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that were initiated during that period, and the effects of the worst economic slump since the Great Depression (including the cost of steps necessary to combat it), we would not be facing these huge deficits in the near term.
While President Obama inherited a dismal fiscal legacy, that does not diminish his responsibility to propose policies to address our fiscal imbalance and put the weight of his office behind them. Although policymakers should not tighten fiscal policy in the near term while the economy remains fragile, they and the nation at large must come to grips with the nation’s long-term deficit problem. But we should not mistake the causes of our predicament.

Make no mistake: President Obama owns this deficit now. Its implications were clear before he even began his presidential campaign. But if we ever hope to extract ourselves from our fiscal crisis, and ensure that it never happens again, we need to be clear about its causes, and be guided by them in the future.

Step 1: never voting Republicans back into office ever again.

Apologist undone

Former Bush speech writer Marc Thiessen has a new book out called Courting Disaster, in which he breathlessly attempts to justify Bush-era torture policies. Like many apologists for the practice, he simultaneously attempts to argue that there was no torture under Bush, and that the non-existent torture under Bush saved lives by extracting intelligence.

Jane Mayer, author of The Dark Side and relentless investigative journalist when it comes to torture, has the smack down in this week’s New Yorker:

Courting Disaster” downplays the C.I.A.’s brutality under the Bush Administration to the point of falsification. Thiessen argues that “the C.I.A. interrogation program did not inflict torture by any reasonable standard,” and that there was “only one single case” in which “inhumane” techniques were used. That case, he writes, involved the detainee Abd al-Rahim Nashiri, whom a C.I.A. interrogator threatened with a handgun to the head, and with an electric drill. He claims that no detainee “deaths in custody took place in the C.I.A. interrogation program,” failing to mention the case of a detainee who was left to freeze to death at a C.I.A.-run prison in Afghanistan. Referring to the Abu Ghraib scandal, Thiessen writes that “what happened in those photos had nothing to do with C.I.A. interrogations, military interrogations, or interrogations of any sort.” The statement is hard to square with the infamous photograph of Manadel al-Jamadi; his body was placed on ice after he died of asphyxiation during a C.I.A. interrogation at the prison. The homicide became so notorious that the C.I.A.’s inspector general, John Helgerson, forwarded the case to the Justice Department for potential criminal prosecution. Thiessen simply ignores the incident.

Thiessen also categorically states, “The well-documented fact is there was no torture at Guantánamo.” One person who would disagree with this remark is Susan Crawford, the conservative Republican jurist whom Bush appointed to serve as the top “convening authority” on military commissions at Guantánamo. Last year, she told Bob Woodward, of the Washington Post, that there was at least one Guantánamo detainee whose prosecution she couldn’t allow because his abuse “met the legal definition of torture.”

Perhaps the most outlandish falsehood in “Courting Disaster” is Thiessen’s portrayal of Obama and the Democrats as the sole opponents of brutal interrogation tactics. Thiessen presents the termination of the C.I.A. program as a renegade action by President Obama, who has “eliminated our nation’s most important tool to prevent terrorists from striking America.” Yet Thiessen knows that waterboarding and other human-rights abuses, such as dispatching prisoners into secret indefinite detention, were abandoned by the Bush Administration: he wrote the very speech announcing, in 2006, that the Administration was suspending their use.