J’accuse!

by von QUITE FRANKLY, Kevin Drum and Eric Martin are offering non sequiturs that are beneath them: A couple of months ago conservative apologists were falling all over themselves lauding the success of Ethiopia’s brutality-based approach to quelling the Islamist insurgency in neighboring Somalia. Today, that approach isn’t looking so good. Eric Martin comments: Why, … Read more

And The Hits Just Keep On Coming…

by hilzoy Murray Waas, via TPM: “Shortly before Attorney General Alberto Gonzales advised President Bush last year on whether to shut down a Justice Department inquiry regarding the administration’s warrantless domestic eavesdropping program, Gonzales learned that his own conduct would likely be a focus of the investigation, according to government records and interviews. Bush personally … Read more

I Am So Not Surprised…

by hilzoy From the AP: “The Army Corps of Engineers, rushing to meet President Bush’s promise to protect New Orleans by the start of the 2006 hurricane season, installed defective flood-control pumps last year despite warnings from its own expert that the equipment would fail during a storm, according to documents obtained by The Associated … Read more

Trusting In God’s Judgment

by hilzoy

Glenn Greenwald has a piece up today about Bush and the neocons. I want to highlight and expand on one part of what he writes:

“To do this, they have convinced the President that he has tapped into a much higher authority than the American people — namely, God-mandated, objective morality — and as long as he adheres to that (which is achieved by continuing his militaristic policies in the Middle East, whereby he is fighting Evil and defending Good), God and history will vindicate him:

On one subject the president needed no lessons from Roberts or anyone else in the room: how to handle pressure. “I just don’t feel any,” he says with the calm conviction of a man who believes the constituency to which he must ultimately answer is the Divine Presence. Don’t misunderstand: God didn’t tell him to put troops in harm’s way in Iraq; belief in Him only goes so far as to inform the president that there is good and evil. It is then his job to figure out how to promote the former and destroy the latter. And he is confident that his policies are doing just that.

Or, as luncheon attendee Michael Novak of the American Enterprise Institute recalled (also in The Weekly Standard) the President saying: “I want to have my conscience clear with Him. Then it doesn’t matter so much what others think.” (…)

Nothing matters — not the disapproval of the American people of the President’s actions nor rising anti-Americanism around the world. He should simply ignore all of that and continue to obey the mandates of neoconservatism because that is what is Good and his God will be pleased.” (emphasis in original.)

Glenn seems to suggest that there’s a problem with thinking that what really matters is not what other people think of one’s actions, but what God thinks. This would of course be true if one worshipped a malevolent God, who commanded that we do dreadful things. (Similarly, if you cared about what other people thought, but all those other people were sadists, you’d be in trouble.)

But if the person under discussion accepts any one of the major religions, whose Gods are (basically) good, then I don’t think it’s a problem to care more about what God thinks than what other people think. In fact, God being God, it would be odd if a religious person didn’t think this. In particular, it isn’t a problem to have a President who is Christian and believes this. Christianity, after all, is a religion whose God commands compassion, and is deeply concerned about justice.

What is a problem is to have someone in office who claims to care only about what God thinks and how God will judge him, but who doesn’t actually take this idea seriously. Someone like that will use the thought that only God’s opinion matters simply to dismiss human criticism, without actually worrying about God. He will regard God as a convenient excuse, someone he can assume agrees with him. But to believe in a God who is, in fact, you, or who is so unreal to you that you don’t need to bother taking His views seriously, is not faith; it is the opposite of faith.

Read more

US Attorneys: The Basics

by hilzoy

Some basics on the US Attorney story:

(1) Question: Isn’t this just like what Clinton did? Answer: no. US Attorneys are often replaced at the beginning of a new President’s first term. They are almost never replaced in midterm, like this. Here’s a Congressional Research Study:

“At least 54 U.S. attorneys appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate left office before completion of a four-year term between 1981 and 2006 (not counting those whose tenure was interrupted by a change in presidential administration). Of those 54, 17 left to become Article III federal judges, one left to become a federal magistrate judge, six left to serve in other positions in the executive branch, four sought elective office, two left to serve in state government, one died, and 15 left to enter or return to private practice. Of the remaining eight U.S. attorneys who left before completing a four-year term without a change in presidential administration, two were apparently dismissed by the President, and three apparently resigned after news reports indicated they had engaged in questionable personal actions. No information was available on the three remaining U.S. attorneys who resigned.”

So: at least two, and at most five, US Attorneys were removed from office in the middle of their terms between 1981 and the present firings. George W. Bush managed to fire more attorneys on one day than had been fired in mid-term during the previous 25 years.

(2) Question: So what? What difference does it make if the President fires people at the beginning of his term or in the middle, given that it’s probably for political reasons either way? Answer: When a President replaces US Attorneys at the beginning of his term, he is generally doing so to put in people who fit his ideology or accept his priorities, or to reward supporters. It’s a lot less likely that he will be replacing them because they have disobeyed his orders to investigate or indict someone, or to stop an ongoing investigation.

When a President replaces US Attorneys in mid-term, however, he can sack them not just for not being fully aligned with him ideologically, but for their actions on some specific case. He might want them to back off an investigation they think should be pursued, or to investigate or indict where they think there’s no evidence. And that’s a lot more serious, since it gives Presidents the power to direct the power of law enforcement at their political opponents.

Lest this seem like an abstract worry…

Read more

Public Service Announcement

by publius It’s pledge week at Majikthise. I’d encourage people to help Lindsay stay off of drugs (i.e. pharma reporting) and continue with the journalism. Given the lack of institutional funding available for progressive writers, these efforts are both important and areas where progressive blogs can make a real difference.

The Plot Thickens

by hilzoy From the NYT: “The White House was deeply involved in the decision late last year to dismiss federal prosecutors, including some who had been criticized by Republican lawmakers, administration officials said Monday. Last October, President Bush spoke with Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales to pass along concerns by Republicans that some prosecutors were … Read more

Why Clinton’s Iraq Problem Matters

by publius Having been on hiatus, I’ve spent some time lately wondering why I’m so viscerally blah about Hillary Clinton’s candidacy. Apparently I’m not the only one – she scored an anemic 4% in the latest MyDD straw poll. I’ve tried hard to come up with a Slate-like contrarian post about why my Clinton Blahs … Read more

But Wait: There’s More!

by hilzoy From Salon: “As the military scrambles to pour more soldiers into Iraq, a unit of the Army’s 3rd Infantry Division at Fort Benning, Ga., is deploying troops with serious injuries and other medical problems, including GIs who doctors have said are medically unfit for battle. Some are too injured to wear their body … Read more

300

by von

LET’S GET the obligatory post on "300" out of the way, since the movie seems to be everywhere these days.

1.  I haven’t seen it.

2.  Yet, based on the previews alone, I am willing to endorse the thesis of Andrew Sullivan’s respondant.

3.  The stand at Thermopylae was the only good thing that Sparta ever did.  I’m not kidding:  there’s very little to like about Spartan society, particularly when compared with Athenian democracy (the competing model); the standard Spartan army was no better than the army of any other Greek state (as clearly demonstrated in later conflicts); and the best way to explain the Spartan foreign policy of the age is that it included equal parts pride, greed and envy — sometimes with a healthy dose of stupidity as well.  Moreover, only a few decades after Thermopylae, Sparta was making common cause with the Persians in Sparta’s wars against Athens.  Defender of the Greeks?  Only when it suited Sparta’s interest.

4.  The stand of the 300, while an important rearguard action, was not the critical battle in this particular campaign.  Rather, the crucial battles occured at sea, when an Athens-led navy took on a much-larger Persian fleet.  The Athenian navy both (1) saved Leonidas‘ ass for days by denying the much-larger Persian fleet safe harbor to land marines directly behind him and (2) eventually destroyed the much-larger Persian fleet at the Battle of Salamis, effectively (although not immediately) ending the campaign against Greece by severing Persia’s supply lines.*  (Did I mention that the Persian fleet was much larger than the Athenian one?)  Themistocles, the Athenian general who commanded the naval fleet and masterminded the victory, gets no love.

5.  Oh, and it wasn’t "300" anyway.  It was 300 Spartans supported by about 700 Thespians — or 1000 Greeks total.  The Thespians also get no love. 

6.  The foregoing is Exhibit 1,204,995,231 in support of the thesis that there is no justice.

*Yes, credit for final victory is usually given to the Spartans at the Battle of Plataea, but that was simply the last battle in the Persian war — it was not the turning point.

UPDATE:  Best comment so far is from Togolosh:  "In fact, I think it’s likely that there were *no* Spartans at Thermopylae, but rather 700 regular Thespians and 300 Master Thespians who were pretending to be Spartans. Acting!"

Also, Jesurgislac rightly notes that Spartan women had an easier go of it than Athenian women.  That’s one reason I wrote "there’s very little to like about Spartan society" rather than there’s nothing to like about Spartan society, but I should do a better job pointing out that Sparta is closer to modern norms on at least this issue.  Still, given that (1) Sparta’s armies really were not the shiznit of the ancient world, but, by and large, were only a notch-or-two above ordinary; (2) until Sparta bribed Athens’ best rowers over to its side at the end of the PP war, a Spartan naval victory was defined as "Sparta flees (successfully)"; and (3) Sparta tried to sell out the rest of the Greeks to the Persians about 80 years after Thermopylae, it’s pretty stunning how Sparta is regarded today.

Read more

Prosecutors

by hilzoy Having been busy, I haven’t written about the firing of the eight prosecutors before now. (Josh Marshall has, and if you haven’t been reading his reporting on it, you should. And TPMMuckraker has helpfully collected all its posts on this story here.) But it’s one more of those stories that ought to be … Read more

Ahmadinejad’s rough week

by Charles

The Iranian president has had better times, but he’s been looking downright beleaguered of late.  Going down the list…

The defecting defense minister.  Although it happened a month ago, Mr. Asghari is tucked away in a secret European location and presumably giving his hosts information that is damaging to the regime.  More here:

AN Iranian general who defected to the West last month had been spying on Iran since 2003 when he was recruited on an overseas business trip, according to Iranian sources.

This weekend Brigadier General Ali Reza Asgari, 63, the former deputy defence minister, is understood to be undergoing debriefing at a Nato base in Germany after he escaped from Iran, followed by his family.

A daring getaway via Damascus was organised by western intelligence agencies after it became clear that his cover was about to be blown. Iran’s notorious secret service, the Vavak, is believed to have suspected that he was a high-level mole.

According to the Iranian sources, the escape took several months to arrange. At least 10 close members of his family had to flee the country. Asgari has two sons, a daughter and several grandchildren and it is believed that all, including his daughters-in-law, are now out of Iran. Their final destination is unknown.

Asgari is said to have carried with him documents disclosing Iran’s links to terrorists in the Middle East. It is not thought that he had details of the country’s nuclear programme.

Read more

Aaaaahh! Open Thread

by hilzoy My life has been monstrously busy lately — deadlines, talks, and then, suddenly, the fact that I had earlier said “sure, I’ll sit on the graduate student admissions committee” morphed from a breezy comment into the need to spend most of last weekend reading dossiers, at perhaps the least convenient time in the … Read more

The Kobayashi Maru Scenario

UNLESS Y’ALL convince me otherwise right quick, I’m about to deploy Plan B of von’s way in political giving:  start giving money to the least objectionable candidate in the primaries of both parties.  The idea is to do what one can to avoid the tragedy of a match-up like the one we saw in ’04, … Read more

Weird

by von SO ANYWAY, I’m wasting a moment and clicking through a couple links and I come upon a piece by Rabbi Marc Gellman on so-called The Jesus Tomb.  Now, I really don’t have a dog in this hunt — my faith, such as it is, really doesn’t depend much on Biblical inerrancy on even … Read more

The Iraq Block

by Charles

This post is a collection of observances from people who are (or were) there.  First, some excerpts from Michael Yon, who was earlier embedded in Mosul and has since been to Baghdad and elsewhere:

Often the most dangerous places in Iraq are at the front gates of bases where suicide attackers roll in. Outside the wire—and often inside the wire—is bad-guy country. A block away from a base might as well be a hundred miles away. We rolled out in humvees for what would be about a 1,225 mile trip inside Iraq, and another portion to Germany and back.

On the 18th, we drove from Baghdad to Ramadi for a “Transfer of Authority” from the 1st Brigade 1st Armored Division, to the 1st Brigade of the 3rd Infantry Division.

Geraldo Rivera was there. He’s got a cool mustache. Monte Morin of Stars & Stripes was there. Monte’s a serious war correspondent. Lieutenant General Raymond Odierno was there. Odierno is a serious general who runs a huge portion of this war. Next time Odierno comes on the news, it can be good to stop and listen.

Read more

The Scarlet Libby

by publius For those of you disappointed that Rove and Cheney escaped Fitzgerald, there is a potential silver lining. They may not be going to jail, but they are going to have to live with the fact that Libby — a close friend and ally — is going to jail for something that they also … Read more

Libby Found Guilty

by hilzoy From the AP: “Former White House aide I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby was convicted Tuesday of obstruction, perjury and lying to the FBI in an investigation into the leak of a CIA operative’s identity. Libby, the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, was accused of lying and obstructing the investigation into … Read more

Barely Legal?

by publius I’m not an expert in this field, and I certainly need more time to see how the statute I’ve cited below has been interpreted. But I think the text of this statute — the federal criminal obstruction of justice statute — might explain why Wilson and Domenici took so long to respond to … Read more

Iranian Intelligence Intrigue

by Charles A month ago, an Iranian general "disappeared" (perhaps along with his family) while in Turkey, and speculation is rampant.  Did Mossad or the CIA kidnap him or did he defect?  In either case, he is a high-level intelligence source who could expose Iranian inner workings.  The Blotter: "This is a fatal blow to … Read more

No Decency, No Shame

by hilzoy

Until now, there have been three things that this administration has done that have reduced me to a tiny molten ball of fury: shredding the Constitution, invading Iraq, and leaving people to die after Katrina. Somehow, all the rest — even really important things, like the deficit, the astonishing failures in nuclear nonproliferation and securing loose nukes, our virtual lack of an energy policy, and all the rest — don’t make me truly livid in quite the way that these three do. Now we can add a fourth: veterans’ health care. I suppose that in the grand scheme of things, it probably matters less than failing to take any action at all on global warming, but it just encapsulates everything that drives me crazy about this administration: the heartlessness, the abject failure even to try to do right by people who manifestly deserve it at the very time when the administration’s own policies were putting their lives in danger, the complete lack of any concern for the very people who were willing to risk everything for us, and who (in general) stood by the administration even when it was utterly failing to stand by them.

Read it and weep:

“Sandy Karen was horrified when her 21-year-old son was discharged from the Naval Medical Center in San Diego a few months ago and told to report to the outpatient barracks, only to find the room swarming with fruit flies, trash overflowing and a syringe on the table. “The staff sergeant says, ‘Here are your linens’ to my son, who can’t even stand up,” said Karen, of Brookeville, Md. “This kid has an open wound, and I’m going to put him in a room with fruit flies?” She took her son to a hotel instead.

“My concern is for the others, who don’t have a parent or someone to fight for them,” Karen said. “These are just kids. Who would have ever looked in on my son?”

Capt. Leslie Haines was sent to Fort Knox in Kentucky for treatment in 2004 after being flown out of Iraq. “The living conditions were the worst I’d ever seen for soldiers,” he said. “Paint peeling, mold, windows that didn’t work. I went to the hospital chaplain to get them to issue blankets and linens. There were no nurses. You had wounded and injured leading the troops.” (…)

Hundreds of soldiers contacted The Washington Post through telephone calls and e-mails, many of them describing their bleak existence in Medhold.

From Fort Campbell in Kentucky: “There were yellow signs on the door stating our barracks had asbestos.”

From Fort Bragg in North Carolina: “They are on my [expletive] like a diaper. . . . there are people getting chewed up everyday.”

From Fort Dix in New Jersey: “Scare tactics are used against soldiers who will write sworn statement to assist fellow soldiers for their medical needs.”

From Fort Irwin in California: “Most of us have had to sign waivers where we understand that the housing we were in failed to meet minimal government standards.” (…)

VA hospitals are also receiving a surge of new patients after more than five years of combat. At the sprawling James J. Peters VA Medical Center in the Bronx, N.Y., Spec. Roberto Reyes Jr. lies nearly immobile and unable to talk. Once a strapping member of Charlie Company, 1st Battalion, 5th Cavalry, Reyes got too close to an improvised explosive device in Iraq and was sent to Walter Reed, where doctors did all they could before shipping him to the VA for the remainder of his life. A cloudy bag of urine hangs from his wheelchair. His mother and his aunt are constant bedside companions; Reyes, 25, likes for them to get two inches from his face, so he can pull on their noses with the few fingers he can still control.

Maria Mendez, his aunt, complained about the hospital staff. “They fight over who’s going to have to give him a bath — in front of him!” she said. Reyes suffered third-degree burns on his leg when a nurse left him in a shower unattended. He was unable to move himself away from the scalding water. His aunt found out only later, when she saw the burns.”

Paul Krugman provides context:

“For all its cries of “support the troops,” the Bush administration has treated veterans’ medical care the same way it treats everything else: nickel-and-diming the needy, protecting the incompetent and privatizing everything it can.

What makes this a particular shame is that in the Clinton years, veterans’ health care — like the Federal Emergency Management Agency — became a shining example of how good leadership can revitalize a troubled government program. By the early years of this decade the Veterans Health Administration was, by many measures, providing the highest-quality health care in America. (It probably still is: Walter Reed is a military facility, not run by the V.H.A.)

But as with FEMA, the Bush administration has done all it can to undermine that achievement. And the Walter Reed scandal is another Hurricane Katrina: the moment when the administration’s misgovernment became obvious to everyone.

The problem starts with money. The administration uses carefully cooked numbers to pretend that it has been generous to veterans, but the historical data contained in its own budget for fiscal 2008 tell the true story. The quagmire in Iraq has vastly increased the demands on the Veterans Administration, yet since 2001 federal outlays for veterans’ medical care have actually lagged behind overall national health spending.

To save money, the administration has been charging veterans for many formerly free services. For example, in 2005 Salon reported that some Walter Reed patients were forced to pay hundreds of dollars each month for their meals.

More important, the administration has broken longstanding promises of lifetime health care to those who defend our nation. Two months before the invasion of Iraq the V.H.A., which previously offered care to all veterans, introduced severe new restrictions on who is entitled to enroll in its health care system. As the agency’s Web site helpfully explains, veterans whose income exceeds as little as $27,790 a year, and who lack “special eligibilities such as a compensable service connected condition or recent combat service,” will be turned away.

So when you hear stories of veterans who spend months or years fighting to get the care they deserve, trying to prove that their injuries are service-related, remember this: all this red tape was created not by the inherent inefficiency of government bureaucracy, but by the Bush administration’s penny-pinching.

But money is only part of the problem.

We know from Hurricane Katrina postmortems that one of the factors degrading FEMA’s effectiveness was the Bush administration’s relentless push to outsource and privatize disaster management, which demoralized government employees and drove away many of the agency’s most experienced professionals. It appears that the same thing has been happening to veterans’ care.

The redoubtable Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, points out that IAP Worldwide Services, a company run by two former Halliburton executives, received a large contract to run Walter Reed under suspicious circumstances: the Army reversed the results of an audit concluding that government employees could do the job more cheaply.

And Mr. Waxman, who will be holding a hearing on the issue today, appears to have solid evidence, including an internal Walter Reed memo from last year, that the prospect of privatization led to a FEMA-type exodus of skilled personnel.”

Remember: this is not about money. At the very same time that the Bush administration was sending troops off to fight two wars and underfunding the VA, at the very same time that it was charging wounded veterans for their meals, this administration somehow found a way to cut taxes for the wealthiest among us. It’s too much, apparently, to ask the likes of Paris Hilton to pay taxes on any money they inherit, after the first few tax-free millions. But it’s not too much to ask people who have given their health or their limbs or their minds fighting George W. Bush’s misconceived war to pay for their meals, or to live in rooms with asbestos and mold and rodents and stray syringes lying about.

This is not about money. It’s about a complete lack of decency and honor and fairness; and about the absence of even the most minimal sense of shame.

Read more

Bad Judicial Decision of the Week

by Katherine Last week it was Boumedienne; this week it’s El Masri v. Tenet. Three Fourth Circuit judges unanimously ruled that Khaled el-Masri cannot sue the U.S. government because of the State Secrets Privilege. Here’s the best/worst line–not essential to the court’s result, but the biggest "what the hell?!" factor: "By no means do we … Read more

Data Points

by hilzoy Someone called Instapunk proposed the following challenge: “The exercise is this: Search six months’ worth of content, posts and comments, of the 20 most popular blogs on the right and the left. The search criteria are George Carlin’s infamous “7 Dirty Words.” I am absolutely certain that the left will far exceed the … Read more

Defending “Wasted”

by publius Politically speaking, I understand why Obama and McCain had to apologize for saying that soldiers’ lives were “wasted” in Iraq. I wish, though, that they had refused to do so. Refusing to say “wasted” is actually more disrespectful to our troops than saying it. A far better tribute would be to call a … Read more

Atom Heart Mother, Redux

by von PROFESSOR REYNOLDS continues his attempt to shoot down carbon offsets (previously discussed at ObWi here), by linking to a well-rounded analysis from The Economist.  Reynolds claims that The Economist supports his claim that carbon offsets are counterproductive.  Here is Reynolds’ post: STILL MORE on whether carbon offsets work, from The Economist. "If you … Read more

The Levin Amendment

by hilzoy Lincoln Chafee has an Op-Ed in the NYT, about the role of Senators’ votes on the Iraq War Resolution in the current Presidential campaign: “The situation facing the candidates who cast war votes has, to my surprise, often been presented as a binary one — they could either vote for the war, or … Read more