brainrow

George W. Bush works to secure his legacy:

With its international mandate in Iraq set to expire in 11 months, the Bush administration will insist that the government in Baghdad give the United States broad authority to conduct combat operations and guarantee civilian contractors specific legal protections from Iraqi law, according to administration and military officials.

This emerging American negotiating position faces a potential buzz saw of opposition from Iraq, with its fragmented Parliament, weak central government and deep sensitivities about being seen as a dependent state, according to these officials.

At the same time, the administration faces opposition from Democrats at home, who warn that the agreements that the White House seeks would bind the next president by locking in Mr. Bush’s policies and a long-term military presence.

Skeptical Iraqis are asking, “So this is democracy? Shut up and do what I tell you?”

The Administration can just point to the U.S. Senate, which seems ready to roll over and grant unconsitutional powers to Bush:

The Republican leadership in the Senate made their move early Thursday evening, successfully blocking any votes on amendments to the intelligence bill and forcing the Senate to vote only on the Administration-approved bill worked out by the Senate Intelligence committee. …

The Intel committee bill expands the government’s wiretapping authority and gives immunity to the telecoms that helped the government secretly spy on Americans without getting the warrants required by law.

The Iraqis thought they were getting Democracy. What they got was MAD — Modern American Democracy. What a gyp!

I owe an apology to George W. Bush and the whole Bush Administration. I’ve been saying that they told thousands and thousands of lies during the run-up to the invasion of Iraq.

I was wrong.

A new study says they made only 935 false statements:

According to the study, Bush and seven top officials — including Vice President Dick Cheney, former Secretary of State Colin Powell and then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice — made 935 false statements about Iraq during those two years.

The study was based on a searchable database compiled of primary sources, such as official government transcripts and speeches, and secondary sources — mainly quotes from major media organizations.

I’m deeply ashamed of over-stating the case against Bush and Co. I’m very, very, very sorry.

Repeating, for the record: they only made 935 false statements.

That’s completely different.

Only part of this speech is famous. It’s worth hearing the whole thing.

A short clip from my favorite Martin Luther King speech is here.

Unless George W. Bush declares a State of Emergency and cancels the November elections — which seems moderately unlikely without Alberto Gonzales as his chief legal advisor — we will inaugurate a new president one year from today.

Surveying the field of surviving candidates from both parties, I feel confident that, no matter which candidate becomes president next year, the inauguration will be a huge, huge upgrade.

But will it be enough?

For years, I’ve felt that our constitutional system was hanging by a thread. But in recent months, I haven’t believed that.

I believe the thread has snapped.

The Constitution needs friends. But George W. Bush, sworn to “preserve, protect, and defend” it, has instead trampled it. The Congress, sworn to support the Constitution, has rolled over time after time. They’ve gutted the writ of habeas corpus. Congressional Democrats joined with Republicans to pass flatly unconstitutional laws — granting Bush authority to bypass constitutionally-required warrants, for example. Right-wing federal judges look the other way or even approve the Administration’s crimes against the Constitution.

As Judge Learned Hand said in 1944: “Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women. When it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it; no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it. While it lies there, it needs no constitution, no law, no court to save it.”

So we, the people of the United States, face a great question in 2008: does liberty lie in our hearts? Will we take back this country? Will we restore the Constitution?

Picture this: next year, the new President — whoever it is — repeats the oath of office after the Chief Justice.

“I do solemnly swear …”

“that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States …”

“and will to the best of my ability …”

“preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Imagine, at the word “Constitution,” that a mighty roar comes from ten thousand, then fifty thousand, then a hundred thousand throats. Dignitaries on the stand leap to their feet, applauding. The roar becomes wave after wave of cheers and applause from the crowd, loud enough and continuous enough to stop the proceedings for several minutes. A thunderous ovation, not for the new president, but for the Constitution, which needs friends, and has them.

When, after several minutes, the cheers and applause finally fade, the new president finishes:

“So help me, God.”

Let’s take the country back.

Many years ago, I worked with a guy whose outgoing personality I envied. He was a glad-hander, a back-slapper, with a winning smile and a ready wit. Almost everybody who met him liked him instantly.

But it didn’t take long at all — a few days, maybe a few weeks — to see that he was also a lying, manipulative, back-stabbing weasel. He didn’t hide it. He would — confidentially, of course — show me just how he’d tricked or cheated someone else. Undoubtedly, he confidentially entertained others by telling them how he was fooling me.

Everybody saw through him eventually, but I don’t think he ever suspected just how transparent his dishonesty was to everyone.

I haven’t thought of that guy for years, but Mitt Romney reminds me of him.

It’s startling to see a reporter call a politician on a lie. It’s not surprising that campaign aides consider that “unprofessional.” Yeah, you sure don’t see the profession doing that very often.

I wanted to mark the new year by observing a minute of silence for each American soldier who died in Iraq in 2007. I wanted to think about each of those lost lives, about their hopes, about their heartbroken families.

Sixty seconds for an entire life — it’s a feeble gesture, I know. But I wanted, by devoting just one minute to contemplation of a single life, to get some sense of the scale and scope of the sacrifices made in Iraq by our men and women in uniform.

In 2007, there were 901 U.S. deaths in Iraq. That’s fifteen hours and one minute of silence.

In March, the Iraq war will enter its sixth year.

Now I want to scream.

Cartoonist Tom Tomorrow reviews 2007.

Part 1 and Part 2:

Well, 2008 is a new year. Maybe things will be better this year. Hope — foolish, foolish hope — springs eternal.

The Joy of Tech examines the differences between Christmases past and present.

(Even I am not such an old fogey as to believe that Christmas past was quite that idyllic.)

The most generous man in Washington, D.C., must be the CNN reporter who writes that Bush’s legacy is a mixed bag:

It’s the best of times, it’s the worst of times — a tale of two legacies as President Bush prepares to ring in the final year of his presidency.

I’m not nearly as generous as that guy. If I were to say that Bush’s legacy is mixed, I would mean it’s a mix of honest incompetence and deliberate malice, and I slipped “honest incompetence” in there only because I’m in a giving mood this time of year — most of the time I think the Bush administration is pure malice.

So, Merry Christmas to Ed Henry, the soul of generosity. Merry Christmas to you, George Bush, Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, Alberto Gonzales, and all the administration. May this Christmas bring each of you exactly what you deserve.

Uh oh…

At an afternoon news conference, D.C. Mayor Adrian M. Fenty and Fire Chief Dennis L. Rubin said security concerns prevented them from saying exactly where or how the fire started.

Maybe I’m just paranoid… Security concerns? Really?

But a source with knowledge of the fire said the flames began in a utility closet off Vice President Cheney’s ceremonial office on the second floor. The flames were confined to the closet, but a significant amount of smoke raced through the building, the source said.

Some reports say the fire apparently started in an electrical closet or telephone room.

An electrical closet — yeah, that makes sense.

Today’s fire at the Executive Office Building next door to the White House suggests that sometimes, shredding the evidence just isn’t enough.

Yet another quote from A Blog Around The Clock:

The best time to hold your tongue is the time you feel you must say something or bust. —Josh Billings

Now we’re getting warmer…

Nice quote, by way of A Blog Around the Clock:

Wisdom is the reward you get for a lifetime of listening when you’d have preferred to talk. —Doug Larson

Does this explain the recent inactivity of this blog? Highly unlikely.

Another quote, swiped from the same blog for efficiency’s sake:

The most dangerous words in the English language are, “This time it’s different.” —Sir John Templeton

Highly unlikely.

Via Keith Olbermann’s Countdown: Colin Powell is interviewed by GQ magazine. The interviewer asked about the threats of World War II and the Cold War, and how they compare to today’s threats:

Q: Isn’t the new global threat we face even more dangerous?

A: What is the greatest threat facing us now? People will say it’s terrorism. But are there any terrorists in the world who can change the American way of life or our political system? No. Can they knock down a building? Yes. Can they kill somebody? Yes. But can they change us? No. Only we can change ourselves. So what is the great threat we are facing?

Ooh! I know! I know! It’s George W. Bush, right?

Where were you when we needed you, Colin?

Garrison Keillor explains a particular strain that still runs through American political life:

My ancestors were Puritans from England. They arrived here in 1648 in the hope of finding greater restrictions than were permissible under English law at that time. —Garrison Keillor

(Via A Blog Around The Clock.)