GroupThinkTank
Revolutionizing the world, one "I agree" at a time
Thursday, September 28, 2006
Mike Russo, 7:27 PM:
Aaaaaaand.... Suspended.
My ability to comment intelligently on this is sadly not up to the task at the moment; hell, my ability to not curl up into a ball and rock back and forth over and over crooning disconnected adjectives to myself is barely coping. I mean, the legal issues really are hard and interesting -- Rasul said that the Gitmo detainees had access to habeas as a matter of statutory, not constitutional, entitlement, so stripping as to them isn't automatically unconstitutional, but the newly-expanded provision allowing for U.S.-detained suspects who the President determined "supported" terrorists or terrorist networks is so potentially broad that I have to think it would tread on the common-law right (though I'd thought that the idea that the sovereign can lock up enemies of the Crown without access to the writ because they're enemies of the Crown was soundly repudiated along with the Star Chamber back in the 17th Century).
But as I said, not up to commenting in any real depth. Just wanted to share the love. And express happiness at my foresight in deciding to grab a drink or two with friends tonight.
UPDATE: OK, just had to share this: Keith Olbermann having a Network moment. Ten straight minutes of mostly-pellucid rant, and they even splice in some footage from the movie version of 1984. He goes after Bush, rather personally, and damn, it made me feel better.
Monday, September 25, 2006
David Bernat, 10:37 PM:
Blog: Archiving
There are those here who know more about blogging than I, oh....
I'd like to archive and store my blog; to transfer it as is -- content and structure -- to an off-line repository, and file it away for posterity. Kind of like a Library of Congress, without the national interest or complicated numbering system. What have you come across that would facilitate this operation?
David Bernat, 2:15 AM:
Clinton defends his pursuit of Bin Laden
There's been a lot of talk recently about Bush's legacy, and naturally it allows for a contrast of Bush and Clinton. Regardless of your thoughts (well, I know all *your* thoughts), I found it interesting to see Clinton defend his legacy and blast Bush.
[CNN.com]
I can't say I believe there is a connection to the "larger picture" here. I've just never seen Clinton so red and fire-eyed.
Thursday, September 21, 2006
Mark Dixon, 4:30 PM:
Rangel misfires at Chavez
"It should be clear to all heads of government that criticism of Bush administration policies, either domestic or foreign, does not entitle them to attack the president personally," said Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY 15th). "George Bush is the president of the United States and represents the entire country. Any demeaning public attack against him is viewed by Republicans and Democrats, and all Americans, as an attack on all of us." (Emphasis mine.)
First, regarding "personal attacks," the U.S. Navy backed the 2002 coup d'etat that briefly removed Chavez from power, and the CIA plotted to down Chavez's plane en route from Caracas to the UN in New York in 2003. Talk about personal attacks!
Second, anyone who has been paying attention knows that Bush does NOT represent the entire country, and after the voting irregularities in Florida and Ohio, I believe a strong case has been made that he is NOT president of the United States. I applaud Chavez or anyone telling the truth about Bush to the world.
Friday, September 15, 2006
Mike Russo, 3:27 PM:
God Shows His Middle Finger to Creation, Part XXXVIII
Seriously, now.
In possibly related news, Meat Loaf is covering Celine Dion.
I should really have more substantive things to say on the important issues of the day, but these two things have a bearing on step 1: is the world actually worth caring about?
Wednesday, September 06, 2006
Mike Russo, 4:38 PM:
Rove is *Good*
I presume you've all seen the news today about KSM and the rest of the disappeared being sent to Gitmo. Before I wade into cynicism in the rest of this post, I want to acknowledge that this makes me feel very good indeed -- of all of the terrible things the administration has done as part of the so-called GWOT, this in my estimation was the worst (I don't think of Iraq as being part of it, I should point out). The policy of whisking people away, not acknowledging where or whether they're being held, subjecting them to "special" interrogation methods, and denying Red Cross access was a horrendous violation of human rights and the rule of law in general. The fact that that policy is gone as of today is overwhelming -- it took five years and a hell of a lot of passionate advocacy and hard work, and I think we as a nation and as individuals should be unreservedly proud that government's doing the right thing. I'm definitely having a celebratory drink tonight.
With that said, fuck, Rove's good. The Republicans have been taking a gigantic pounding, and Hamdan was a huge setback for them. Further, the Senate's really held firm on not allowing Bush's quick-fix legislation to go through. This is a very very good riposte. Making what looks like (and might well be) a huge concession, and shining a very public light on KSM and his compatriots to say "the only reason this guy isn't lawfully in jail is that you're dragging your feet on this legislation," leads to very good optics. More, it *hugely* undercuts the work human rights orgs have been doing to reveal who's actually at Gitmo -- there are lots of farmers who were in the wrong place at the wrong time, but now, KSM is there too. If you look at the stakes in Hamdan, they were pretty minor -- he was one of only a dozen guys charged in the tribunals, and he's really not alleged to have done very much. Try him (and his compatriots) or not, who really cared -- they were small fry. Trying KSM and al-Zubaydah -- that's a much bigger deal, and really raises the question in a much more immediate way, both in terms of how the public sees it and how individual Senators might approach the matter. More, by revealing the secret prisoners, the question of proper trial practice becomes even more linked to the definition of war crimes under Common Article 3 -- this isn't just abstract, as Congress is now on the spot and needs to say whether the people who interrogated KSM are guilty of war crimes or not.
[Note too that they finally released the Army Field Manual today, without a classified appendix, banning many of the specified techniques the human rights community finds objectionable. This is another big "hey, look at us being reasonable!" event. Not that I'm doubting the sincerity of the military men and women who fought to keep it transparent and adhere to the law of far -- but the timing of release is very clearly political]
Implicit in all of this is "look at how unseriously the Supreme Court and Democrats take the war on terror -- this important program is being shut down because of them!"
The only wrinkle is that three Republican Senators have been among the most obstreperous opponents of Bush's agenda -- McCain, Warner, and Graham. If they hold firm, they should be able to keep Bush's terrible legislation from moving forward, and just as importantly, prevent the Rove machine from tarring this inaction as the result of Democratic fecklessness. This might well happen. But it's a very good move, and all sorts of assumptions need to be recalibrated.
I really want to know what happens next...
