Category: America

Interesting juxtapositions popping up around the administration’s supporters today. First, word that the official DOD record for Kerry’s Bronze Star commendation supports his version of events, not “Swift Boat Veteran” critic Larry Thurow’s:

Larry Thurlow, who commanded a Navy Swift boat alongside Kerry in Vietnam, has strongly disputed Kerry’s claim that the Massachusetts Democrat’s boat came under fire during a mission in Viet Cong-controlled territory on March 13, 1969. Kerry won a Bronze Star for his actions that day.

But Thurlow’s military records, portions of which were released yesterday to The Washington Post under the Freedom of Information Act, contain several references to “enemy small arms and automatic weapons fire” directed at “all units” of the five-boat flotilla. Thurlow won his own Bronze Star that day, and the citation praises him for providing assistance to a damaged Swift boat “despite enemy bullets flying about him.”…

Last month, Thurlow swore in an affidavit that Kerry was “not under fire” when he fished Lt. James Rassmann out of the water. He described Kerry’s Bronze Star citation, which says that all units involved came under “small arms and automatic weapons fire,” as “totally fabricated.”

Now, someone is lying here. And my money says that the DOD, which would have every reason to cast Kerry in a bad light following his war protest activities, is probably telling the truth. Which makes Thurlow, in plain speech, a bad actor and a liar.

Then from Beaverton, Oregon, comes this lovely photo of reasoned rebuttal from a Bush supporter (courtesy Oliver Willis):

An unidentified supporter of President Bush tries to silence protester Kendra Lloyd-Knox (right) outside Southridge High School in Beaverton.

It’s good to know that the administration’s record on civil liberties is setting a positive example for its supporters.

BuzzMachine: When did we Saudis stop beating your American wives? The Saudi government is funding radio ads to address charges about Saudi complicity in 9/11 and subsequent terrorist and Al Qaeda related activity. I heard the ad this afternoon—in a Cambridge-area liquor store (Dr. Ironic, call your office). Not very convincing…

New York Times (Magazine): Wiring the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy. Even the title of the piece must make conservatives apoplectic. It makes me a little queasy. But the article is a brilliant dissection of the effects of campaign finance reform on the flow of money and the policy creation process in the Democratic party—and outside it. It’s really interesting to think what some of the money that was poured into dot-bombs in the late ’90s could do now in the political process—and who the equivalents to Marc Andreeson and Jeff Bezos will turn out to be in the political arena.

I followed a pointer from Scoble to the Apollo Image Gallery at the Project Apollo Archive. This is a fabulous online archive of photos from the first manned US space flights through the last Apollo mission, including:

• The original seven astronauts
• The “Freedom 7” launch carrying Alan Shepard into space
• Ed White performing the first US space walk during Gemini 4
• The tragic fire that cost the lives of Ed White, Gus Grissom, and Roger Chaffee during a training session for Apollo I at Pad 34
• Apollo 10, on which the command module was “Charlie Brown” and the lander was “Snoopy” (prompting some fabulous publicity photos (see above) and a classic Peanuts strip)—see also this interesting discussion about the “Silver Snoopy” quality award that was instituted to get the program back on track after the Apollo 1 disaster
• An enormous set of photos from Apollo 11, the first manned landing on the moon
• Apollo 13, the mission that inspired the movie
• And all the rest of the missions through Apollo 17 in 1972

It’s tremendous to see this archive of photos, many of which I’ve grown up with, become available on line. It’s also a bit sad. On the day I was born in 1972, the Apollo 17 crew was just getting ready to start the final manned mission. I was barely two weeks old when the crew splashed down into the Pacific Ocean. In the intervening 31-plus years, man hasn’t left Earth orbit.

(I can’t link directly to the images in the archive at present because it’s been overwhelmed with traffic and is temporarily being mirrored offsite.)

Condolences to the Cathy Woolard campaign. I guess whatever else you can say about Georgia politics, the state is never boring and never predictable.

So that’s what Greg Greene has been up to: tomorrow is the Democratic primary for the Georgia Fourth District Congressional race, and Greg’s candidate Cathy Woolard has been snapping up endorsements. There is also, finally, an official campaign blog, though to date it only has one post.

God bless Sean Bonner and CafePress for immortalizing the best event to date of the election year in cotton and coffee mugs. But what I really want is a t-shirt with this quotation on one side and this quotation on the other.

Our president and vice president. We don’t just do Newspeak; sometimes we speak everything that’s on our minds loud and clear.

So what’s it all about?

In the spirit of Linus, let’s let the words of Thomas Jefferson speak for the day:

The Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United States of America

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. –Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.

He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature.

He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:

For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing taxes on us without our consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury:

For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:

For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule in these colonies:

For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments:

For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends.

We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

Massachusetts: John Hancock, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Connecticut: Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York: William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey: Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Pennsylvania: Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Delaware: Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Maryland: Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia: George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Georgia: Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton

…don’t they understand that talking to the President is a privilege? What do they think they’re doing, providing a public service or something? Certainly the journalists in Ireland appear to feel entitled to ignore the White House’s pre-interview briefs and treat the president with something less than kid glove deference:

The Irish Independent learned last night that the White House told Ms Coleman that she interrupted the president unnecessarily and was disrespectful.

She also received a call from the White House in which she was admonished for her tone.

And it emerged last night that presidential staff suggested to Ms Coleman as she went into the interview that she ask him a question on the outfit that Taoiseach Bertie Ahern wore to the G8 summit.

Anyone who still believes that the White House doesn’t seek to control its presentation in the media, please raise your hand.

Oh, and “admonished for her tone”? After last week, there’s only one thing—following the administration’s own example—that one can say to that accusation… (Thanks to the Rittenhouse Review for the tip (scroll down); you can also access the audio of the aborted interview.)

Interesting watching Bill Clinton on 60 Minutes tonight. I’m sure that in other parts the usual machinery is gearing up to throw things at the ex-President for his disingenuousness, even his daring to speak in public at all now.

My perspective at this point is: love him or hate him, I think the contrast between him and our current President, and even John Kerry, could not be greater. Clinton is probably the closest thing the American presidency has produced since Lincoln to a tragic Shakespearian figure. (FDR, in his secret wheelchair, might come close.) But Clinton’s ambition, his deep desire to change the world, and his Falstaffian appetites add up to the real deal: a passionate, accomplished, and deeply flawed American who by all rights should be remembered for having accomplished great things, but will instead be remembered with a cigar in his hand.

But with all that, he is still the most approachable of all Presidents, a man who is not afraid to talk about his upbringing, to hang out with grade-school buddies in a diner (and look like many a middle-aged Southern man while doing it). A man who says he and his wife went through a year of a day a week in therapy, apart and together, and says it on TV, who looks the nation in the eye and can say, “I recommend that if you invest a bunch of years in a marriage that you try counseling before you give it all up.”

In contrast, our current president’s troglodytic failure in more than thirty seconds in a press conference to identify one thing he’d done wrong, in a presidency that has consisted of 266 days of vacation, 30 of those prior to the deadliest terrorist attack on US soil, followed by an invasion of Afghanistan (justified but unfinished and understaffed) and an invasion of Iraq under false pretenses, and who continues to insist that there was a connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda despite all the facts, stands as evidence that he’s not worthy to wipe Bill’s wingtips.

I don’t know if we’ve seen enough of John Kerry to know where he falls on that spectrum. He certainly doesn’t have the easy affability of Clinton, but clearly he doesn’t have the duplicitous ideological idiocy of George W. and his retinue. But I think that the fact that Clinton could score the top three spots on Blogdex (two on the book, one about a BBC interview gone astray) when he isn’t even campaigning, during an election year, means that Kerry needs to step up his charm offensive if he is to come out from the ex-President’s shadow.

Esta (in a rare post on Tuesday—congrats on finishing the first year, chica) says she wants to see accountability in the Iraqi prisoner abuse scandal. Meanwhile, conservative politicians and their apologists are running every possible way to point the fingers anywhere but to the administration and the people in charge.

Timothy Noah in Slate rounds up a who’s who of finger pointing, in which various conservatives rush to blame “moral relativism…gays…pornography…feminists…Quentin Tarantino…the Farrelly Brothers…women in the military…the academic left…the liberal media/entertainment complex…journalists…[and] our sick society.” (All attributed, with links). And Josh Marshall calls Senator James Inhofe on his thuggish statement that we should be more concerned about the Red Cross blowing the whistle on our mistreatment of prisoners than about the abuse itself. It’s a good thing no fluffy bunnies were near the prisons; I have a feeling they’d get some of the blame too.

What astonishes me is that anyone gets away with it. I don’t believe you can make a few individual soldiers and contractors a scapegoat for the torture (let’s call a spade a spade) of these prisoners. As Mark Kleinman points out, the principle flaws in the argument can be expressed almost completely in words of one syllable:

Our … troops … work … for … us.
Their … acts … are … our … acts.
We … are … res – pon – si – ble … for … what … they … do.
We … get … to … vote … on … their … boss.

Except, of course, we don’t get to vote on Rumsfeld.

Where’s William Bennett’s sanctimonious moral clarity when we need it? Oh, never mind: that was a joke.

So, in the spirit of Mark Kleinman, here’s my brief version of the argument: Isn’t accountability part of responsibility? Isn’t responsibility part of holding office? Isn’t upholding the law (and the Geneva Convention) part of being the President? As I’ve said before: How absent-minded! How forgetful!

Ben and Jerry’s will be doing an iTunes song giveaway on free cone day. I read the headline and groaned, remembering the Pepsi giveaway and imagining premiums hidden in cones and under pint lids—in short, everything we feared when the company was bought out.

But the mechanics are quite a bit different. In Ben and Jerry’s giveaway, the giveaway isn’t tied to merchandise, but to activism. If you sign a pledge to vote in November’s presidential election on their website, you get a free song. Needless to say, the offer is US only. (No mention of the promotion yet on their site, though.)

Tired of hearing the GOP leadership rail against MoveOn for violating soft money bans (as though independent groups couldn’t voice an opinion about the president)? Wondering whether there will ever be another Internet savvy candidate again after Dean’s disappearance? Wondering which candidate you should support for a seat in the US House of Representatives with good old fashioned hard money?

Well, wonder no more, bunky. Following up my coverage of the campaign two weeks ago, I wanted to point to the latest Cathy Woolard development. Greg Greene, blogger extraordinaire, press secretary and research director for Cathy Woolard’s campaign, and my former college roommate, has mounted an appeal for funds on his blog. Benefits: help elect Georgia’s first gay congressperson, ensure that an experienced, fiscally moderate, socially progressive voice gets its place in the House, deny the GOP a seat in the House, and help send Greg with his boss to DC. Contribute on Cathy’s official site, and give an amount ending in $.07 so that the campaign will know it came from Greg’s blog. I’ve given; won’t you?

Now, about that beer, Greg…

I watched and listened to the President’s news conference last night with anger, resignation, and something like shame. After all that’s happened, even acknowledging that we know now that Saddam had no stockpile of WMDs, he still says he would have invaded Iraq. Barely an acknowledgement that the small decentralized cells of radical stateless terrorists who blew our lives apart on September 11th pose more of a direct threat to the US than Iraq and the rest of the “axis of evil” ever did. He says the August 6 PDB memo didn’t constitute a clear warning. What about “Bin Laden Determined To Strike In US” is unclear? It might at least be expected to give one pause before cutting an emergency post-9/11 call for additional anti-terrorism funds from the FBI by two-thirds.

And what was up with the response to the question, “After 9/11, what would your biggest mistake be, would you say? And what lessons have you learned from it?” Bush’s answer, “I wish you’d have given me this written question ahead of time so I could plan for it… I can’t come up with something under the pressure of the press conference,” is the clearest self-articulation of Bush’s lack of self-reflective wisdom, courage and inability to handle anything unscripted that I’ve heard yet. As Queso wrote, “!?! Wow.”

And compare his non-response to the question, “you never admit a mistake. Is this a fair criticism? And do you believe you made any errors in judgment” to Richard Clarke’s unequivocal statement: “Your government failed you, those entrusted with protecting you failed you, and I failed you….And for that failure, I would ask — once all the facts are out — for your understanding and your forgiveness.”

The folks at Pandagon echo my shame: “I hate having so little pride in my own President.” Dave Winer thinks Bush ought to resign and take the presidency of Iraq, since his focus has been there and not cleaning up troubles and threats at home. I don’t know that one has to go beyond the first part of that sentence. Bush ought to be a man, admit that he and his cabal of true believer advisors were wrong, wrong, wrong, and resign. He is unfit to be our president.

Update: Lots of good discussion around this. Thanks to one commenter for pointing out I had misquoted the title of the PDB; I’ve corrected it in line.