Haven't we learned anything?
March 5, 2006 6:08 AM Subscribe
White House dedicates itself to rooting out true danger to the country. No, I am not talking about Al Qaeda. Actually the true danger appears to be any news that puts this administration and their tactics in a bad light. It's okay to use leaks when needed, but the safety of this country relies on the need to quit thinking about what is being reported and uncovered, and to start focusing on the fact that anyone would dare report it in the first place.
I'd love to see them try. A 34% approval rating will be a historic high should Bush Co. actually do this.
posted by photoslob at 6:26 AM on March 5, 2006
posted by photoslob at 6:26 AM on March 5, 2006
The Bush Administration: doing their very best to lay the groundwork for the Orwellian nightmare totalitarian state the USA will eventually be.
posted by psmealey at 6:30 AM on March 5, 2006
posted by psmealey at 6:30 AM on March 5, 2006
Right. It's not about running an ethical and effective government. It's about doing a shitty job, but making sure no one knows.
posted by crunchland at 6:32 AM on March 5, 2006
posted by crunchland at 6:32 AM on March 5, 2006
I don't see anything in that article that is truly new, nor even unique to the Bush administration. When I was a federal employee, we were constantly reminded not to talk to the press for any reason except to refer them to the PR officer.
posted by mischief at 6:37 AM on March 5, 2006
posted by mischief at 6:37 AM on March 5, 2006
Sure, wanting to prevent leaks which make your administration look bad isn't anything new. But every time I read an article in which a white house official speaks in defense of its actions, I see something which chills my blood with its brazenly fascist undertones and dire implications for the future of my country:
David B. Rivkin Jr., a partner at Baker & Hostetler in Washington and a senior lawyer in the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations, said the leaking is "out of control," especially given the unique threat posed by terrorist groups.
Does anyone else die just a little bit more everytime they hear the "uniqueness of terrorism justifies x" formula?
I know, nothing new, but I lose sleep over it.
posted by diocletian at 7:19 AM on March 5, 2006
David B. Rivkin Jr., a partner at Baker & Hostetler in Washington and a senior lawyer in the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations, said the leaking is "out of control," especially given the unique threat posed by terrorist groups.
Does anyone else die just a little bit more everytime they hear the "uniqueness of terrorism justifies x" formula?
I know, nothing new, but I lose sleep over it.
posted by diocletian at 7:19 AM on March 5, 2006
Yup, from a risk management perspective that very 'uniqueness' of the threat generally justifies little.
posted by mischief at 7:40 AM on March 5, 2006
posted by mischief at 7:40 AM on March 5, 2006
"When I was a federal employee, we were constantly reminded not to talk to the press for any reason except to refer them to the PR officer."
Sure, but you leave no room for valid reasons to shed light on things that are unethical, illegal and just plain evil. We have the strongest doses of these things since arguably the Nixon years. It is very telling that the things that have come to light (torture, warrentless spying etc) have not been addressed and dealt with. They want to deal with those who put the info out, but not what they have exposed. What happened to our bullshit meter?
posted by UseyurBrain at 7:47 AM on March 5, 2006
Sure, but you leave no room for valid reasons to shed light on things that are unethical, illegal and just plain evil. We have the strongest doses of these things since arguably the Nixon years. It is very telling that the things that have come to light (torture, warrentless spying etc) have not been addressed and dealt with. They want to deal with those who put the info out, but not what they have exposed. What happened to our bullshit meter?
posted by UseyurBrain at 7:47 AM on March 5, 2006
What happened to our bullshit meter?
Apparently it was housed in the World Trade Center.
posted by mkhall at 8:13 AM on March 5, 2006
Apparently it was housed in the World Trade Center.
posted by mkhall at 8:13 AM on March 5, 2006
So the government decides that its number one priority is its own perpetuation. I'm shocked, positively shocked!
Haven't we learned anything
No, we haven't. Perhaps the intentions of the Clinton administration weren't quite so malign at heart, but make no mistake about it - this kind of thing goes way beyond the GOP.
It's not about running an ethical and effective government.
Correct, and it never has been. I'm struggling to think of any government anywhere, ever, that's been ethical and effective. Maybe Jefferson's bunch?
posted by hoverboards don't work on water at 8:27 AM on March 5, 2006
Haven't we learned anything
No, we haven't. Perhaps the intentions of the Clinton administration weren't quite so malign at heart, but make no mistake about it - this kind of thing goes way beyond the GOP.
It's not about running an ethical and effective government.
Correct, and it never has been. I'm struggling to think of any government anywhere, ever, that's been ethical and effective. Maybe Jefferson's bunch?
posted by hoverboards don't work on water at 8:27 AM on March 5, 2006
It's okay to use leaks when needed
Regardless of the consequences.
posted by homunculus at 9:33 AM on March 5, 2006
Regardless of the consequences.
posted by homunculus at 9:33 AM on March 5, 2006
"Plame Leak Sabotaged America's Iran-Watching Intelligence Effort
You know what I wonder when I read this? Who is the bastard that leaked it!?
posted by UseyurBrain at 9:37 AM on March 5, 2006
You know what I wonder when I read this? Who is the bastard that leaked it!?
posted by UseyurBrain at 9:37 AM on March 5, 2006
homunculus, I get a: Forbidden You don't have permission to access /archives/001246.php on this server. Additionally, a 403 Forbidden error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.... when I try that link.
Is that an example of what happens to a leaker?
posted by gsb at 9:52 AM on March 5, 2006
Is that an example of what happens to a leaker?
posted by gsb at 9:52 AM on March 5, 2006
Glenn Greenwald: Bush's attacks on press freedoms escalate
posted by homunculus at 10:03 AM on March 5, 2006
posted by homunculus at 10:03 AM on March 5, 2006
What crunchland said. It would be fantastic if we could introduce legislation that exempted illegal government activities from classification. Talk about taking a step towards more transparent government.
posted by aberrant at 10:04 AM on March 5, 2006
posted by aberrant at 10:04 AM on March 5, 2006
gsb: that's odd. Here's the Raw Story article it refers to.
posted by homunculus at 10:06 AM on March 5, 2006
posted by homunculus at 10:06 AM on March 5, 2006
Almost funny.
posted by stinkycheese at 10:40 AM on March 5, 2006
posted by stinkycheese at 10:40 AM on March 5, 2006
"to shed light on things that are unethical, illegal and just plain evil. We have the strongest doses of these things since arguably the Nixon years."
Anecdotal, I know, but I witnessed a far higher level of unethical and illegal activities while working for the federal government than I have experienced in private business. As for "just plain evil", that's subjective.
posted by mischief at 10:53 AM on March 5, 2006
Anecdotal, I know, but I witnessed a far higher level of unethical and illegal activities while working for the federal government than I have experienced in private business. As for "just plain evil", that's subjective.
posted by mischief at 10:53 AM on March 5, 2006
From the primary link:
"There's a tone of gleeful relish in the way they talk about dragging reporters before grand juries, their appetite for withholding information, and the hints that reporters who look too hard into the public's business risk being branded traitors," said New York Times Executive Editor Bill Keller, in a statement responding to questions from The Washington Post. "I don't know how far action will follow rhetoric, but some days it sounds like the administration is declaring war at home on the values it professes to be promoting abroad."
posted by digaman at 11:53 AM on March 5, 2006
"There's a tone of gleeful relish in the way they talk about dragging reporters before grand juries, their appetite for withholding information, and the hints that reporters who look too hard into the public's business risk being branded traitors," said New York Times Executive Editor Bill Keller, in a statement responding to questions from The Washington Post. "I don't know how far action will follow rhetoric, but some days it sounds like the administration is declaring war at home on the values it professes to be promoting abroad."
posted by digaman at 11:53 AM on March 5, 2006
So what can we do? I keep reading about these things and talking about these things and it's really getting to me that I'm here, in America, watching these things happen, watching all this shit, and I guess it's nice that we can talk about it on these here internets but ... it seems like every interest group that theoretically could help do something, that used to be active, just can't do anything anymore. I'm sure I don't even need to mention how great the Democratic party has been lately.
How about a new party?
posted by blacklite at 11:57 AM on March 5, 2006
How about a new party?
posted by blacklite at 11:57 AM on March 5, 2006
Now that I've actually had breakfast and can be slightly more coherent — I'll absolutely throw a party, if we can create a party at the party. Party party.
posted by blacklite at 2:55 PM on March 5, 2006
posted by blacklite at 2:55 PM on March 5, 2006
The bad guys beat us, blacklite, and you can't just blame it on the Democratic party. The pro-life maniacs and homophobes and xenophobes and all those smarty pants conservatives who can't stomach the smelly hippies and their inability to grasp the need to balance social issues with fiscal responsibility (thanks a lot, guys, this new era of controlled spending and rational economics is really going so awesome), all the firearm fanatics who just know that every Democrat's dearest wish is to pry every last piece from their cold dead fingers didn't start a new party or even try to run their own subset of the existing one (the "moral majority" tried that back in the eighties, you'll recall, and learned quick enough that it was the wrong road. They just took it over, through activism activism activism. The Bush posse learned how to consolidate these forces in Texas and they transferred the principles to national elections brilliantly.
Meanwhile liberals are basically about as useful as tits on a boar, to coin a phrase. We don't like to be zealous and we don't like to organize. The lunatic fringe and true believers are all off on their own tacks, voting Green Party or protesting the WTO, useful shit like that. Mainstreamers pick their horses with a consistent tin ear, perpetually backing uninspired common denominator candidates who ultimately prove incapable of hooking the undecided middle of the road voter with their bland patter, and indeed there seems to be some force within the DFL acting to make people even more boring than they actually are. I listened to Al Gore giving a fiery speech on the astonishing, flagrant attack civil liberties and the principles of just society are under, and I thought, man, where the fuck were you six years ago.
The Democrats seem to keep thinking they can get up on some groundswell of public opinion, and they keep getting proven wrong. Remember the last presidential election, how the kids were gonna rise up and carry Kerry to victory? Becuase, you know, we're liberals! And that's cool, right, you know, fight the power, Woodstock. Well, the kids sure spoke loud and clear in that last election: they just don't give a shit. They barely vote and all the MoveOn and Rock The Votes didn't do a thing about that.
I almost did the same thing you did when I read this post, blacklite. I wanted to jump right in and cry "somebody tell me what to do!" Then I realized: none of the fucking humps slouching around this timewasting engine that is the internet have a fucking clue what to do, myself most emphatically included. If anything, I now think the internet is in fact very much part of the problem. Venting online provides this utterly false sense of actually doing something about the problem. Duhh, I blogged about it, take that, powers that be! The GOP just has a better system. I figure it will take about seventy or eighty years for America to fully convert to a fascist police state. It won't be the first time and it certainly won't be the last. We're fucked.
posted by nanojath at 10:39 PM on March 5, 2006
Meanwhile liberals are basically about as useful as tits on a boar, to coin a phrase. We don't like to be zealous and we don't like to organize. The lunatic fringe and true believers are all off on their own tacks, voting Green Party or protesting the WTO, useful shit like that. Mainstreamers pick their horses with a consistent tin ear, perpetually backing uninspired common denominator candidates who ultimately prove incapable of hooking the undecided middle of the road voter with their bland patter, and indeed there seems to be some force within the DFL acting to make people even more boring than they actually are. I listened to Al Gore giving a fiery speech on the astonishing, flagrant attack civil liberties and the principles of just society are under, and I thought, man, where the fuck were you six years ago.
The Democrats seem to keep thinking they can get up on some groundswell of public opinion, and they keep getting proven wrong. Remember the last presidential election, how the kids were gonna rise up and carry Kerry to victory? Becuase, you know, we're liberals! And that's cool, right, you know, fight the power, Woodstock. Well, the kids sure spoke loud and clear in that last election: they just don't give a shit. They barely vote and all the MoveOn and Rock The Votes didn't do a thing about that.
I almost did the same thing you did when I read this post, blacklite. I wanted to jump right in and cry "somebody tell me what to do!" Then I realized: none of the fucking humps slouching around this timewasting engine that is the internet have a fucking clue what to do, myself most emphatically included. If anything, I now think the internet is in fact very much part of the problem. Venting online provides this utterly false sense of actually doing something about the problem. Duhh, I blogged about it, take that, powers that be! The GOP just has a better system. I figure it will take about seventy or eighty years for America to fully convert to a fascist police state. It won't be the first time and it certainly won't be the last. We're fucked.
posted by nanojath at 10:39 PM on March 5, 2006
Yeah.
I'm not even a citizen, you know, I'm just kind of here. Wishing it could be fixed. I feel like I'm one of the timewasting humps myself, sitting around staring at all these articles floating by and everyone getting all pissed off and going "man, this sucks!" and nothing actually happening. MoveOn seems like the most organized political thing to ever emerge from the internet — on their front page now are important issues like AOL's plan to perhaps charge for e-mails (gasp!) and "50 ways to love your country" (important!).
I don't want people to think they're being useful. I have not seen any useful action by anyone left of centre in years. It fucking sucks. Gore delivers some absolutely amazing speech and no one seems to be able to get through the media to be able to get it reported anywhere. No one cares, it's not in any newspapers — does anyone read newspapers anymore anyway?
I've been talking about this all day with a few friends of mine, off and on. There's hardly anything to do at this point, it all seems like too little too late. Maybe as soon as the story of the cigar broke we should have all been getting together and figuring out exactly what to do. Maybe the Clinton era made everyone fall into some kind of content stupor and this is what we're getting in response. Maybe it's some sort of deep problem with modern society — maybe these are the ills of the internet: an unbridgeable rift between the digitally-savvy and the uninformed remainder that's made it impossible to have meaningful public discourse.
Hell, I'm sure a majority of the population would have glazed over at 'unbridgeable rift'. And the rest of them would at 'meaningful public discourse'. Maybe the internet is a lot more insular than we like to think it is.
This sucks.
posted by blacklite at 11:32 PM on March 5, 2006
I'm not even a citizen, you know, I'm just kind of here. Wishing it could be fixed. I feel like I'm one of the timewasting humps myself, sitting around staring at all these articles floating by and everyone getting all pissed off and going "man, this sucks!" and nothing actually happening. MoveOn seems like the most organized political thing to ever emerge from the internet — on their front page now are important issues like AOL's plan to perhaps charge for e-mails (gasp!) and "50 ways to love your country" (important!).
I don't want people to think they're being useful. I have not seen any useful action by anyone left of centre in years. It fucking sucks. Gore delivers some absolutely amazing speech and no one seems to be able to get through the media to be able to get it reported anywhere. No one cares, it's not in any newspapers — does anyone read newspapers anymore anyway?
I've been talking about this all day with a few friends of mine, off and on. There's hardly anything to do at this point, it all seems like too little too late. Maybe as soon as the story of the cigar broke we should have all been getting together and figuring out exactly what to do. Maybe the Clinton era made everyone fall into some kind of content stupor and this is what we're getting in response. Maybe it's some sort of deep problem with modern society — maybe these are the ills of the internet: an unbridgeable rift between the digitally-savvy and the uninformed remainder that's made it impossible to have meaningful public discourse.
Hell, I'm sure a majority of the population would have glazed over at 'unbridgeable rift'. And the rest of them would at 'meaningful public discourse'. Maybe the internet is a lot more insular than we like to think it is.
This sucks.
posted by blacklite at 11:32 PM on March 5, 2006
nanojath: That was about the most accurate appraisal of the political situation in the US that I have read in a long time. The liberals have been so enamored by social issues they forgot to organize social constructs that can act as party cells.
posted by mischief at 5:20 AM on March 6, 2006
posted by mischief at 5:20 AM on March 6, 2006
It can turn around in a hurry, with the right candidate. Bill Clinton's machine understood how to fight and win. I was a Republican back then and it really pissed me off how successful it was. Neither Al Gore nor John Kerry had those types of organizations and it showed. Whoever wins the 2008 nomination better have the ability to fight fire with fire.
posted by UseyurBrain at 5:28 AM on March 6, 2006
posted by UseyurBrain at 5:28 AM on March 6, 2006
... it sounds like the administration is declaring war at home on the values it professes to be promoting abroad."
Obviously what they're doing is getting rid of all our freedoms so teh terrorists no longer have any reason to hate us. See? They DO have your best interests at heart.
Although watch out for the War on Terror, Mark II, when They Hate Us for Our Hamburgers and Expensive Haircuts and Shiny Things, or THUHEST for short.
posted by Dormant Gorilla at 7:55 AM on March 6, 2006
Obviously what they're doing is getting rid of all our freedoms so teh terrorists no longer have any reason to hate us. See? They DO have your best interests at heart.
Although watch out for the War on Terror, Mark II, when They Hate Us for Our Hamburgers and Expensive Haircuts and Shiny Things, or THUHEST for short.
posted by Dormant Gorilla at 7:55 AM on March 6, 2006
I think part of what is at stake is thinking for oneself. Leaking means to some degree you disagree with the administration line and what to alert the world as to what you percieve as something wrong happening.
I don't believe the leak itself is all they're trying to prevent. It is, in part, thought control.
posted by Smedleyman at 9:36 AM on March 6, 2006
I don't believe the leak itself is all they're trying to prevent. It is, in part, thought control.
posted by Smedleyman at 9:36 AM on March 6, 2006
They wanted to impeach Clinton for lying under oath about his (personal) sex life! Having sex!
Compared to what Bush has done, why is he still prez?
How far does he have to go before people will act?
Is the opposition (democrats) so powerless they can't do anything?
posted by indifferent at 2:11 PM on March 6, 2006
Compared to what Bush has done, why is he still prez?
How far does he have to go before people will act?
Is the opposition (democrats) so powerless they can't do anything?
posted by indifferent at 2:11 PM on March 6, 2006
Well, with the Republicans controlling the House and Senate, in a word, YES.
posted by crunchland at 2:14 PM on March 6, 2006
posted by crunchland at 2:14 PM on March 6, 2006
Wow, government over there in the U.S. of A is broken then...?
posted by indifferent at 2:23 PM on March 6, 2006
posted by indifferent at 2:23 PM on March 6, 2006
No. It's working the way it was designed to work. The Democrats are in the minority in both the House and the Senate, and they don't control any of the wheels of power to bring any sort of action against the President. They can bring the ball and the bat and the gloves, but if the Republican majority don't want to play, there's no game to play.
posted by crunchland at 2:31 PM on March 6, 2006
posted by crunchland at 2:31 PM on March 6, 2006
It can turn around in a hurry, with the right candidate. Bill Clinton's machine understood how to fight and win.
The fundamental problem with US politics is that it requires a "machine" to win. The financial and organizational requirements are such that the winning party must be reliant on a corrupt, or easily corruptible, mechanism.
posted by five fresh fish at 6:14 PM on March 6, 2006
The fundamental problem with US politics is that it requires a "machine" to win. The financial and organizational requirements are such that the winning party must be reliant on a corrupt, or easily corruptible, mechanism.
posted by five fresh fish at 6:14 PM on March 6, 2006
« Older No Jaws of Life here. | illustrated journeys Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by signal at 6:17 AM on March 5, 2006