1 Boring Old Man

Marked  by  Karl Rove,
Fired  last  December,
Not Senate Reviewed,
and Rachel K. Paulose

… who is the U.S. Attorney for Minnesota, the District where several senior attorneys recently demoted themselves to get out from under her control and her Bible quotes. She was previously the Senior Counsel to Acting Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty and was a Special Assistant to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Her best pal at the Justice Department was Monica Goodling, [former] Senior Counsel to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales [Goodling resigned yesterday]. When Rachel was appointed to fill the post, her swearing in was described by her colleagues as a "Coronation," held in an Auditorium with a Choir – a real first.

While Rachel was not appointed to replace one of the fired Attorneys, she’s a Republican Operative from the Central Office filling a spot in one of Rove’s targeted States – suggesting her appointment was part of the Plan [Recall that Sampson’s first strategy  in his January 2006 email was to offer the U.S.A.’s a chance to resign on their own first, before firing anyone]. Let’s hope the Congressional Investigators call these disgruntled attorneys ASAP to hear their take on Madame Attorney Paulose…

I almost get tired of raling about our government, but they just won’t stop. They invaded Iraq on what was, at best, a bad hunch. Last night, we watched re-runs of Valerie Plame’s testimony on CSPAN2. She was clearly working like hell at the C.I.A. trying to confirm the Administration’s obsession with Saddam Hussein’s WMD’s [finding nothing]. But Bush and Cheney were sure, so off we went to war based on their hunch. Now, we are being presented with clear evidence of Global warming and man’s part in it, but they continue to not only debunk it, but actually work to undermine the evidence.

Rule by opinion wouldn’t be so bad if we had leaders who had decent opinions based of solid information. Rule by opinion is a disaster when the leaders only have ideologically driven opinions, paranoid hunches, and ignore facts – a really big disaster… 

A political Blog is hardly the place for an exposition on the Tibetan Wheel of Life. But there is something about it that is pertinent to the modern American dilemma. In ancient times, the religion of Tibet had to do with Monsters from the Dead – was built on fear. A Buddhist Monk travelling through Tibet did a remarkable thing. He convinced the ruler that these Monsters were nothing more than their own aggression – and he taught them the Buddhist solution to such a thing. So, the Monster in the background is their aggression personified [external projection of internal aggression], their old god Yama. In the center of the wheel are the root delusions of people that cause the problems [internal aggression] – hate [snake], ignorance [rooster], and greed [pig]. The remaining circles represent the Buddhist way to create a life that transcends these three delusions.

So, why is it here? I was thinking about the triumverate of our current Administration and what’s wrong – and I recalled this central wheel: ignorance [Bush], greed [Cheney], and hate[Rove]. Or is it ignorance [Bush], greed [Rove], and hate [Cheney]? No matter. You get my point. They’re fighting made up Monsters – Liberals, Arabs, Democrats, Scientists. They’re pandering and living by fear. And we all know that what they’re all three really fighting is their own personal demons, and they’re using our country to do it with.

I wonder if there’s a wise old Monk available for a Washington visit?

Gonzales Aide Who Refused to Testify Resigns

The top aide to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales abruptly quit on Friday, almost two weeks after telling Congress she would not testify about her role in the firings of federal prosecutors.

"I am hereby submitting my resignation to the office of attorney general," Monica M. Goodling said in a three-sentence letter. There was no immediate reason given, but her refusal to face Congress had intensified a controversy that threatens Gonzales’ job.

Asserting her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, Goodling had rejected demands for a private interview with a House committee investigating the firings.

…

Goodling is at the center of the controversy because, as the bridge between the Justice Department and the White House, she may be best suited to explain how deeply Karl Rove and other members of President Bush’s political team might have been involved in the firings. Congress also wants her to testify on Gonzales’ role in light of his shifting explanations.

…

Her lawyers have said such a hearing would be a perjury trap for her. They note allegations that Goodling misled Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty before he testified to Congress about the ousters, causing him to give an incomplete and possibly inaccurate account.

"Her lawyers have said such a hearing would be a perjury trap for her." They say that like it makes some  kind of sense. It makes absolutely no sense in the real world. People don’t get charged with perjury when they tell the truth. Her lawyers point to Libby who was charged with perjury after a Grand Jury appearance. As I understood it, he was charged with perjury because what he said wasn’t true. In essense, she’s asserting that she can’t testify without lying. They are implying that the Democrats will make her into a liar no matter what she says because they’re evil liberals and that’s what evil liberals do, and so the correct thing is of course to not testify.. I say that this is a fundamental issue, and that Congress should press the point just like Fitzgerald did with Judith Miller and Matthew Cooper. If she won’t answer questions, hi-ho, hi-ho, it’s off to jail she go…

Looking back over my recent posts, I’m surprised at how much hostility I’m expressing about this Administration’s antics. I sound like the Neocons must’ve sounded as the Clinton years drug on and on – sitting in their little think-tanks dreaming of taking over the government. I was just watching a video on t·r·u·t·h·o·u·t.org. They were talking about a film, the thesis of which was that  Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush_{1 ,} and Bush₂ have basically been about undoing the Civil Rights Movement[s] of the 1960’s.

As simplistic as that seems, it feels right. I feel naive for not knowing it intuitively. I guess I’m so much a child of the 1960-1968 era that I don’t realize what a cataclysmic change that time was. I remember the hatred and prejudice in the South of my youth and the incredulity of people that we would "oppose" a war. But somehow, I guess I thought those ideas of Civil Rights and Peace were so obviously right that the struggle was over. It never occurred to me that it had been a hundred years since the Civil War, and that in spite of all that carnage, it still wasn’t over in my lifetime.

The American experiment claims that people of all kinds can live together in harmony. It may be true that people can live together, but it’s damned hard work, and the harmony part is questionable. It feels like "All Men Are Created Equal" is still more of a question than a principle – whether it’s race, religion, sex, gender preference, class, or wealth that separates us. That piece of the human kind that controls prejudice is a potent force, not easily tamed.

And it’s alive in my mind too. I can see it in my own hostility towards this Administration. So, I guess I’m as much a part of the political see-saw as any. And I reckon we’ll go up and down until the end of time…

Cheney criticizes Pelosi for Syria trip

Vice President Dick Cheney scolded House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday for "bad behavior" in traveling to Syria, a country that he said promoted terrorism.

In a conversation with fellow conservative Rush Limbaugh on Limbaugh’s radio show, Cheney belittled Pelosi’s public statement after she met with Syrian President Bashar Assad in Damascus on Wednesday.

"It was a non-statement, a nonsensical statement, and didn’t make any sense at all that she would suggest that those talks could go forward as long as the Syrians conducted themselves as a prime state sponsor of terror," Cheney said…

All week the White House has criticized Pelosi’s trip to the Middle East, but no comments have been as colorful as Cheney’s.

"This is a bad actor," the vice president said of Assad, "and until he changes his behavior, he should not be rewarded with visits by the speaker of the House of Representatives."

Limbaugh asked, "Don’t you get enraged when this kind of thing happens?" Cheney said he was "obviously disappointed" in Pelosi.

"Fortunately," Cheney said, "I think the various parties involved recognize she doesn’t speak for the United States in those circumstances; she doesn’t represent the administration. The president is the one who conducts foreign policy, not the speaker of the House."

Limbaugh asked Cheney about President Bush’s use of a recess appointment Wednesday to install Sam Fox, a St. Louis businessman and GOP fundraiser, as ambassador to Belgium…

Limbaugh called Fox a "great American," and said the recess appointment showed that the White House was "willing to engage these people and not allow them to get away with this kind of — well, my term, you don’t have to accept it — Stalinist behavior from those people on that committee."

"Well, you’re dead-on, Rush," Cheney said.

and if that weren’t enough…

Cheney reasserts al-Qaida-Saddam link as latest Pentagon report

Vice President Dick Cheney and the Pentagon are offering conflicting views about whether al-Qaida had links to Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.

Cheney continues to insist there is a connection but a declassified Defense Department report cites more evidence that Saddam’s regime did not cooperate with the terrorist group.

Speaking to radio host Rush Limbaugh, Cheney contended that al-Qaida was operating in Iraq before the March 2003 invasion led by U.S. forces. He says terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was leading the Iraqi branch of al-Qaida. Others in al-Qaida planned Nine-Eleven.

But the Pentagon report released Thursday says seized documents, along with interrogations of Saddam and two of his former aides, confirm that the terrorist organization and the Saddam government were not working together before the invasion.

 Rule by sarcasm continues to be his major tool – one that just keeps on giving…

Cheney Speech Prompts Protests at BYU

Students and faculty at Brigham Young University (BYU) are not known for political protests, especially those aimed at U.S. Presidents and their administrations. The Provo, Utah, school is owned and operated by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, better known as the Mormon Church. And the Church, the school and the surrounding county and state are strongly identified with conservative ideals and support for President Bush.

"The University is nestled in a conservative county in a conservative state," notes Kelly Patterson, director of BYU’s Center for the Study of Elections and Democracy. "And (Mormon) voters in statewide polls and national polls have shown a disposition toward conservative voting and support for the president over time, as well."

That may be why staffers for Vice President Dick Cheney called BYU and offered Mr. Cheney as a commencement speaker. The Vice President is giving just two commencement addresses this year. One is at West Point. It seems BYU and Utah would be a safe place for the second, a place free from protest.

But, hundreds of BYU students, faculty and alumni find a Cheney commencement speech disconcerting. They’ve been signing an on-line petition and they organized a rare campus demonstration, in which speeches, shouting, slogans, marching, personal attacks and criticism of BYU and the Mormon Church were prohibited. BYU’s College Democrats, a campus club, organized the protest and agreed to the restrictions.

"The College Democrats have agreed to keep it tame," explained Richard Davis, a BYU professor of Political Science and faculty adviser for the club. The students agreed "not to be riotous or disrespectful … or even say anything. It was not (designed to include) speechmaking."

New York Sun: Cheney for President in 2008

Could Dick Cheney follow in the footsteps of the last two-term Republican vice president? At least one major New York City newspaper thinks so.

Among unannounced, potential 2008 presidential candidates "the one that who [sic] would bring the most to the race is Vice President Cheney," writes New York City’s daily newspaper The Sun in an editorial.

In addition to having a "defender" on the campaign trail, says The Sun, Cheney offers attractive qualities as a candidate.

"He has foreign policy experience by virtue of having served as defense secretary, and he has economic policy experience, having served as a leading tax-cutter while a member of the House of Representatives," writes the newspaper.

The paper goes on to claim that Cheney’s wife Lynn would be an asset to his campaign and that she would "make one of the greatest First Ladies in history."