“I think as far as the adverse impact on the nation around the world, this administration has been the worst in history.” Jimmy Carter calls out Dubya’s foreign policy as the worst ever. (As noted earlier, several prominent historians have already come to that conclusion.) “Asked how he would judge [Tony] Blair’s support of Bush, Carter said: ‘Abominable. Loyal. Blind. Apparently subservient.‘” Well, maybe he’ll do better at the Bank. Update: Or does he? Carter backs down.
Category: The Dubya Era
Friends to the Immigrant?
The big news last Friday: Dubya and the Senate came to a deal on immigration reform, although the compromise — supported by Democratic Senators Kennedy, Feinstein, and Salazar as well as Republicans such as McCain, Graham, and Martinez — faces some major implementation issues and potential fire from both sides of the issue. Among the critics: Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama: “Without modifications, the proposed bill could devalue the importance of family reunification, replace the current group of undocumented immigrants with a new undocumented population consisting of guestworkers who will overstay their visas, and potentially drive down wages of American workers.“
A Mockery of Justice.
“James B. Comey, the straight-as-an-arrow former No. 2 official at the Justice Department, yesterday offered the Senate Judiciary Committee an account of Bush administration lawlessness so shocking it would have been unbelievable coming from a less reputable source.” By way of Medley, the WP blanches at a ridiculous attempt by then-White House counsel Alberto Gonzales to secure warrantless wiretaps against the will of the Justice Department. “Having failed, they were willing to defy the conclusions of the nation’s chief law enforcement officer and pursue the surveillance without Justice’s authorization. Only in the face of the prospect of mass resignations — Mr. Comey, FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III and most likely Mr. Ashcroft himself — did the president back down.“
Wolfowitz’s last hunt?
“‘The staff were absolutely horrified by what seemed to be the Bush administration’s disdain for a clear-cut case of corruption at the bank,’ said one official.” Paul Wolfowitz’s tenure at the World Bank looks to enter its final hours after the Bank’s Board turns down an attempt by the White House to save face and the Dubya administration begins cutting its losses.
Cartoon Corruption.
“Renzi — now, was that the guy with the skeezy land deal? Or the woman Paul Wolfowitz promoted?” To help keep track of them all, Slate offers a handy illustrated guide to GOP scandals.
The Simi Valley Ten.
Is this it? Is this all you can conjure, Republicans? Perhaps it was because I was feeling mighty under the weather when catching up with it on TiVo, but last Thursday’s GOP debate was more than a little underwhelming. Of the top tier, Mitt Romney probably acquitted himself the best: He seemed a bit blow-dried and canned, sure, but we were at the Reagan library, after all, and he didn’t do anything to hurt his standing as a front-runner with money to burn. Frankly, John McCain‘s act seemed stale to me: The “Gates of Hell” notwithstanding, he seemed to possess little-to-none of the from-the-gut, truth-to-power charisma that propelled him through 2000. (And his pained, convoluted stance on Iraq — everything got screwed up for years but now we’re hunky-dory — doesn’t make a lick of sense.) Rudy Giuliani proved once again that he’s a better candidate in theory than in practice, and I don’t see his half-hearted shrug over Roe V. Wade playing too well to the conservative cheap seats. (Let’s not forget, three of these ten folks — Brownback, Huckabee, Tancredo — wouldn’t even admit to believing in evolution.) Speaking of which, Mike Huckabee and Sam Brownback seemed like the two among the rest with the best shot to jump up a notch, particularly as either could conceivably become the favorite son of the Dobson wing of the party. Ron Paul’s ardent libertarianism was a surprising X-factor in the debate, and I thought it was kinda fun to have him around. (He also came across better, IMO, than the Dem’s official monkey wrench, Mike Gravel.) Jim Gilmore, Tommy Thompson, Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter? Meh. If I were Fred Thompson, I wouldn’t be dissuaded from a run by this lot. I mean, the GOP field already looks like one of those WaMu ads with the gang of disgruntled bankers (Indeed, an Obama-and-GOP Youtube remix seems inevitable) — why not add one more to the mix?
Probably the most telling fact of the evening was the dog that didn’t bark: Dubya. Watching these ten prominent Republicans squirm and equivocate every time anyone mentioned the president and his current policies tells you everything you need to know about 2008 — After eight years of GOP mismanagement and corruption, the election is the Dems to lose.
Digging Deeper…
“I continue to hope that the Department will cooperate with the Committee’s investigation, but it is troubling that significant documents highly relevant to the Committee’s inquiry have not been produced.” On the prosecutorial front, Patrick Leahy subpoenas Karl Rove’s e-mails (or at least what’s left of them), and the Justice Department begins its own inquiry into Monica Goodling, to ascertain whether political bias played a part in her hiring decisions. The plot thickens…
Deconstructing Harvey.
“But reading Mansfield has real value for understanding the dominant right-wing movement in this country. Because he is an academic, and a quite intelligent one, he makes intellectually honest arguments, by which I mean that he does not disguise what he thinks in politically palatable slogans, but instead really describes the actual premises on which political beliefs are based. And that is Mansfield’s value; he is a clear and honest embodiment of what the Bush movement is.” Glenn Greenwald eviscerates Harvard professor Harvey Mansfield after the latter pens an op-ed for the WSJ entitled “The Case for the Strong Executive — Under some circumstances, the Rule of Law must yield to the need for Energy.” See the problem in that title? It kinda jumps out at you.
Veto-Powered | Benchmarks the Benchmark.
“‘Setting a deadline for withdrawal would demoralize the Iraqi people, would encourage killers across the broader Middle East and send a signal that America will not keep its commitments. Setting a deadline for withdrawal is setting a date for failure.'” As expected, Dubya vetoed the recent Iraq spending bill passed in Congress, only the second time he’s exercised his veto power (the first being stem cells.) And, with few options at their disposal and a veto-override failing in the House 222-203, the Dems have already dropped their troop-withdrawal timetable, and now look to fashion a compromise using the language of benchmarks. “‘I believe the president is open to a discussion on benchmarks,’ said Senate Democratic Whip Richard J. Durbin…White House officials are also looking to benchmarks as an area of compromise, but they want them to be tied to rewards for achievement, not penalties for failure.” Um, what achievements would those be, and how would we evaluate them? It’s the soft bigotry of low expectations all over again. Four years after “Mission Accomplished, I don’t see how we can feasibly expect this administration to offer anything other than the same rose-scented lies about the chaos in Baghdad. They have no other setting.
Rove down the Hatch?
Following up on recent news that Karl Rove’s political behavior was being looked into, the WP describes how White House officials gave 20 private political briefings to government agency officials on the 2006 midterms, likely to push them into helping out struggling GOP candidates. “Such coercion is prohibited under a federal law, known as the Hatch Act, meant to insulate virtually all federal workers from partisan politics.“