All posts by Caoimhin Laochdha

About Caoimhin Laochdha

Central Vermont life-long civil liberties activist. I offset my carbon footprint by growing my own energy and riding my bicycle at least 8 months of the year. Every election cycle, since Gerald Ford's social promotion to the Oval Office, I've volunteered for at least one Democratic presidential campaign that ultimately finished in second (or lower) place.

Gonzales, Butt-Plugs, Job Security & the Dutch

Uncategorized

(CL’s got a way with words, no? Enjoy! – promoted by JDRyan)

Yesterday’s hearings showed the Attorney General lying, obfuscating; and once more, unconvincingly pleading ignorance to the criminal activity he has navigated on behalf of the Bush administration. At the same time, he gave even more compelling testimony proving he is unqualified to be Attorney General and unworthy of any position of trust.


Will he go? NO.


One more time: ALBERTO GONZALES IS NOT RESIGNING. Gonzo has better job security than most anyone I know including most prognosticating his immediate departure. He will not leave the Attorney General post. Even if he wanted to go, which is possible, Mister Bush will not allow it.  

There are two primary and related reasons for Bush keeping Gonzales at DOJ.


First, the Senate will not confirm — or even hold hearings to confirm a replacement Attorney General — until their investigators have turned Abu’s office upside down. Keeping Abu as His Attorney General is therefore Mister Bush’s least bad option. 


Secondly, and consequently, losing Abu carries too many liabilities and opens the Justice Department to unaffordable sunlight. The Dep’t of Justice flank is Mister Bush’s most vulnerable, and it is the last one he will leave exposed. Losing Gonzales will invite Democrats (and media to the extent it cares) into a vault Bush claims is not there, to find evidence Bush claims does not exist, about activities Bush claims never happened.


The level of criminal activity, human & civil rights abuses, mismanagement and corruption is unparalleled in U.S. history.  Bush cannot trust anyone else at the Justice Dep’t helm because he cannot trust anyone, other than Gonzales, to blithely cover-up and lie with the loyal abandon that is the Alberto Gonzales trademark. In Mister Bush’s eyes, the level of embarrassment caused by Abu’s incompetence, perjury, lawlessness and contempt for constitutional rights and civil liberties is a welcome distraction. Gonzo’s liabilities remain insignificant to Mister Bush compared to the resultant sunlight that will shine on direct evidence of executive branch crimes if  the obstructer-in-chief is no longer there to protect his master-in-chief’s interests.


Little Dutch Boy


Abu Gonzales will remain ensconced in Justice as long as Bush holds on in the White House because in Mister Bush’s eyes Gonzales is like the administration’s little Dutch boy.


Gonzales is standing with his finger in a creaking dike that is near bursting. Everyone sees the dike nearing the breaking point from a torrent of rampant criminality. The worse it gets for Gonzales standing at the base of this dike, the more Bush needs him to stay and keep the truth from washing past. Worse than a light socket and less inviting than a snake hole, no one else will jam their own finger into this swelling dike of overflowing corruption to save only one person. The last thing Mister Bush wants to know are the consequences of Abu withdrawing his fat little finger. Until the dike is fixed, no one else will put their finger in on Mister Bush’s behalf either.  (FYI-the Dike is not scheduled for maintenance until January 2009).


Many of Bush’s reasons for keeping Abu at DOJ are obvious. A successor tapped for the Attorney General chair will be beholden to a confirmation process more than the President. Mister Bush needs loyalty. Loyalty requires a finger in the dike rather than an open mouth in the Senate. Watching Gonzales hold up the dike is far less stressful to Mister Bush than sweating the disclosures needed to start a confirmation process.


The Butt-Plug


Let’s face it, this administration operates like a (poorly functioning) colon.


The unchallenged tolerance for GOP criminal activity, mismanagement, kleptocracy, fraud and abuse sits like gridlocked and compacted shit unable to pass through a waste system of GOP controlled government. Hiding Mister Bush’s crimes and holding back evidence of his administration’s systemic complicity is like trying to plug a ballooning colon until after the 2008 election cycle. In the Bush administration, the obvious place to fear an evidentiary evacuation is at the Dep’t of Justice. Unfortunately for Judge Gonzales, he is perched at the evacuation point just as Mr. Bush feels the sudden onset of a dysenteric implosion.


Bush knows how uncomfortable Judge Butt-Plug is, and he realizes that everyone wants him to just let it go. Instead he arrogantly sits there pretending nothing is wrong and pretending no one is noticing his eyes bulging as he pushes his ass against his presidential chair with every ounce of his strength. Pulling Gonzales out of his administration’s bungy-hole would effectively flush the Justice Dep’t with a constitutional enema. It could drown the White House in it own untreated sewage. 


Mister Bush’s default instinct is fear and it drives him to deceitfully jam the Gonzales Butt-Plug further up his ass. Between Gonzales and Bush, that feeling is awkwardly mutual and mutually uncomfortable.


Someone has cleaned up Bush’s messes his entire life. In the dark recesses of his little brain, however, he fears and knows this mess will be different. As uncomfortable as the Gonzo Butt-Plug is to everyone near Bush, his dwindling inner circle of true believers realize no Attorney General following Gonzales will so willingly plug himself in and loyally hold back the shit.


The Game


Bush’s demand that Gonzales stay at Justice is a strategic call, not a loyal one. Appreciating this dynamic can only help to put more pressure on Bush.


More importantly, Democrats can better drive a wedge between the Bush administration and the congressional and establishment Republicans who are being tarred with this obscene spectacle. Outside of Bush’s inner circle, those Republicans fear Gonzales as a liability as much as Mister Bush fears his own personal liabilities if Gonzales is forced to leave.


Bottom line, Gonzales will not leave the Attorney General post under the current cloud. If there is one person who will close the lights on this administration, it will be that little shit now sitting on the top floor of the Dep’t of Justice. He will be the last to go.


The immediate Democratic strategy is therefore to make him an even greater liability and to spread those liabilites widely and thickly on the rest of the GOP. If Mister Bush insists that Gonzo stay on the job as a national disgrace to shield his administration, then he must be used as a political sword against those Republicans who find the rule of law and constitutional democracy so offensive under a Bush presidency.


sláinte,

cl

Congress: Helping the Toddler in Chief (TIC) & Assuming their Constitutional Role

Uncategorized

( – promoted by JDRyan)

The longer Mister Bush resists accepting troop support funding from Congress, the more public opinion grows for their redeployment and return. Congress’ hand is strengthened by the day and Mister Bush’s position is weakened thus making it harder and harder for congressional Republicans to stand and enable his failures.

The American people are demanding, and our national security demands, the end of the U.S. war on Iraq. The American people are speaking more and more in voice in opposition to our failed occupation of Iraq.

Mister Bush does not need a bill with strings attached; he needs one with chains in place.

Here is the Democratic message and approach in presenting the 2007 Troop Support Funding Act.

2007 Troop Support Funding Act

DEMOCRATIC MESSAGE:

The Toddler in Chief (TIC) proved long ago that he cannot effectively prosecute a military operation in the best national security interests of the U.S.

Mister Bush cannot be trusted with the responsibility of bringing our troops home safely.  He sent troops into an occupation without planning, body armor or a mission. Now he has made it painfully clear that he cannot be trusted to lead our troops out of his administration’s self-inflicted national security failure.

Therefore, it is Congress’ responsibility to take every measure necessary to help insure the safe return of the troops. The funding bill that we will now send to the President will set a firm withdrawal date of 1 August 2008. 

The bill will contain clear directives and fully fund the resources needed to facilitate the orderly and safe redeployment of troops out of Mister Bush’s failed occupation.

Mister Bush alleges that he listens to his commanders in the field. This statement is false. The consensus expert military evaluation of the Iraqi occupation – and obvious conclusion of the American people that is shared by this Democratic Congress – is that Mister Bush cannot be trusted.  Mister Bush cannot be trusted to extricate troops capably and competently from his policy failure any more than he was capable of responsibly deploying them in the first place.

Therefore, the Troop Support Funding Act, which the Congress will pass and send to the President, will give our commanders in the field the resources and flexibility to safely wind down Mister Bush’s failed occupations. It will also allow our military commanders to conduct effective military operations free of the political interference and pressure they currenty endure from the White House when planning and conducting their military operations. The White House’s current political demands on our military — that this occupation go on indefinitely — will inevitably cause even greater and more tragic costs for our troops, their families and U.S. security interests.

Mister Bush is fond (and programmed) to say he listens to commanders in the field about how to win a war. The political and constitutional reality, however, is that Congress, AND ONLY CONGRESS, ultimately decides whether this country goes to war. 

Beginning this October, concluding 1 August 2008 and on behalf of our troops and the American people who sent us here, this Democratic Congress says that there shall no longer be a war in Iraq.

While the military decides HOW to conduct a war, the decision of whether or when there shall be war is ultimately, and only, a Congressional responsibility.

We further recognize that whether this country continues is war on Iraq is a decision best made in conjunction with the President. However, if Mister Bush will not accept his responsibility to our military and our national security, it falls upon Congress’ shoulders to make the ultimate decision. 

Prior Congresses have shrunk from this responsibility, and the President has wrongly placed upon our military both political and policy responsibilities that are Congress’ alone.

— This Congress will no longer tolerate this administration’s misuse of our military.

— This Congress will fight for the American people who want this occupation to end.

— This Congress will secure the provisions and resources needed for our troops’ safe return.

On behalf of the American people, Congress will now draft the second Troop Support Funding Act, pass it and swiftly send it to Mister Bush.  Democrats want our military and their families to be assured that this branch of government, which is solely responsible for decisions of war and peace, will fight for their interests and take seriously its responsibility to provide the resources to bring our troops home safely.

* * *

sláinte,
cl

THE FIRST VERMONT PRESIDENTIAL STRAW POLL (for links to the candidates exploratory committees, refer to the diary on the right-hand column)!!! If the 2008 Vermont Democratic Presidential Primary were

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

It’s a Democratic Thing, You Wouldn’t Understand (I can’t anymore)

Uncategorized

(good one from C.L. More, please! – promoted by JDRyan)

Is it culture or politics?

1990s GOP PLAN: Once they decided to impeach a Democratic president, the GOP scoured everywhere to find, create or develop the illusion of a crime to justify their political impeachment conspiracy.  Laughably absent any act by President Clinton resembling a high crime or misdemeanor warranting congressional impeachment and conviction proceedings, the bastards STILL went ahead and tried to convict him.

Current DEMOCRATIC PLAN: Deciding impeachment to be a bad political idea the Democratic congress scours everywhere to find a reason to justify not impeaching Mister Bush Ridiculously absent any indication that Mister Bush has the slightest interest in, or capacity to, ceasing criminal activities that require congressional impeachment and conviction, and laughably and tragically absent any historical precedent of a President engaging in this level of criminality without facing legal or constitutional jeopardy, the Democratic congress STILL goes ahead a refuses to perform its duty to stop Mister Bush’s criminal behavior.

Why the difference?

(cross posted at big orange).

How to explain the difference?  How can two cultures and two eras diverge from the reality of who we are and what we’ve become?

Truly remarkable. 

EXHIBIT A:  In the 1990s, President Clinton competently led the U.S. through a period of peace and prosperity.  In response, the Republican congress made the political decision to go hell bent to impeach him no matter what the consequences or potential outcome. 

Response to Exhibit A —

  1. GOP PLAN: Once they decided to impeach him, the GOP scoured everywhere to find, create or develop the illusion of a crime to justify their political impeachment conspiracy.  Laughably absent any act by President Clinton resembling a high crime or misdemeanor warranting congressional impeachment and conviction proceedings, the bastards STILL went ahead and tried to convict him.

  2. BACKGROUND (to GOP plan): Clinton’s popularity was generally in the high-50s / low-60s, which are amazingly good numbers for a second term president (perhaps due to that unsexy peace and prosperity thingy that drove the media and GOP –  but I repeat myself there – crazy, remained generally popular, nonetheless).  Republicans feared not the consequences of a sham impeachment charade and suffered no noticeable ill effects by hoisting this fraud on the American public.  Some even scored a few benefits.  Congress’ popularity was a fraction of Clinton’s and polls showed general opposition to impeachment.

EXHIBIT B: Beginning the 21st century, our ruler presides over a historically unparalleled time of gross incompetence, corruption, war and the moral/military/financial bankrupting of the United States.  Leading a failed administration, our ruler commits high crimes and misdemeanors, some he commits against us everyday.  When caught, he indignantly brags that he is doing it to protect us and it is actually the people who reveal his criminal activities who are endangering us.

From violations FISA’s federal criminal law provisions to aiding & abetting espionage among top aids (just for starters), Mister Bush literally commits high crimes and misdemeanors every single day of his presidency.  By the time he’s had breakfast, Mister Bush has further acted as an accessory-after-the-fact of the serious national security crimes and conspiracies performed by his top staff, has further maintained orders instructing NSA/CIA/Defense Intel. to violate federal criminal statutes under FISA, and acts in furtherance of the illegal operations and orders causing the kidnapping, assault, battery and tortured of uncounted and untold victims in violation of U.S. laws, treaty obligations and many foreign laws as well.

Response to Exhibit B —

1.  DEMOCRATIC PLAN: Deciding impeachment to be a bad political idea the Democratic congress scours everywhere to find a reason to justify not impeaching Mister Bush Ridiculously absent any indication that Mister Bush has the slightest interest in, or capacity to, ceasing criminal activities that require congressional impeachment and conviction, and laughably and tragically absent any historical precedent of a President engaging in this level of criminality without facing legal or constitutional jeopardy, the Democratic congress STILL goes ahead a refuses to perform its duty to stop Mister Bush’s criminal behavior.

2.  BACKGROUND (to Democratic plan):  Bush’s popularity is so low, that “popularity” and “Bush” cannot be used in the same sentence without laughing. Democrats fear any consequences while, ironically, standing to gain politically by doing their job of impeaching and trying the President for his crimes.  Congress’ popularity is relatively high for it and many Democrats in particular, and polls show support among Americans for impeachment proceedings.

Why more talk about Presidential Removal Proceedings:

As the crimes unfolded over the past several years, I was generally agnostic about impeachment because of the political conclusion that the effort will almost certainly die in the Senate.

However, I strongly support any effort to begin and vigorously start impeachment proceedings and my reasoning and change is generally a result of the lame reasons given by so many Democrats for not bringing removal proceedings against Mister Bush.

The tipping point for me is the gross failure of the Democratic party to honestly explain [frame] the issue for the public/media/Mister Bush/voters. How about, for instance:

We are not bringing impeachment and conviction proceedings against the President at this time.  Although the level of acknowledged and ongoing criminality and fraud warranting removal of the President is historically unprecedented, the overwhelming majority of GOP Senators support and continue to endorse this President’s behavior. 

Were it up to us, the President would be held accountable for his crimes and his betrayal of his oath of office.  However, as long as the Republican caucus in the Senate, which ultimately controls whether these proceedings will be successful, continues to strongly support the ongoing criminal actions of this President, we will work to stop President through the legislative process rather than the impeachment process over which the President’s party in the Senate has the ultimate vote.

Elections have consequences and we hope the voters will remember that each Republican U.S. Senator is personally responsible for the ongoing war and Presidential misconduct.

Instead, the Democrats’ reasons for not impeaching the President read and sound either like a concession speech.  They are better arguments for impeachment than against it.

Bad reason 1:  “It will take away from the business of congress” — The President is taking away from the business of congress by not following the laws passed by congress and not allowing the policies voted into law by the people’s representatives to be followed. If the concern is `the business of congress,” than removal proceedings are certainly in order. By the way, when did congress ever receive less cooperation in doing the “business of congress” by putting more pressure on an unpopular president?

Another bad reason: “We need to investigate” — And you are investigating just what? 

Most of the investigations are primarily needed to assess the damage done by the Bush/Cheney crimes.  Congress is not investigating whether crimes occurred; it is investigating the magnitude of the criminality and the breadth of the damage.  Furthermore, the administration continues to subvert meaningful investigation through obstruction and noncompliance with their obligations to submit to oversight. 

You want investigations?  Then get rid of those obstructing the investigations so the American people may have a full account of the mismanagement, fraud, waste and criminality that has occurred on Mister Bush’s watch and at his instruction.

Today —

Hope to see you today at the State House.

sláinte,
cl

Time for Democratic “Rubber-Stamping”

Uncategorized

Ok folks: time for the Democrats to become “rubber stamps” in the name of law & order and to uphold their constitutional oath and function.  If the Republican Congress could do it for kleptocracy, the Democrats can do it for the national interest.

The Libby trial was the functional equivalent of an impeachment. 

It outlined the espionage and treason condoned and conspired to by Mister Bush and Mister Cheney. It is therefore time for the House to “rubber stamp” the trial record and send articles of impeachment to the Senate.  The House of Representatives could effectively conclude impeachment proceedings in less time than a typical 6 hour GOP House controlled work week.

It is no longer useful for Congress to bother with discussion of Libby’s deceitful felonies.  Time to call for resignations, impeachments, demand necessary criminal trials (perhaps some deportations/extraditions) and conduct real EXPOSURE HEARINGS (no need for much Congressional investigation – kinda’ missed the boat on that one) into the administration’s espionage, which the media still refers to dismissively as a mere “leak.”

After the full General Assembly takes up the impeachment measure, I hope it does not need to re-send the uncontroverted evidence of espionage and treason to the House as well. 

Rubber stamping is one thing, spoon feeding the distinguished constitutional servants is another.

slainte,
cl

Who is “drawing blood?”

Uncategorized

(Although there is a thinking that this issue should be allowed to decompress some, I am promoting this post to the front page for a very specific reason: to serve notice on any concerned that while John Odum may be rendered (hopefully temporarily) silent, GMD is larger than any one man, and cannot be silenced through threats or intimidation. Like the Hydra of myth: cut off one head, and two more take its place. Nota bene. – promoted by kestrel9000)

Thanks John for putting Vermont’s “Democratic wing of the Democratic party” on the national emerging media map.  Seeing Front Pagers here at GMD recognized for their insight at DKos as well as having GMD providing a Vermont home at MYDD is a source of pride. 


Below the fold – kestrel9000

To all the folks reading this, notice what John said about  “drawing blood.” John has the decency of giving us an honest explanation of why he is stepping out.  I think he owes us that much just as we owe him our appreciation. However, John is far too classy, and as we’ve come to see over the past year far too loyal a person to let us know WHERE the blood was drawn.  In fact, I don’t even see in his post an express mention of who drew the blood.

Sure Thomas Naylor wrote a smear job against John.  Still, I question whether the rambling and generally unnoticed delusional ravings of a truth-cripple drew any blood.  Ever since the fact-addled relic Naylor stumbled to his mailbox to deliver a fact challenged a press release, his natural allies have understandably faded into the woodwork.  Don’t blame them.   Explaining Naylor’s charges, even Tony Snow or Ari Fleischer would be reduced to blushing as they spouted off a string of “that factual scenario is no longer operative” excuses.  

The fact is Naylor et al. threw a little hissy fit about their connections with bigoted revisionist Southerners who glorify the slaughter of Americans by treasonous Confederate insurgents who sought to destroy the United States solely to protect their ability to commit crimes against humanity through slavery, lynching and genocide.  Nice folks.  As Mr. Robinson famously said to Benjamin in The Graduate, Mr. Naylor “You’ll forgive me if I don’t shake your hand.”

In the grand scheme of things, Naylor et al. are gadfly piss-ants hidden in tire treads on Vermont’s political runway.  I don’t say this gloatingly either.  Admittedly, some of these folks espouse a pipe dream that is extremely attractive — as are all pipe dreams.  Also, there is a modicum of intellectual heft behind SVR.  

So why do I suggest that Naylor — a fact-addled piss-ant-non-factor in Vermont political conversation — did not necessary draw blood, at least directly?  Read this portion of his press release:

The insidious lies disseminated by the anonymous blogger are hyped by VNRC staff member John Odum on his Green Mountain Daily (GMD) website, and by members of the Green Mountain Collective. Odum (whose e-mail address – (coincidentally? – contains the phrase “poetworld”) is a Democratic Party political hack who used to work for Bernie Sanders and is vehemently opposed to peaceable secession. [snip]
Whether Odum’s Green Mountain Daily (GMD) website is subsidized by VNRC is unknown to us. However, it is surprising that VNRC Executive Director Elizabeth Courtney appears to allow Odum to publicly engage in character assassination activities against an organization like SVR, whose basic principles  . . . [are] not dissimilar to those professed by VNRC.

Aside for the fact that there is enough hogshit in that snippet to overflow the  largest fecal lagoon in pig country, Naylor is obviously trying to get someone else to exercise influence over Vermont’s political discourse that is unimaginable to him.  Who has the indirect influence that Naylor never had, does not have and never will have?  Read: “[I]t is surprising that VNRC Executive Director Elizabeth Courtney appears to allow Odum to publicly engage in character assassination activities against an organization like SVR.” Hmmh. 

GMD is a spare-time project of a father, husband and person who toils at a day job like the rest of us.  This story has stirred the emotions of a few on the fringe, but like every outliner dustup, it will soon be forgotten.  Similarly, Naylor is a soon to be forgotten harmless old crank gasping for media oxygen whenever and wherever he can get it and is no individual threat to anyone.  VNRC has nothing to do with GMD but it is everything to John.  VNRC is John’s BLOOD. 

Here, John creates a forum for discussion, we discuss, GMD exists — that’s the basic formula.

Until this soapy operatic, I confess that I did not know where John worked.  Many people I’ve discussed this with, political junkie friends, colleagues who work in/around the Statehouse and others who work in non-profits/advocacy groups here in the Montpelier area where I live, have raised the specter of the Chris Graff affair.

I disagree that this is similar to the Chris Graff affair.  Chris Graff was fired from his job for doing his job.  Naylor is neither the AP nor VNRC and GMD does not employ John, VNRC does.  The analogy is just too tenuous for me.  Naylor’s press release implicating Elizabeth Courtney is, however, a seeming attempt by him to play puppet-master over John’s employer.  If the powers-that-be at VNRC have their strings pulled this easily, the analogy still won’t work but the result will be the same.

If VNRC caves, the effect of this is no different than any of us having our employers receive threats or harassment due to letters to the editor we write in our spare time.  What John is doing by cultivating a discussion forum and liberal Democratic blog for citizen journalism is old-fashioned good-citizenship.  This is something we need much more of these days.  Sadly, however, our employers can affect whether we use our citizenship talents.  If I am correctly reading between the lines here, Naylor is trying to get Elizabeth Courtney to throw cold water on John’s spare time community citizenship contributions.  What’s next, our employers telling what to (not) say at Town Meeting?

This brings me back to my point about this relative insignificance of this story.  While no one will remember this soapy operatic in a few days, no one will forget if John is “Graffed” or gagged by his employer.  I hope I am wrong about my “reading between the lines here.”  Obviously John is laying all the blame at heat generated by the blogespheric SVR controversy and not at his workplace. 

Still, I keep thinking about that statement about “drawing blood.”  Just as Deep Throat suggested that we “follow the money” I suggest that we “follow the blood.”  John’s metaphoric blood is his day job.  I could not be a good parent, husband or a good citizen without a job.  My job is my metaphoric blood and I know it.  John has found a way to give back to his community and make a valuable citizenship contribution through GMD. 

I, as a fellow citizen, would feel better knowing that John is taking a break from the understandable stress of this ridiculous distraction.  On the other hand, if his employer is caving to associates of people who glorify terrorism, genocide, slavery and the violent upheaval that came close to destroying the United States, then I don’t see this story going away for a long time.  SVR’s mouse-that-roared press release is an asterisk attached to a footnote about story that is a non-event.  Vermont’s most successful new media political blog having its founder pressured by his employer from being a contributing citizen is a story with long legs and an elephant’s memory, however.

It is obvious to all that come here that there is no relationship between VNRC and GMD.  Were there a relationship with any outside single agenda groups, even ones with which we may have philosophical propinquity, I doubt any of us would want to be a part of this community.  This blog is about Democratic & democratic politics and progressive liberal policy.  I hope we readers of GMD will receive a signal from VNRC that they are not tampering with John’s spare time citizenship activities. 

Call me presumptuous, but I believe I have a right to the benefits of folks in my community exercising acts of good citizenship, in their spare time, without their employers pressuring them to shut up rather risk giving the vapors to hooded wingnuts.

slainte,
cl