Latest Threads
Greatest Threads
Home » Discuss » Journals » Elidor Donate to DU
Advertise Liberally! The Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Advertise on more than 70 progressive blogs!
Rule of the Damned
Posted by Elidor in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Wed Jun 18th 2008, 09:23 PM
King Edward's private secretary, Knollys, once wrote to someone to ask about Winston's motives. 'Let's not pretend he's doing this out of principle or conviction: the thought that he has either is enough to make anyone laugh.'

A damaged man, but one you would want on your side in a fight! He was wrong half the time, but he never wanted for decision or drive. His life was filled in almost equal parts with terrible blunders and great victories. And he did not give up in anything.

At the ripe old age of 32, he complained bitterly about the shortness of life. 'We are all worms,' he decided. 'But I do believe that I am a glow worm.' It was his sad fate to watch over the decline of the British Empire, and this understandably made him a bit testy. "I will not preside over a dismemberment!"

You made me love you, I didn't want to do it...

Winston the former Apostate, savior of the Tories (from Punch). Ultimately, I'm afraid I love him, too, warts and all. I'm sure he would have inspired me to fits of rage, but what a glow worm he was.

Read entry | Discuss (2 comments)
Posted by Elidor in Latest Breaking News
Sat Mar 22nd 2008, 09:09 PM
We had a city councilman whose holy grail was cheap cable and internet for everyone. If more people had known at the time, he might have gotten somewhere, but he didn't have the support to push it through, much to the relief of those thieving bastards at Charter, among others.

People sometimes ask what I have against capitalism. It's this: it cannot co-exist with progressive communities. Capitalism is US residents paying up to twice the cost of drugs sold elsewhere. It's HMO's charging more than the mortgage on your house to cover your family, but you still pay thousands of dollars a year beyond that for basic care. It's subcontractors in Iraq, under FEMA, at the Pentagon, looting the treasury in return for criminally unsafe goods and services rendered most fraudulently.

The public sphere needs to kept free of this rank parasitism. We need to weed out extortionism in the garden of community. The good of the community must be distinguished from the good of the company. All too often, businesses scream and wring their hands and local chambers of commerce and their allies in municipal government roll over and give the bastards whatever they want, free land, buildings, tax subsidies, cheap labor, etcetera. It's made into a one-way street, and the companies suck it all up, but the community gets precious little in return, just a few menial jobs and a few nice press releases in the local business-friendly rag.
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by Elidor in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Wed Oct 03rd 2007, 11:25 PM
October 4, 2007
Secret U.S. Endorsement of Severe Interrogations

This article is by Scott Shane, David Johnston and James Risen.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 3 — When the Justice Department publicly declared torture “abhorrent” in a legal opinion in December 2004, the Bush administration appeared to have abandoned its assertion of nearly unlimited presidential authority to order brutal interrogations.

But soon after Alberto R. Gonzales’s arrival as attorney general in February 2005, the Justice Department issued another opinion, this one in secret. It was a very different document, according to officials briefed on it, an expansive endorsement of the harshest interrogation techniques ever used by the Central Intelligence Agency.

The new opinion, the officials said, for the first time provided explicit authorization to barrage terror suspects with a combination of painful physical and psychological tactics, including head-slapping, simulated drowning and frigid temperatures.

Mr. Gonzales approved the legal memorandum on “combined effects” over the objections of James B. Comey, the deputy attorney general, who was leaving his job after bruising clashes with the White House. Disagreeing with what he viewed as the opinion’s overreaching legal reasoning, Mr. Comey told colleagues at the department that they would all be “ashamed” when the world eventually learned of it.

Later that year, as Congress moved toward outlawing “cruel, inhuman and degrading” treatment, the Justice Department issued another secret opinion, one most lawmakers did not know existed...

via TPM:

It seems, from an article in tomorrow's Times, that there's still much we are yet to learn about how far the Gonzales Justice Department took us into the darkness of state-sponsored torture and lawlessness. Not just the euphemism-laced quasi-torture we've already been numbed to. But everything. From Cheney's lips to Gonzales' pen, you might say. From the Times ...

'Shame' hardly does it justice. But it is a start. How does the country, the state, cleanse itself of the pollution of Cheneyism?

Digby chimes in:

I am still stunned that we are talking about the United States of America issuing dry legal opinions about how much torture you are allowed to inflict on prisoners. Stories like this one are the very definition of the banality of evil --- a bunch of ideologues and bureaucrats blithely committing morally reprehensible acts apparently without conscience or regret.
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments) | Recommend (0 votes)
Posted by Elidor in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Wed Oct 03rd 2007, 08:39 PM

Leahy to Mukasey: Can We Get Along?
By Paul Kiel - October 3, 2007, 11:59AM

Last month, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) had a simple message: the President's nominee for attorney general, Michael Mukasey, wasn't going anywhere until the administration finally handed over documents he'd long been seeking.

But now it appears that things are moving along, though it seems that the administration hasn't handed over anything.

In a letter this morning, Leahy listed roughly a dozen questions he wanted answers to -- all of them relating to whether Mukasey would lead the Justice Department differently from Alberto Gonzales (e.g. would he fire a large number of U.S. attorneys at the direction of White House political operatives?). We've posted that letter below.

And while we're on the subject of dropping the ball:

U.S. Attorneys Investigation Waits on House Leadership
By Paul Kiel - October 3, 2007, 2:15PM

"The scandal at the Department of Justice has gone on long enough," said Rep. Rahm Emmanuel (D-IL) back in March. "Careers have been destroyed and legitimate public corruption cases have been derailed. It is time for accountability -- it is time for the truth."

Six months and several Department senior resignations later, it's a different time. The urgency is gone.

More than two months after the House Judiciary Committee passed contempt resolutions against White House chief of staff Josh Bolten and former counsel Harriet Miers for ignoring committee subpoenas, it's still unclear when, or if, Democrats will hold a vote on the full floor.

The leadership has indefinitely delayed taking up the issue. House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) told The Politico last month, “I don’t think anything is going to happen on that for a while,” and couldn't offer a range. Three weeks later, that hasn't changed.

And apparently scheduling concerns are not all that's at issue. A source familiar with the ongoing discussions told TPMmuckraker that getting the leadership to bring the contempt resolutions to the floor at all is an "uphill struggle."

And finally we have:

Contempt Watch: 160 days since Condoleezza Rice ignored Congressional subpoena

96 days since Josh Bolten ignored a Congressional subpoena to produce documents.
82 days since Harriet Miers ignored a Congressional subpoena to appear.
61 days since Karl Rove ignored a Congressional subpoena to appear and produce documents.
61 days since Scott Jennings ignored a Congressional subpoena to appear and produce documents.

When will Congress act on this?

A question for the Dems on the Hill: what the hell are you doing up there? Very little of it is in line with what we sent you there to do. When does accountability come into the picture? Does any of this mean anything to you? Hello? Is there anybody home?
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments) | Recommend (+1 votes)
Greatest Threads
The ten most recommended threads posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums in the last 24 hours.
Visitor Tools
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this Journal.
Random Journal
Random Journal
The Usual Suspects
Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals  |  Campaigns  |  Links  |  Store  |  Donate
About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.