You know, I’m not all excited about Al Gore getting into the presidential race, but I know one thing: We should be listening to what this man is saying, and not just about global warming. In an excerpt from his new book, Gore writes:

…our democracy is in danger of being hollowed out. In order to reclaim our birthright, we Americans must resolve to repair the systemic decay of the public forum. We must create new ways to engage in a genuine and not manipulative conversation about our future. We must stop tolerating the rejection and distortion of science. We must insist on an end to the cynical use of pseudo-studies known to be false for the purpose of intentionally clouding the public’s ability to discern the truth. Americans in both parties should insist on the re-establishment of respect for the rule of reason.

The rule of reason. It almost sounds like a new romanticism, but hey, I’m all for it.

You know, I’m not all excited about Al Gore getting into the presidential race, but I know one thing: We should be listening to what this man is saying, and not just about global warming. In an excerpt from his new book, Gore writes:

…our democracy is in danger of being hollowed out. In order to reclaim our birthright, we Americans must resolve to repair the systemic decay of the public forum. We must create new ways to engage in a genuine and not manipulative conversation about our future. We must stop tolerating the rejection and distortion of science. We must insist on an end to the cynical use of pseudo-studies known to be false for the purpose of intentionally clouding the public’s ability to discern the truth. Americans in both parties should insist on the re-establishment of respect for the rule of reason.

The rule of reason. It almost sounds like a new romanticism, but hey, I’m all for it.

Former CIA Director George Tenet on 60 Minutes tonight said several interesting things, but here’s the best: The standard of proof for going to war should be beyond a reasonable doubt b/c obviously the preponderance standard is only good enough when life and liberty are not at stake.

Ok, so Tenet did not say that exactly. He said something like the amount of evidence he had showing that Iraq had nuclear or biological weapons might have allowed him to win a case in civil court, but not criminal court. In other words, we went to war on a preponderance of evidence. Really, really bad idea.
[tags]war, Iraq[/tags]

Hooray! Resurgent Democrats win control of the House! Democrats still need VA and MT to win the Senate, but in VA, Webb (the Dem) has declared victory and is ahead w/almost all votes counted (although there will almost certainly be a recount). In MT, Tester (the Dem) is ahead by 3,000 votes but one county ââ�¬â�� where I live and also Conrad Burns’ “home” county ââ�¬â�� is having a recount because of human error with the electronic counting machines. Of course, a recount raises the specter (in my mind, at least) of dirty tricks and vote-riggingââ�¬â��the count didn’t come out how the losers wanted, so they have a quick recount to make sure their candidate gets just enough votes to win. That wouldn’t happen, though, would it?

My paranoia aside, welcome back to divided and accountable government! (Let’s hope.) Is this election result a wholesale rejection of the Bush regime and its congressional lapdogs? Uh, yeah. But get ready for the Republican spin about this not being a mandate for Democrats, being about local issues not national or global issues, etc. Bullshit. People were freaking voting for Democratic governors just to send Bush a message on Iraq.

It’s about freaking time, is all I can say. Thanks America, for finally waking up and standing up to the “vote for Democrats and the terrorists win” lies that have kept the Republicans afloat since 9/11/01. Finally finally finally we’re going to get some reasonable discussion of real issues rather than having to put up w/a steady drumbeat of fearmongering and demagoguery that’s done nothing but make the world a less stable and secure place. Of course, the president still has the lead on foreign policy, but at least we can hope he’ll be held accountable for the most egregious of his many, many mistakes.

Finally, while I’m absolutely thrilled with the results, my happiness is dogged by two things. First, some of the Democrats who won last night are eerily like their Republican counterparts on many issuesââ�¬â��anti-abortion, pro-gun, etc. Maybe that’s not a big deal, but it does seem to confirm that the political possibilities in this country have shifted far to the right on the whole. As L. put it, we’ve moved so far to the right that Reagan Republicans are now Democrats. That is not good.

Second, the Democrats have a lot of work to do and I don’t personally have a great deal of confidence that they’re up to the task. This is especially true if the Democrats do take the Senate (and I’m still very hopeful they will)ââ�¬â��in that case, there will be no excuse if they don’t get things done domestically, and there will also be no one to blame if whatever the Dems do turns out unpopular. So they’ve got a huge challenge; here’s hoping they’re ready to meet it or Dems are going to really unhappy again in 2008.

Hooray! Resurgent Democrats win control of the House! Democrats still need VA and MT to win the Senate, but in VA, Webb (the Dem) has declared victory and is ahead w/almost all votes counted (although there will almost certainly be a recount). In MT, Tester (the Dem) is ahead by 3,000 votes but one county ââ�¬â�� where I live and also Conrad Burns’ “home” county ââ�¬â�� is having a recount because of human error with the electronic counting machines. Of course, a recount raises the specter (in my mind, at least) of dirty tricks and vote-riggingââ�¬â��the count didn’t come out how the losers wanted, so they have a quick recount to make sure their candidate gets just enough votes to win. That wouldn’t happen, though, would it?

My paranoia aside, welcome back to divided and accountable government! (Let’s hope.) Is this election result a wholesale rejection of the Bush regime and its congressional lapdogs? Uh, yeah. But get ready for the Republican spin about this not being a mandate for Democrats, being about local issues not national or global issues, etc. Bullshit. People were freaking voting for Democratic governors just to send Bush a message on Iraq.

It’s about freaking time, is all I can say. Thanks America, for finally waking up and standing up to the “vote for Democrats and the terrorists win” lies that have kept the Republicans afloat since 9/11/01. Finally finally finally we’re going to get some reasonable discussion of real issues rather than having to put up w/a steady drumbeat of fearmongering and demagoguery that’s done nothing but make the world a less stable and secure place. Of course, the president still has the lead on foreign policy, but at least we can hope he’ll be held accountable for the most egregious of his many, many mistakes.

Finally, while I’m absolutely thrilled with the results, my happiness is dogged by two things. First, some of the Democrats who won last night are eerily like their Republican counterparts on many issuesââ�¬â��anti-abortion, pro-gun, etc. Maybe that’s not a big deal, but it does seem to confirm that the political possibilities in this country have shifted far to the right on the whole. As L. put it, we’ve moved so far to the right that Reagan Republicans are now Democrats. That is not good.

Second, the Democrats have a lot of work to do and I don’t personally have a great deal of confidence that they’re up to the task. This is especially true if the Democrats do take the Senate (and I’m still very hopeful they will)ââ�¬â��in that case, there will be no excuse if they don’t get things done domestically, and there will also be no one to blame if whatever the Dems do turns out unpopular. So they’ve got a huge challenge; here’s hoping they’re ready to meet it or Dems are going to really unhappy again in 2008.

Hooray! Resurgent Democrats win control of the House! Democrats still need VA and MT to win the Senate, but in VA, Webb (the Dem) has declared victory and is ahead w/almost all votes counted (although there will almost certainly be a recount). In MT, Tester (the Dem) is ahead by 3,000 votes but one county ââ�¬â�� where I live and also Conrad Burns’ “home” county ââ�¬â�� is having a recount because of human error with the electronic counting machines. Of course, a recount raises the specter (in my mind, at least) of dirty tricks and vote-riggingââ�¬â��the count didn’t come out how the losers wanted, so they have a quick recount to make sure their candidate gets just enough votes to win. That wouldn’t happen, though, would it?

My paranoia aside, welcome back to divided and accountable government! (Let’s hope.) Is this election result a wholesale rejection of the Bush regime and its congressional lapdogs? Uh, yeah. But get ready for the Republican spin about this not being a mandate for Democrats, being about local issues not national or global issues, etc. Bullshit. People were freaking voting for Democratic governors just to send Bush a message on Iraq.

It’s about freaking time, is all I can say. Thanks America, for finally waking up and standing up to the “vote for Democrats and the terrorists win” lies that have kept the Republicans afloat since 9/11/01. Finally finally finally we’re going to get some reasonable discussion of real issues rather than having to put up w/a steady drumbeat of fearmongering and demagoguery that’s done nothing but make the world a less stable and secure place. Of course, the president still has the lead on foreign policy, but at least we can hope he’ll be held accountable for the most egregious of his many, many mistakes.

Finally, while I’m absolutely thrilled with the results, my happiness is dogged by two things. First, some of the Democrats who won last night are eerily like their Republican counterparts on many issuesââ�¬â��anti-abortion, pro-gun, etc. Maybe that’s not a big deal, but it does seem to confirm that the political possibilities in this country have shifted far to the right on the whole. As L. put it, we’ve moved so far to the right that Reagan Republicans are now Democrats. That is not good.

Second, the Democrats have a lot of work to do and I don’t personally have a great deal of confidence that they’re up to the task. This is especially true if the Democrats do take the Senate (and I’m still very hopeful they will)ââ�¬â��in that case, there will be no excuse if they don’t get things done domestically, and there will also be no one to blame if whatever the Dems do turns out unpopular. So they’ve got a huge challenge; here’s hoping they’re ready to meet it or Dems are going to really unhappy again in 2008.

I don’t know what the average American or a majority of Americans think of the whole Foley scandal and its subsequent coverup, but I’m hearing increasing outrage from bloggers, pundits, the media, and even (gasp!) Democrats. That’s all greatââ�¬â��the behavior and the coverup are outrageous. Yet, at the same time, I’m thinking: What else would we expect from a bunch of people who think nothing of giving the president nearly unlimited discretion to detain and torture anyone he wants? (The bill is here, although I don’t know if that was the language that was finally adopted or not.) Last week this governmental body legalized torture and effectively suspended one of the most basic human rights known to modern man, and I had a pretty hard time finding anyone outside a few law scholars who could muster up much outrage about it. Now we learn Foley has acted like a dirty pervert and his colleagues worked hard to cover it up and we’re surprised and outraged and calling for heads to roll?

$%!&@#!!!!!!!!

If I hear some rightwing freak (e.g.) say “a wartime president must” this or “a wartime president must” that one more time, I think I will explode. If Bush is a “wartime president” then so was every president since the “Cold War” began. None of the presidents of the past 60 years attempted to scare the American People to death and then claim unprecedented and unconstitutional powers under the guise of “wartime.” Ok, there was Truman and the steel mills, but I don’t think even Truman tried to hide behind “wartime.” He said it was a national emergency, but that’s very different from claiming we’re “at war” and this is “wartime.”

Oh, and just as the right wing’s “wartime” logic would make all presidents of the last 60 years or so “wartime presidents,” it would also make all presidents in the foreseeable future “wartime presidents.” In that case, I guess we should just expect executive power to continue to expand until it entirely swallows the other two branches of government and we become an incredibly secure military-consumer fascist state where a tiny fraction of people are incredibly rich and the rest of us won’t even be able to eat cake.

Absurd? Certainly, but no more so than all this “wartime” ridiculousness. Damn, I wish the Democrats or someone in public life would shut this ridiculous rhetoric down! Where is the opposition to this madness!?

Boyd v. U.S., 116 U.S. 616, 635 (1886):

Illegitimate and unconstitutional practices get their first footing . . . by silent approaches and slight deviations from legal modes of procedure. This can only be obviated by adhering to the rule that constitutional provisions for the security of person and property should be liberally construed. A close and literal construction deprives them of half their efficacy, and leads to gradual depreciation of the right, as if it consisted more in sound than in substance. It is the duty of courts to be watchful for the constitutional rights of the citizen, and against any stealthy encroachments thereon. Their motto should be obsta principiis. We have no doubt that the legislative body is actuated by the same motives; but the vast accumulation of public business brought before it sometimes prevents it, on a first presentation, from noticing objections which become developed by time and the practical application of the objectionable law.

I stumbled upon this while reading Courtroom 302 by Steve Bogira. I found it sort of reassuring in light of recent news. Sort of.

Yesterday the U.S. Senate gave the President the power to torture, the power to detain anyone, any time, for no reason, forever. Those detained will not be able to challenge their imprisonment; no one may ever know they’re even in prison. Glenn Greenwald has the blow-by-blow on yesterday’s “debate” and vote [via TDQ]. As soon as Bush signs this into law, anyone, anytime, could just disappear forever into U.S. military custody. The world has seen these kinds of tactics before. I note in this connection that the recently declassified snippet from the National Intelligence Estimate reports that “leftist” groups are terror threats. Only the President (and any lackey’s to whom he designates the power) can say who is an “enemy combatant.” I’m sure you can do the math from there…. [tags]terrorism, torture, bush administration, fear, congress, conlaw[/tags]