Op-Ed

Political myth-making goes into overdrive every four years. With presidential campaigns fixated mostly on media, an array of nonstop spin takes its toll while illogic often takes hold: When heroes are absent, they're invented. When convenient claims are untrue, they're defended.

Many supporters come to function as enablers -- staying silent or mimicking their candidate's contorted explanations to try to finesse the gaping contradiction. Fast talk substitutes for straight talk. A kind of "covering fire" across media battlefields makes it easier for the candidate to just keep on dissembling.

There are true believers, of course -- people who believe every word that comes out of their own mouths when, for instance, they stand at the podium of the Republican or Democratic convention. Whatever the extent of their sincerity, only superlatives will do as speakers unequivocally praise George W. Bush or John Kerry.

AUSTIN, Texas -- No sooner do we win a long struggle to clean up politics and restore democracy in this country than we find the whole thing under attack, and we have to go out and re-fight the same battle all over again. Good thing we're not easily discouraged.

        This is what's happening in Arizona, where the successful Clean Elections law is now under attack by the big special interests and national conservatives with ties that run from Tom DeLay (surprise!) to Bush's fund-raising machine.  

        Micah Sifry of Public Campaign reports, "They've raised hundreds of thousands of dollars to put a constitutional amendment on the November ballot that doesn't mention anywhere its true intent, to de-fund the Clean Elections system." This charming endeavor is masquerading under the misnomer "No Taxpayer Money for Politicians," a misleading moniker right up there with Bush's "Clear Skies and Healthy Forests" initiatives. What a shame they couldn't figure out a way to call it the Patriot Amendment.

AUSTIN, Texas -- Such comfort. At the close of the G-8 summit, described by President Bush as "very successful" (except we didn't get anything we wanted), the president offered us comfort on the uncomfortable topic of torture: "Look, I'm going to say it one more time. The instructions went out to our people to adhere to the law. That ought to comfort you."

        "We're a nations of laws," he went on. "We adhere to laws. We have laws on the books. You might look at those laws, and that might comfort you."

 AUSTIN, Texas -- When, in future, you find yourself wondering, "Whatever happened to the Constitution?" you will want to go back and look at June 8, 2004. That was the day the attorney general of the United States -- a.k.a. "the nation's top law enforcement officer" -- refused to provide the Senate Judiciary Committee with his department's memos concerning torture.

        In order to justify torture, these memos declare that the president is bound by neither U.S. law nor international treaties. We have put ourselves on the same moral level as Saddam Hussein, the only difference being quantity. Quite literally, the president may as well wear a crown -- forget that "no man is above the law" jazz. We used to talk about "the imperial presidency" under Nixon, but this is the real thing.

AUSTIN, Texas -- As Lily Tomlin observed, "No matter how cynical you get, it's impossible to keep up." But as Con Ed used to say, dig we must. Courtesy of David Sirota at the americanprogress.org website, we find the following matches between word and deed:

        Just before Memorial Day, Veterans Affairs Secretary Anthony Principi said, "Our active military respond better to Republicans" because of "the tremendous support that President Bush has provided for our military and our veterans." The same day, the White House announced plans for massive cuts in veterans' health care for 2006.

        Last January, Bush praised veterans during a visit to Walter Reed Army Medical Center. The same day, 164,000 veterans were told the White House was "immediately cutting off their access to the VA health care system."

        My favorite in this category was the short-lived plan to charge soldiers wounded in Iraq for their meals when they got to American military hospitals. The plan mercifully died a-borning after it hit the newspapers.

AUSTIN, Texas -- CBS News has acquired tapes of Enron employees boasting about how they were "f-----g over" California during the late, great "energy crisis" there.

        My favorite segment in these charming conversations is the dismay at Enron when local utilities try to get the money back. "They're f------g taking all the money back from you guys?" inquires an Enronite. "All the money you guys stole from those poor grandmothers in California?"

        "Yeah, Grandma Millie, man."

        "Yeah, now she wants her f------g money back for all the power you've charged right up, jammed right up her a-- for f------g $250 a megawatt hour."

        Grandma Millie. The nerve of her. Imagine thinking it's wrong to rig a market and overcharge by billions of dollars. But hey, no worries at Enron, because George W. Bush is about to be elected president. "It'd be great. I'd love to see Ken Lay secretary of energy."

AUSTIN, Texas -- Here's a special story about a big payday. Richard Strong, formerly of Strong Capital Management Co., will receive 85 percent of a sum estimated to be between $400 million and $700 million dollars. That's a lot of lettuce.         

For those of you who don't follow the business pages, last week Strong sold his company to Wells Fargo at this fire-sale bargain rate, leaving poor Richard with only several hundred million. Alas, the company was down in value from an estimated $1.5 billion just a few months ago on account of the recent unpleasantness over Strong's habit of making "market timing" trades, the root of the current scandal over mutual funds.         

If Mark Twain were living now instead of a century ago -- when he declared himself "an anti-imperialist" and proclaimed that "I am opposed to having the eagle put its talons on any other land" -- the famous writer's views would exist well outside the frame of today's mainstream news media.

      In the current era, it's rare for much ink or air time to challenge the right of the U.S. government to directly intervene in other countries. Instead, the featured arguments are about whether -- or how -- it is wise to do so in a particular instance.

      It's not just a matter of American boots on the ground and bombs from the sky. Much more common than the range of overt violence from U.S. military actions is the process of deepening poverty from economic intervention. Outside the media glare, Washington's routine policies involve pulling financial levers to penalize nations that have leaders who displease the world's only superpower.

      In Haiti, abominable poverty worsened during the first years of the 21st century while Uncle Sam blocked desperately needed assistance.

AUSTIN, Texas -- Too bad for anyone who tuned in to President Bush's speech Monday night hoping to hear something that would cheer us up -- like a plan. That was as depressing as divorce. There he was, still peddling the phony idea that Saddam Hussein was connected to 9-11 -- I guess that one will never get too old or too disproved.

            In case you think no one in public life is capable of intelligent thought about Iraq, I recommend a speech made by Gen. Anthony Zinni (well, OK, so he's slightly retired) May 12 to the Center for Defense Information. In it, Zinni lists the 10 mistakes he believes were responsible for getting us into this fine mess.

            My own modest contribution to this task began the day we announced we would be using Saddam's main palace as our headquarters in Iraq. "No, no, no," I moaned. "We're Americans. We don't do palaces." We should have announced that all Saddam's palaces would be converted into universities.

For many years, health-conscious Americans avidly consumed margarine as a wholesome substitute for artery-clogging butter. Only later did research shed light on grim effects of the partially hydrogenated oil in margarine, with results such as higher incidences of heart disease.

     Putting our trust in bogus alternatives can be dangerous for our bodies. And for the body politic.

     For many years, staples of the highbrow American media diet have included NPR News and the New York Times. Both outlets are copious and seem erudite, in contrast to abbreviated forms of news. And with conservative spin widespread in news media, NPR and the Times appeal to listeners and readers who prefer journalism without a rightward slant.

     Recent developments, however, add weight to evidence that it would be unwise to have faith in news coverage from NPR or the New York Times.