Op-Ed
AUSTIN, Texas -- Well, fellow Texans, they can stick a fork in
us, 'cause we're done. Not only has Governor Goodhair called yet another
special session (cost now at over $5 million) to implement Tom DeLay's dirty
redistricting deal, but we're about to vote an end to public access to the
courts, as well.
Unless a miracle occurs -- like a whole lot of Texans giving up time on a football Saturday to go vote on a bunch of boring propositions -- Sept. 13 will see the end of the open courts provision of the Texas Constitution. Cleverly disguised a cap on medical malpractice awards, Proposition 12 is a direct assault on an independent judiciary.
Unless a miracle occurs -- like a whole lot of Texans giving up time on a football Saturday to go vote on a bunch of boring propositions -- Sept. 13 will see the end of the open courts provision of the Texas Constitution. Cleverly disguised a cap on medical malpractice awards, Proposition 12 is a direct assault on an independent judiciary.
AUSTIN, Texas -- Sigh. You write an article advocating what you
think would be useful, constructive suggestions about Iraq, and you get an
avalanche of right-wing reaction about "failuremongers" and "nattering
nabobs of negativism."
Bill Safire is back at the same old stand after all these years, denouncing "merchants of dismay" trying to justify their "decade of appeasement."
Great, anybody who opposed this war in the first place was accused of lack of patriotism, and now anybody who points out that it's not going well is guilty of defeatism. If you raise your hand and ask where the weapons of mass destruction we were told were the reason for this war are, you're instructed to just Get Over It.
Well, I ain't gonna take it anymore. I am not shutting up for Bill O'Reilly or anyone else. I opposed our unprovoked, unnecessary invasion of Iraq on the grounds that it would be a short, easy war followed by the peace from hell. I predicted every terrorist in the Middle East would be drawn to Iraq like a magnet. I was right, and I'm not going to apologize for it.
Bill Safire is back at the same old stand after all these years, denouncing "merchants of dismay" trying to justify their "decade of appeasement."
Great, anybody who opposed this war in the first place was accused of lack of patriotism, and now anybody who points out that it's not going well is guilty of defeatism. If you raise your hand and ask where the weapons of mass destruction we were told were the reason for this war are, you're instructed to just Get Over It.
Well, I ain't gonna take it anymore. I am not shutting up for Bill O'Reilly or anyone else. I opposed our unprovoked, unnecessary invasion of Iraq on the grounds that it would be a short, easy war followed by the peace from hell. I predicted every terrorist in the Middle East would be drawn to Iraq like a magnet. I was right, and I'm not going to apologize for it.
The Bush administration never hesitated to exploit the general
public’s anxieties that arose after the traumatic events of September 11,
2001.
Testifying on Capitol Hill exactly 53 weeks later, Donald Rumsfeld did not miss a beat when a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee questioned the need for the United States to attack Iraq.
Senator Mark Dayton: “What is it compelling us now to make a precipitous decision and take precipitous actions?”
Defense Secretary Rumsfeld: “What’s different? What’s different is 3,000 people were killed.”
As a practical matter, it was almost beside the point that allegations linking Baghdad with the September 11 attacks lacked credible evidence. The key factor was political manipulation, not real documentation.
Testifying on Capitol Hill exactly 53 weeks later, Donald Rumsfeld did not miss a beat when a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee questioned the need for the United States to attack Iraq.
Senator Mark Dayton: “What is it compelling us now to make a precipitous decision and take precipitous actions?”
Defense Secretary Rumsfeld: “What’s different? What’s different is 3,000 people were killed.”
As a practical matter, it was almost beside the point that allegations linking Baghdad with the September 11 attacks lacked credible evidence. The key factor was political manipulation, not real documentation.
When I hear pundits warn that Iraq is becoming a “quagmire,” I
wince.
“Quagmire” is a word made famous during the Vietnam War. The current conflict in Iraq comes out of a very different history, but there are some chilling parallels. One of them has scarcely been mentioned: These days, the editorial positions of major U.S. newspapers have an echo like a dirge.
Of course, the nation’s mainstream press does not speak with a monolithic editorial voice. At one end of the limited spectrum, the strident and influential Wall Street Journal cannot abide any doubts. Its editorials explain, tirelessly, that the war was Good and the occupation is Good -- and those who doubt are fools and knaves. (LBJ called such dissenters “Nervous Nellies.”)
“Quagmire” is a word made famous during the Vietnam War. The current conflict in Iraq comes out of a very different history, but there are some chilling parallels. One of them has scarcely been mentioned: These days, the editorial positions of major U.S. newspapers have an echo like a dirge.
Of course, the nation’s mainstream press does not speak with a monolithic editorial voice. At one end of the limited spectrum, the strident and influential Wall Street Journal cannot abide any doubts. Its editorials explain, tirelessly, that the war was Good and the occupation is Good -- and those who doubt are fools and knaves. (LBJ called such dissenters “Nervous Nellies.”)
AUSTIN, Texas -- It is insufficient to stand around saying, "I
told you Iraq would be a disaster." Believe me, saying, "I told you so" is a
satisfaction so sour it will gag you when people, including Americans, are
dying every day.
I think our greatest strength is still pragmatism. OK, this isn't working, now what? In an effort to be constructive, even in the face of a developing catastrophe, I have been combing the public prints in an effort to find something positive to suggest.
I think our greatest strength is still pragmatism. OK, this isn't working, now what? In an effort to be constructive, even in the face of a developing catastrophe, I have been combing the public prints in an effort to find something positive to suggest.
If you run a lootocracy, you have no conception of sufficiency. You set up
the rules to grab as much money as you can, as if you've won a supermarket
shopping spree. You also concentrate power, the better to arrange the world
for your benefit. Unchecked by modesty, satiety, or shame, you take all you
can get away with. You loot until someone stops you.
The word lootocracy was originally coined to describe the corrupt cartels that have ruled and plundered countries like Nigeria, Kenya, and some of the former Soviet Republics. But with an amazingly small amount of national debate, George Bush is installing a more global and sophisticated version-one where those on top can do whatever they choose without the slightest constraints. Bush began his presidency by giving the wealthiest five percent of all Americans massive tax breaks of $75 billion a year. He paid for them in part by cutting child abuse prevention, community policing, Americorps, low-income childcare, health care, housing, and even support for military families. This spring he passed another round of cuts, $35 billion a year targeted overwhelmingly to the same lucky lootocrats.
The word lootocracy was originally coined to describe the corrupt cartels that have ruled and plundered countries like Nigeria, Kenya, and some of the former Soviet Republics. But with an amazingly small amount of national debate, George Bush is installing a more global and sophisticated version-one where those on top can do whatever they choose without the slightest constraints. Bush began his presidency by giving the wealthiest five percent of all Americans massive tax breaks of $75 billion a year. He paid for them in part by cutting child abuse prevention, community policing, Americorps, low-income childcare, health care, housing, and even support for military families. This spring he passed another round of cuts, $35 billion a year targeted overwhelmingly to the same lucky lootocrats.
A national media spotlight has focused on the battle between the
Constitution of the United States and some religious fundamentalists who
viewed themselves as angels of Montgomery. The removal of a big Ten
Commandments monument from an Alabama courthouse on Wednesday was good
news for people who prefer democracy to theocracy.
But as the holy smoke clears, news outlets might want to consider the concepts that have endured on those chiseled tablets -- in the context of the media industry itself.
Before proceeding with this column, I wish to inform any litigious corporation among ye that I will be utilizing quotations from the Ten Commandments for “fair use” purposes in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107.
Rupert Murdoch and News Corp. should note that while I do not have access to extensive financial and legal resources of the sort available to Al Franken and his publisher, I intend to defend myself fully against any claims that Fox News has a propriety interest in Exodus 20:1-17.
But as the holy smoke clears, news outlets might want to consider the concepts that have endured on those chiseled tablets -- in the context of the media industry itself.
Before proceeding with this column, I wish to inform any litigious corporation among ye that I will be utilizing quotations from the Ten Commandments for “fair use” purposes in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107.
Rupert Murdoch and News Corp. should note that while I do not have access to extensive financial and legal resources of the sort available to Al Franken and his publisher, I intend to defend myself fully against any claims that Fox News has a propriety interest in Exodus 20:1-17.
AUSTIN -- One problem I have with Arnold Schwarzenegger is that
he looks like a condom stuffed with walnuts. I realize that is superficial,
shallow and unbecoming to a semi-serious-minded liberal like myself, but
there it is. The other is that he doesn't know what he's talking about when
it comes to public policy.
The “Bulworth” movie -- with Warren Beatty playing a senator who
begins to speak disturbing truths in the form of rap lyrics -- caused quite
a stir when it came out five years ago. At the time, I wondered aloud in a
column about what might happen if leading journalists followed that
fictional example.
I’m biased, but it seems to me that some of my lyrics have stood the test of time. For instance:
DAN RATHER: “I like to tell the public how it pains me so -- to be more superficial and keep racking up the dough.”
COKIE ROBERTS: “Born and bred in the pundit patch, I utter easy notions with great dispatch. Every spectrum has a center, every player has a price. If you want to stick my neck out, I have to say no dice.”
BRIT HUME: “I love to tell you all the news on Fox TV. My boss man Rupert Murdoch is cool as he can be. He pays me piles of money for tilting to the right. And if you sound progressive, you’ll really get a fight.”
I’m biased, but it seems to me that some of my lyrics have stood the test of time. For instance:
DAN RATHER: “I like to tell the public how it pains me so -- to be more superficial and keep racking up the dough.”
COKIE ROBERTS: “Born and bred in the pundit patch, I utter easy notions with great dispatch. Every spectrum has a center, every player has a price. If you want to stick my neck out, I have to say no dice.”
BRIT HUME: “I love to tell you all the news on Fox TV. My boss man Rupert Murdoch is cool as he can be. He pays me piles of money for tilting to the right. And if you sound progressive, you’ll really get a fight.”
AUSTIN, Texas -- When in the midst of a Blame Typhoon, with
charges and counter-charges being hurled in all directions, I find it most
useful to consult those two polar stars of utter wrongheadedness, Tom DeLay
and The Wall Street Journal's editorial page.
Both good for a chuckle, and both perfect weathervanes for the wrong direction. When in doubt, Disagree with DeLay, And you'll be OK.
The Journal, in addition to meretricious arguments, vast leaps over relevant stretches of fact and history, and an awesome ability to bend any reality to its preconceived ideological ends, also offers that touch of (SET ITAL) je ne sais quoi, (END ITAL) that ludicrous dogmatism that never fails to charm.
Both good for a chuckle, and both perfect weathervanes for the wrong direction. When in doubt, Disagree with DeLay, And you'll be OK.
The Journal, in addition to meretricious arguments, vast leaps over relevant stretches of fact and history, and an awesome ability to bend any reality to its preconceived ideological ends, also offers that touch of (SET ITAL) je ne sais quoi, (END ITAL) that ludicrous dogmatism that never fails to charm.