Setting the example

The current scandal involving the governor of Illinois, who was caught on tape discussing the sale of the Senate seat there to the highest bidder, has managed to eclipse the ongoing economic crisis, the no-strings-attached gift to Wall Street banks, and the damning Senate Armed Services Committee report indicating that torture was sanctioned and fostered at the highest levels of government.

We all wonder how the foolish governor thought he could get away with it, bragging about his power and cursing out the politicians who wouldn’t play his game, especially since he knew he was the subject of an investigation. Perhaps the governor saw what the rest of us did – that high-level officials from the Oval Office on down are getting away with their crimes and incompetence. The Bush administration lied us into a disastrous war, disregarded US laws and the Geneva Conventions and then made sure that a few low-level soldiers faced the legal consequences for the use of “enhanced interrogation techniques”. Administration officials were so sure that they could trot out Article 2 of the Constitution as an excuse for their every deed that earlier this week the Vice-President confirmed that he had authorized techniques such as waterboarding while insisting that “we don’t do torture.” Sadly, but not surprisingly, the interviewer did not press Mr. Cheney on the contradictory nature of his statements, or on how a technique that had previously been prosecuted by the United States as a war crime was at the very least unacceptable.

Thanks to the media’s abdication of their watchdog responsibility, the Bush administration was also able to

- institute ideological litmus tests for government appointments and overlook such important elements as qualifications;

- break the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act law and and continue its illegal wiretapping of American citizens for a year while the New York Times sat on its reporters story;

- order a supine Congress to amend the 1978 FISA legislation by raising the specter of more devastating attacks and the need for the now mythical Article 2 powers (true to form, Congress, including the President-Elect, acquiesced, immunizing administration officials and their telecommunication allies).

Since that same Congress refused to consider impeachment, the President has been free to bid the country a fond rather than humiliating farewell on the major networks, as reporters render puff pieces detailing what Mr. Bush will do post-presidency. Mr. Bush got a less cozy reception in Iraq, where one journalist delivered a damning message via his shoes.

Is it any wonder then, that Governor Blagojevich would think himself immune from legal consequences and vow to fight until exoneration or death? Still, the country, denied justice in the Bush debacle, may finally see the impeachment of a corrupt government official. Media organizations are attacking the governor with a gusto unseen in their approach to the Bush administration. The shocking attempt to sell the President-Elect’s Senate seat has done what nonexistent weapons of mass destruction, destructive cronyism and erosion of the Constitution could not accomplish.

The bailout hypocrisy

Now that the Bush administration is requesting a $700 billion dollar bailout of Wall Street investment moguls and their companies, a little perspective is in order. It was almost one year ago that Mr. Bush vetoed an expansion of the Children’s Health Insurance Program, much to the dismay of members of his own party. The Congressional attempt to cover an additional 3.5 million low- to middle-income children was viewed by the Bush administration as a “federalization” of health insurance. The grand total of funds requested for this endeavor – $60 billion over five years.

Most experts now agree that some form of federal bailout is necessary to keep the American economy afloat – and that the Wall Sreet firms now in trouble are “too big to fail”. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, himself a former CEO of Goldman-Sachs, will oversee the federal bailout, and has already suggested that a “clean bill” (one without the encumbrances of the democratic process) clear the House and Senate without delay. Ordinary Americans may be chastised for the decisions that lead to their bad debt, but Secretary Paulson insists that the Wall Street bailout remain free of punitive actions.  And while taxpayers are being asked to foot the enormous bill brought about by questionable if not criminal lending practices in support of Mr Bush’s “ownership society”, the administration is balking at such sensible terms as limiting the amount of participating CEO remuneration and giving bankruptcy judges the ability to change the terms of primary mortgages and help homeowners avoid foreclosure. In a display of unmitigated gall, those same industries that are now dependent on government help are lobbying against any aid for struggling homeowners.

To be fair, both parties are responsible for the meltdown we are currently witnessing, as Democrats as well as Republicans are beholden to the financiers now in so much trouble. It was Bill Clinton who signed the Financial Service Modernization Act (also known as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act) in 1999 effectively repealing the Depression era Glass-Steagall Act and removing the wall between commercial and investment banking. That would be the “nation of whiners” Gramm, who until recently was a John McCain economic advisor. Clinton’s Treasury Secretary, Robert Rubin, yet another former CEO of Goldman-Sachs and now an Obama economic advisor championed the repeal. And when Congress passed the bankruptcy reform bill of 2005, handing a huge victory to the credit card industry, 18 Democrats (including the current vice-presidential nominee) voted for passage of the egregious legislation.

The Republican nominee has rid himself, at least publicly, of his troublesome economic advisor. Senator Obama should do the same, and seek economic advice from individuals who are not tainted by their actions in support of the current crisis.

Accountability please

While the rehashing of old news is frowned upon in some circles, I think that a look back a few years is warranted here. Do you recall George W. Bush insisting during his 2003 State of the Union address that there were links between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda, this despite intelligence to the contrary? Remember his certainty about those connections, and the sixteen words about how the British had discovered that the Iraqis were seeking uranium from Africa, a statement that was removed and then returned to the speech? And who could forget George W. callously yucking it up at the Radio and Television Correspondents Dinner in 2004, showing slides of himself searching under the oval office furniture for the elusive WMD as soldiers and civilians continued to die and lose limbs, brain function and sanity. Then time passed and those crafty weapons refused to make an appearance. Maybe you don’t remember, after all, we’ve all been busy trying to deal with the economic crisis engineered by Mr Bush’s administration for the benefit of his corporate buddies.

Well, journalist Ron Suskind is here to remind us. In his new book, The Way of the World, Suskind tells how despite the Bush administration’s public facade of certainty regarding the need to attack Iraq, administration officials still found it necessary to fabricate a document with all the necessary points covered. According to named CIA officials, Saddam Hussein’s former head of intelligence then copied the fabricated document, signed it, and relocated to Jordan with 5 million dollars. The document, created in 2003 but backdated to July 2001, describes how 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta trained in Iraq and mentions attempts by Iraq to import uranium from Niger. It conveniently covered the most incendiary statements from the State of the Union address. This fabrication later found its way to Iraq, into the hands of Ayad Allawi and then on to the British Press and presto, instant justification.

Add this to the catalog of despicable behavior attributable to the Bush administration. It may be too much to ask that our elected representatives hold Mr. Bush and his coterie accountable for their actions; they have after all overlooked so many reprehensible acts over the past seven and a half years. But perhaps once this gang leaves office we the people can find justice in the criminal courts for the offenses committed in our name.