Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Democrats need to revive their " long-neglected oversight muscle."

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-29-09 12:19 AM
Original message
Democrats need to revive their " long-neglected oversight muscle."
That is from a post by one of my favorite bloggers, Sara Robinson at Campaign for America's Future.

She is right. She says our party has "internalized the conservative frame that "accountability" can never be anything but an ugly partisan witch hunt."

The Republicans have framed it that way. They have said that if we try to investigate and hold accountable those in the Bush administration who took us to war on lies, who wiretapped us in the name of security, who wrote about and approved the torture of fellow human beings in a country we invaded....that we will be divisive. Sara is right, we have bought it and swallowed it hook, line, and sinker.

The Truth About Consequences

It's interesting to watch the Democrats trying to work some life back into their long-neglected oversight muscle. Thirty years of conservative misrule have muddled Americans' understanding of words like responsibility, accountability, discipline, and punishment to the point where nobody knows that they mean any more—and don't seem to want to know, either. The social conservatives go on and on about the evils of postmodern morality and situational ethics; and on this score, I can't quite summon myself to disagree. It's been as though nobody on Planet Washington ever had a parent who was able to explain right from wrong, or demonstrate the role cause-and-effect plays in the ethical universe. It's like a moral-gravity-free zone.

..."Let's be clear: Our system of laws was built entirely on the liberal model. The objective of a hearing, investigation, or trial is to dispassionately discover the facts of the matter, and make sure that the consequences are as natural and logical (read: fair) as possible. We're not judging your inherent worth, just your actions. We are forbidden from using force, or punishing you just to prove to you that we can. We have a sacred obligation to ensure that the consequences are more or less proportional to the crime. A good chunk of our Bill of Rights is devoted to making sure the conservative notion of punishment—the arbitrary exercise of power for power's sake—doesn't ever become part of our system of justice.

Given that, we need to be very concerned that the Democrats, as the liberal party, have apparently completely forgotten how any of this is supposed to work. These days, when you broach the subject of holding someone accountable, they physically seize up. You can actually see the wave of terror gripping their bodies. Over the past 20 years, they've completely internalized the conservative frame that "accountability" can never be anything but an ugly partisan witch hunt designed mainly to take out enemies and bludgeon the other side with the full fury of state power The idea that such moments might be (and, in fact, very often have been) something noble, fine, cleansing, and healthy for the country is almost beyond their comprehension. Pecora? Truman? Ervin? Church? That was a long time ago. We couldn't possible do that sort of thing any more.


It is as though anything goes now and is not going to be truly investigated. Things come to mind like the Don Siegelman case, the torture memos, the spying on American citizens by wiretapping. Lots more.

Sara ends with this paragraph. She is right.

The truth about consequences is this: There can be no restoration and reconciliation until people are reassured that the outcome will actually matter, that the real story will be told, and that people will be held accountable for their choices. They are also the very definition of justice, and the necessary precondition of freedom. The most important change we need right now is leaders with a quickening sense of liberal discipline—including the self-discipline and moral courage to stop looking the other way.


I think we all know where this play nice don't make waves mentality came from. I remembered that the DLC had come out with a memo about the NSA surveillance program. They advocated that we should just let bygones be bygones...and look forward. It only makes sense that their advice is followed as the ones surrounding the president are from this school of thought.

DLC: "We see no particular value in dwelling on the administration's past behavior."

...."We see no particular value in dwelling on the administration's past behavior. The more important question is how to bring counter-terrorism surveillance under the rule of law in the present and future. The goal must be to give national security agencies the authority they need to stop terrorist attacks, while also providing the oversight necessary to ensure their efforts are effective and do not violate Americans' civil liberties.

..."For their part, Democrats should focus less on hashing over the administration's past behavior, and focus more on working with responsible Republicans to set new and reasonable rules for the new war that began on 9/11. That's the right thing to do, and it will also help Democrats avoid the political trap Karl Rove so publicly set last week.

..."Democrats should take the position that they are happy to give the administration all the legal authority it wants and needs in exchange for accepting responsibility for actual results.


In the end, the war on terror does not require a president above the law, and the rule of law does not require unreasonable restrictions on surveillance.


Speaking of Karl Rove, that is exactly the kind of thing we are allowing to happen by not insisting on accountability. He is all over the media, he is appearing in forums with important Democrats...thus making him look important.

While he is getting accolades, Don Siegelman is pleading for help to keep from going back to jail.

I am afraid that by using the FISA bill to legalize so much of what the previous administration did, that we have effectively made it tough to investigate and prosecute.

...."Think of it. Here was a Democrat-controlled Congress that vowed to hold the White House accountable for its attempts to trample on the Fourth Amendment. And now it has done just the opposite. The danger can't be overstated. President Bush, Vice President Cheney and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales have never hidden their disdain for the niceties of the law, nor have they ever shown any compunction about using the powers of their office to go after political opponents. And now they have the power to invade Americans' privacy with impunity. There will be no checks and balances, no reports to Congress, no accountability. The potential for abuse is frightening.


And the worst part is that those who created the enhanced interrogation techniques, aka torture, are probably going free with no accountability.

Katha Pollitt of The Nation:

I should have been a torturer. You too, reader. Well, maybe not an actual physical torturer, because then there'd be a small chance I'd go to prison like Lynndie England or Charles Graner. My picture might be in the paper doing nasty things to naked men with a goony smile and a thumbs-up. I might even have disturbing memories and bad dreams, because surely, unless one is a sociopath, throwing people into walls and hanging them from the ceiling all day is likely to have its troubling moments. What I mean is, I should have been a member of the torture creative class--a conceptual torturer, a facilitator of torture, perhaps an inventor of torture law, an architect of the torture archipelago, a dissimulator, concealer, denier, rationalizer, minimizer and pooh-pooher of torture. As a word person, I could have come up with circumlocutions to confuse the media, bureaucratic phrases like "special methods of questioning" and "enhanced interrogation techniques."


Yoo, Feith, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld and the others are doing well financially and getting credibility still in spite of the fact they developed the torture techniques.

Sara Robinson ended her post by saying: "A government that cannot fairly, honestly, transparently hold people to account—where, in fact, nobody can apparently even imagine that such a thing might be possible—is by definition, no longer a government of laws, because the law depends on a strong relationship between cause and effect.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
anonymous171 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-29-09 12:21 AM
Response to Original message
1. I believe in progressive economic reforms and destroying the GOP completely.
"Good government" stuff comes second.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DJ13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-29-09 12:23 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. I agree
Reform our economy first, and the government reforms will be easier later.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-29-09 12:25 AM
Response to Original message
3. It's too bad Bush and Cheney weren't using steroids
Our mighty Congressional leaders would have smoked 'em out!

K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-29-09 12:41 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Exactly...they would for sure have been investigated then.
:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-29-09 12:26 AM
Response to Original message
4. no sh*t.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-29-09 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. Exactly.
:(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-29-09 01:42 AM
Response to Original message
6. Sara made some good comments about conservatives and power.
"For conservatives, the goal of discipline is to assert the power of external authority. In their worldview, most people aren't capable of self-discipline. They can't be trusted to behave unless there's someone stronger in control who's willing to scare them back into line when they misbehave. Don't question the rules. Don't defy authority. Just do what you're told, and you'll be fine. But cross that line, dammit, and there will be hell to pay.

In this view, the whole point of punishment is for greater beings (richer, whiter, older, male) to impress the extent of their authority upon lesser beings (poorer, darker, younger, female). I'm in control, I make the rules, and I'm the only one of us entitled to use force to get my way. Since emotional and/or physical domination is the goal, the punishments themselves often use some kind of emotional or physical violence to drive home that point. Spanking, humiliation, arrest, jail and torture all fill the bill quite nicely. I'm not interested in what you think. Do as I say, or I will be within my rights to do whatever it takes to make you behave.

Note, too, the hierarchical nature of this system. Those at the top of the heap enjoy the freedom that comes with never being held accountable by anyone. This exemption is implicit in conservative notions of "liberty," and is considered an inalienable (if not divine) right of fathers, bosses, religious leaders, politicians, and anyone else on the right who holds power over others. The privilege of controlling others' liberty, without enduring reciprocal constraints on your own, is at the heart of the true meaning of "freedom."

Never being held accountable by anyone....that is just about the truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-29-09 11:54 AM
Response to Original message
8. DLC former chairman Harold Ford on accountability for torture.
Ford backtracking

WASHINGTON -- Former Memphis congressman Harold Ford Jr. is taking exception to MSNBC host Chris Matthews' suggestion that Ford's views on torture after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks were "veering into Cheney territory."

Ford sent an e-mail message to the Washington bureau of The Commercial Appeal Wednesday to clarify that he is "adamantly opposed to torture," but that, "given the environment that our intelligence officials were operating in after 9/11, it is not surprising that 'enhanced methods' were executed in an effort to gain valuable and, in some cases, actionable, intelligence...

..."Ford made his original comments on the MSNBC talk show "Hardball" on Monday and those comments are featured on the liberal blogger Markos Moulitsas' DailyKos page under the headline "Pro-Torture Harold Ford Hardball Transcript."


Hard to fight and win when your Democratic leaders, so-called, support torture and think it gets results.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Echo In Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-29-09 12:09 PM
Response to Original message
9. Institutional collusion, not cowardice. Team players protect the team, they don't oppose it
And the team is corporate America/empire, where those in charge give less than a shit about actual democracy, and are more concerned with using rhetoric and propaganda to explain away why democratic ideals simply cannot be pursued here. That likewise defines whether or not a presidential candidate is termed "electable" or not, and then packaged and sold accordingly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-29-09 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Yes. They are protecting the team.
I guess that is how it is done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shadowknows69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-29-09 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
11. I think that muscle has gone the way of the appendix.
And extra part of the body politic that is no longer used.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-29-09 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Atrophied for lack of use.
Good comparison.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-29-09 11:05 PM
Response to Original message
13. Damn right they do
It's mind boggling and terribly disappointing how the Democratic Party is so timid about this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 06:06 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC