Reviewing the Week
I'm up at 5am on vacation and unable to sleep, so I'm reviewing some of the week's news.
First up... From the AP (via Yahoo News), Atty General Michael Mukasey says that "not every wrong, or even every violation of the law, is a crime. In this instance, the two joint reports found only violations of civil service laws." in regards to the Justice dept hiring scandal.
In other words, the Justice Department, having been politicized by violations of the law, declines to punish those who politicized it.
I really don't see how any human group can be expected to police itself, at least not for major, systemic failings.
But worse, it scares the ever living daylights out of me that our Attorney General does not recognize the extreme harm in having a Justice Department slanted so that prosecutions may be done not on merit, but on party affiliation or philosophical difference. There are reasons for those "civil service laws", Mr. Mukasey, and they're not merely picayune trivialities to be so easily dismissed.
Also this week, John Edwards admitted to an affair (although he's still denying fathering the woman's child). I mention this so that I'm not accused of avoiding it, but the fact is, I'm just not that upset about this one, for several reasons. First, he's out of the race and isn't currently on the public payroll. This means that he's a private citizen, and thus, it's not really our business. However, that argument does ring hollow since he was so recently one of the "top three" in the Democratic primary.
The bigger reason is that for me, it's never been about the human failings (which, if we are honest about it, we all have in one area or another) but about the hypocrisy. The difference, to me, between John Edwards and others, such as Elliot Spitzer and Larry Craig is the lack of "do as I say, not as I do" pontificating. To my mind, Edwards has never made a career out of going after people who have affairs. Spitzer made a point, as a prosecutor, of going after patrons of prostitutes, and Larry Craig has gotten a lot of political mileage out of his public abhorrence of homosexuality.
Next up, from the NY Times (and others), the FBI has disclosed that it improperly used the Patriot Act's provision for warrantless "emergency" records demands to obtain the telephone records of reporters for the New York Times and the Washington Post. Now, all things considered, it doesn't sound like a major story, but to me it's emblematic of the problems that persist with the Patriot Act: Removing accountability as an impediment to terrorism investigations makes it too easy for such violations to occur. I am not comforted that the FBI has come clean about its "mistakes", because there do not appear to have been any repercussions for anyone involved. How nice it must be to have that much power in your hands, to use it as you see fit, and when that crosses a line to be able to get away with it entirely with a simple "whoops, sorry."
That's only part of the news from last week, but I'm going to make another attempt at sleep, so that'll do it for today's post.
Liam
5 Comments:
I sure learn a lot from your blog posts -- even when you're on vacation!
In the space of one week we see the countries of Georgia and Poland ticking Russia off (and in the case of Georgia, Russia reacting, some say overreacting).
Do you know much about this Poland stuff? Like why are we putting in missile receptors there? And are we doing this in other countries bordering Russia? Do we have a legitimate reason for doing this? Does Russia have a legitimate reason to be pissed at us for this? I'm no fan of Russia, but it may be that things aren't exactly as they seem, or as McCain would like us to see them. Maybe after your vacation you'll have some thoughts.
Saturday, August 16, 2008 12:06:00 AM
I haven't kept up on Poland, although I've seen a few headlines.
I'll try to learn more about it in the coming week, once I'm back at home.
What I'm trying to figure out is how big Russia is today. We still sort of talk about them as if they were the old Soviet Union (which we erroneously referred to as "Russia"), so the question is whether this could actually be a big issue for us or not.
But no, I don't have any details at the moment.
Liam.
Saturday, August 16, 2008 6:27:00 AM
What really bothers me about Edwards's revelation is that last year, he denied having the affair. Now he admits it. That means he lied last year. (I suppose it could potentially mean he told the truth last year and is lying now. I don't think this is likely.) This lying about sexual peccadilloes is entirely too familiar a story for me when placed in conjunction with people who occupy or intend to occupy the White House. I don't want it to become part of the job description!
Monday, August 18, 2008 2:58:00 PM
Yes, but...
I think they kind of have to. Cheating is not all that uncommon in our nation, and as has become clear in recent years, not even among those who moralize and claim to live a holy lifestyle.
I really kind of wish we didn't ask people about things that don't relate to the job.
There are a lot of people who would make wonderful leaders of this country who will never get there because they have a few skeletons in the closet.
Put another way, if I go in to interview for a job as a programmer, not only do they not ask me if I've ever cheated on my wife, they aren't even allowed to ask if I have a wife. Generally, questions about spouses, children, orientation, etc are omitted entirely from the interview process, so as to protect against charges that the information was improperly used in the hiring decision.
So why is it suddenly OK when we're looking for someone who is going to run our country?
Put another way: I'd rather have another Bill Clinton, Lewinsky and all, than another W, who thus far appears to be living a much more traditional life. (There are rumors, but let's assume they aren't true for these purposes).
It doesn't surprise me that politicians lie about their skeletons, because let's face it, no one is as perfect as the model we try to judge our candidates against, so it's not really a matter of who lives up to it, but who is better at hiding the cracks in the armor.
And maybe it's just me, but I have a number of friends who have so-called "open" marriages. That is to say, they are married to each other and are committed to each other, but are free to have relationships outside of the marriage, and I find that slightly odd, but healthier than the extreme other end, the "now that you're dating me, I want you to give up all of your friends, I should be the only friend you need now" psychos that exist out there.
I am disappointed in John Edwards, but so far I've not heard anything but support from Elizabeth, and she's the only one who should care. The rest of us simply don't know the whole story, so it's just not cool in a sound-bite world to ask a question whose answer may require nuance.
Liam.
Monday, August 18, 2008 3:57:00 PM
Oh, also, I'd like to propose that the next time we're re-making the world, let's make a rule that if you are not without sin, you don't cast the first stone.
In specific, Newt Gingrich, having an affair with someone on his staff while publicly excoriating Bill Clinton for doing the same.
Or, if Edwards had taken the nomination, John McCain making huge hay out of this, while in fact it appears he was courting Cindy while still married to Carol, even though he insists otherwise. Carol, whom he reportedly divorced because she had gotten into an accident and was not, when he returned from Viet Nam, beautiful any more.
Then again, if we had that rule, Rush Limbaugh would have no show, because he certainly could no longer talk about divorce or drug users or a lot of other things.
Still, though, it comes back (to me) to the hypocrisy. And while there is perhaps a small amount of it in denying an affair (thus lying), he wasn't out there condemning anyone else for having affairs nor scoring political points moralizing about proper behavior. He was a human being, doing what a surprisingly high percentage of Americans do, according to research I've seen.
(I really feel strongly about the hypocrisy thing. Go after Eliot Spitzer. Go after David Vitter. Go after Ted Haggard. But leave alone those who aren't trying to moralize about people who's failings they themselves share.)
Liam.
Monday, August 18, 2008 4:04:00 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home