Yoo Know Nothing!

(Updated below)

(crossposted at The Blue Herald)

John Yoo has a new book to shill, and thus is making the circuit again, demonstrating the same keen legal analysis that blithely excuses torture and the elimination of the Great Writ of habeas corpus. Let's be frank – Yoo's law degree and professorship not withstanding, his knowledge of the United States Constitution and the Federalist papers is inferior to that of a smart high school student. (Does that seem harsh? See the end of this post.)

The reason Yoo is still a player at all is because of his culpability in drafting the torture guidelines for the Bush administration. As with Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez (or President Bush, for that matter), Yoo's views are treated seriously only because of his position of power (or past position), not due to merit, insight, or basic knowledge. Yoo has been an useful idiot, all too willing (along with David Addington, Gonzales, William Haynes and others) to try to cobble together a legal justification for the Bush administration's desire for absolute, unchecked power in virtually every field. It is not as if Yoo or his compatriots had a starting point of "let's see what the law says here." Theirs are the actions of defense attorneys trying to protect their clients from prosecution for wrongdoing past, present and future. Reason, consideration of consequences, and examination of precedent do not often intrude, because even a casual flirtation with such dangerously sensible approaches would demolish their fanciful effort like the house of cards it is.

Yoo was on NPR this morning, offering some new nuggets as he commented on the new detainee laws (The Military Commissions Act of 2006). At least Yoo acknowledged that innocent people could be imprisoned. But one of his most laughable excuses for destroying due process is that that due process is — "too expensive."

Here’s the audio clip, as well as an excerpt from his book.

As was the case with Robert Bork, we would all be far worse off if the world were run by John Yoo. Of course, what can anyone expect from a man who so dispassionately asserts that the President of the United States has the legal right to have a child's testicles crushed?

_______________________________________

Here’s a Yoo round-up, featuring analysis of some disingenuous and illogical gems from the man himself, for those who would defend his legal acumen, let alone his moral reasoning:

A Washington Post portrait.

Glenn Greenwald’s Yoo posts, plus a post on Federalist #69.

TalkLeft’s Yoo posts, including a piece on the WaPo portrait here.

Firedoglake’s Yoo posts, most specifically a piece on the WaPo portrait here.

Josh Marshall’s Yoo posts, including a piece on the WaPo portrait here.

Marty Lederman’s writings dealing with Yoo,

Law professor Michael Froomkin (at Discourse.net) on Yoo, in particular this post.

Anonymous Liberal’s Yoo posts.

Oh, and why not throw in the Lawyers, Guns and Money Yoo posts as well.

Finally, I have an older, tangential post on Alberto Mora which links one of Jane Meyer’s superb, in-depth New Yorker articles on torture and the battle over it inside the Bush administration.

Update: NPR now has reader comments posted on the Yoo page linked above. They played a few this morning (audio here). My favorite comes from a federal judge:

'Can This Be America?'

Listening to John Yoo talk about this new legislation was chilling. I'm a federal judge, and have taught constitutional law for 16 years. The very idea of holding anyone without trial, without the right to see the evidence that was used to justify naming them an "enemy combatant," and depriving them of the ability to challenge why they are even there is so repugnant to a constitutional democracy that I am shocked that this man actually claims to be defending American values. These are the tactics of the old Soviet Union, not of a country that stands for freedom and the rule of law.

I also quibble with his contention that U.S. citizens still have the right to habeas review. I've read the law. The president can form his own tribunal, which can determine who is an "enemy combatant" (not just an alien enemy combatant), and the decision of that tribunal would not be subject to habeas review. Moreover, persons targeted by this tribunal would not even have access to the military tribunal trial created under this law.

How easy it would be for a president to use such a law to make his political enemies simply disappear. Can this be America?
-- Leif Clark, San Antonio, Texas

Battle of the Defense Analysts!

(crossposted at The Blue Herald)

One of the most frustrating experiences for a passionate, political news junkie is to see two talking heads go at it over some important issue and have your boy (or girl) let some major falsehood go unchallenged or fail to make a key, pertinent point.

The flip side is it’s very refreshing when someone really nails it.

On PBS’ NewsHour on Monday, 10/2/06, their last segment was “Defense Analysts Debate Whether Secretary Rumsfeld Should Go” (the link provides audio, streaming video, and sadly, a very incomplete transcript).

Lawerence Korb squares off with General Ronald Fogleman, and Korb politely challenges everything Fogleman says in praise of Donald Rumsfeld with detailed facts. When Fogleman asserts that Rumsfeld may be unpopular with the generals, but is well-liked by the rank and file (yeah, right! Thanks for the body and vehicle armor!) Korb challenges him on it, and brings up Rumsfeld’s use of an autopen to sign condolence letters. Every time Fogleman makes an assertion, Korb is right on top of it, and never lets the conversation just move on (as Fogleman clearly wishes it to). Korb lets no falsehoods stand. It’s fantastic.

While I of course no do not possess firsthand knowledge of Rumsfeld and his ways, it is Korb’s portrait that matches common sense, soldier accounts, the statements of all those retired generals, countless news reports, and books such as The Assassin’s Gate, Fiasco, and State of Denial. Rumsfeld has surpassed even Robert McNamara in infamy as a Secretary of Defense, and like Cheney and Bush, he will stubbornly keep leading as disastrously as he has for the past four years. It does the war effort no good to lie about how horrible the situation is in Iraq; lying about Rumsfeld’s catastrophic record doesn’t help the cause any, either.

Foley’s Pedophilia is all Clinton’s Fault

(crossposted at The Blue Herald)

It’s hard to refrain from puking when one hears the GOP talking points circulating on Mark Foley, in characteristic violent conflict with all logic and facts of the case. “Dems’ sex scandals are far worse.” (They’re not, they’ve all been consensual – but who cares? Does that make Foley innocent? And why not condemn all wrongdoing?) “Dems knew about this abuse but deliberately sprung it now to affect the election.” (They didn’t, the GOP supervisor of the pages did not share the information with his Democratic counterpart and ABC's Brian Ross has reluctantly revealed that his source was a Republican.) The most hilarious line is probably “The GOP House leadership was afraid they’d be labeled gay-bashers.” (!!!) The list goes on and on — not to mention the implied assertions such as “consensual sex between two adult men is the same as pedophilia” and “all gay men are predatory pedophiles.” Somehow, for the hardcore conservative zealots, the GOP leadership’s deliberate covering up of this affair to hold onto a congressional seat, and Hastert’s lying, are not sins in comparison, if they’re even acknowledged at all. What about the welfare of the kids involved? What about the horrendous abuse of power?

Thankfully, some conservatives have dropped partisanship to condemn the real scoundrels. But when even the PBS NewsHour guest for the GOP is spouting off about the 23-year old scandal of Democrat Gary Studds (while ignoring the contemporaneous sex scandal of Republican Dan Crane), it’s pretty sad, pathetic and infuriating.

If I were to list every single example of this crap, this post would be pretty long. Over at Firedoglake, Trex offers a mini round-up and vents for many liberals:

Okay, so in the pantheon of lying Reich Wing flacks, it appears that Drudge was dispatched to blame the victims, Ben Stein was called out (It must be a serious political emergency when Karl Rove's office is asking F-list Mtv game show hosts to carry water for the RNC. I mean, who's next? Jenny McCarthy?) to blame the gays, Sean Hannity is (of course!) blaming President Clinton, and Katherine Harris is blaming, well, who, exactly? The media? The Democrats? Oh, and of course, Foley himself is blaming a combination of alcohol and the priest who molested him when he was a teen.

The fact is that this is a Republican scandal, made by Republicans, perpetrated on Republican Youth, covered up and hidden by, yes, Republicans. They have no one to blame on this but themselves.

John Cole has been sounding off on this issue. And Eugene Robinson offers his characteristic lucid analysis (followed by a discussion here). From Robinson’s column:

Former speaker Newt Gingrich suggested over the weekend that House leaders may have worried last year that if they pursued the Foley matter, they'd be "accused of gay-bashing." Clearly, in terms of his spinning skills, Gingrich has lost a step. The issue was whether a congressman was having improper communications with a child, not whether the congressman was gay; it would have been just as troubling if the e-mail had been sent to a female page. And anyway, it's a little late for the Republicans to denounce gay-bashing after raising it to an art form.

And from the chat:

Silver Spring, Md.: This morning on C-SPAN, one caller explained that the whole Foley scandal is really Bill Clinton's fault because of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. Former Defense Dept. Spokesperson Tori Clarke said that she "wouldn't connect the dots in that way" but did carry her disagreement with that assessment any further. Do you think that a "Blame Clinton, Gays, and Demon Rum" approach will work very well for the GOP at this point?

Eugene Robinson: Wow, I missed that one. I can't imagine what the connection might be. In any event, no, I don't think that will work.

[...]

Alexandria, Va.: I find it fascinating that the GOP and its right-wing media echo chamber think they can spin pedophilia. Tony Snow: "simply naughty emails." Ben Stein: "-Foley is a poor misguided Republican man who had a romantic thing for young boys. He sent them suggestive e-mail. I agree, that's not great." Matt Drudge: The "16 and 17 year old beasts" were "egging him on"

This reaction strikes me as nearly as bad as the crime. Do they think this will work?

Eugene Robinson: I can't imagine that this will work, and in fact it seems to particularly enrage some sectors of the Republican base. Tony Snow did a quick about-face -- by mid-afternoon he had dropped the "naughty e-mails" shtick and was furrowing his brow in sorrowful concern. I imagine somebody told him how his blithe dismissal of the whole thing had sounded.

All that sane, responsible adults ask for in this case is the truth, justice, and a little compassion for the pages. But hey, Republican hacks — keep running with “Blame Clinton, Gays, and Demon Rum” instead; you’ve had plenty of practice.

Wonks versus Hacks

(Cross-posted at The Blue Herald)

About twice a year I find myself re-reading a short, entertaining and insightful piece from March 2004 in The Washington Monthly by Bruce Reed titled ”Bush’s War Against Wonks: Why the President’s Policies are Falling Apart.” Bruce Reed served as domestic policy advisor for Clinton. He writes semi-regularly for Slate in a column called The Has-Been. He’s recently expanded on some of his ideas in a book co-authored with Rahm Emanuel titled The Plan: Big Ideas for America.

Here’s a teaser from the article:

Strip away the job titles and party labels, and you will find two kinds of people in Washington: political hacks and policy wonks. Hacks come to Washington because anywhere else they'd be bored to death. Wonks come here because nowhere else could we bore so many to death. These divisions extend far beyond the hack havens of political campaigns and consulting firms and the wonk ghettos of think tanks on Dupont Circle. Some journalists are wonks, but most are hacks. Some columnists are hacks, but most are wonks. All members of Congress pass themselves off as wonks, but many got elected as hacks. Lobbyists are hacks who make money pretending to be wonks. The Washington Monthly, The New Republic, and the entire political blogosphere consist largely of wonks pretending to be hacks. "The Hotline" is for hacks; National Journal is for wonks. "The West Wing" is for wonks; "K Street" was for hacks.

After two decades in Washington as a wonk working among hacks, I have come to the conclusion that the gap between Republicans and Democrats is as nothing compared to the one between these two tribes. We wonks think we're smarter than hacks. Hacks think that if being smart makes someone a wonk, they'd rather be stupid. Wonks think all hacks are creatures from another planet, like James Carville. Hacks share Paul Begala's view that wonks are all "propeller heads," like Elroy on "The Jetsons." Wonks think the differences between hacks and wonks are as irreconcilable as the Hutus and the Tutsis. Hacks think it's just like wonks to bring up the Hutus and the Tutsis.

In every administration, wonks and hacks fight it out. The measure of a great president is his ability to make sense of them both. A president must know the real problems on Americans' minds. For that he needs hacks. But ultimately, he needs policies that will actually solve those problems. For that he needs wonks.

Reed proceeds to delve into Ron Suskind’s journalism on the Bush White House, among other things. The phrase “reality-based community” had not entered the lexicon yet, but Reed’s piece is clearly aimed not only at wonks, but at reality-based hacks. Sadly, they seem to be a rare breed these days.

Notice a Pattern?

(crossposted at The Blue Herald)

I know, I know, it’s hard to keep up with all the scandals these days! Well, face it, if you’re in the GOP, you’re not spending any time actually governing the country, or discussing ways to make things better, be it in America or Iraq. And idle hands makes for securing the Devil’s massive campaign contribution to your war chest. Let’s recap, shall we? In the past week or so, we learned that:

1. The National Intelligence Estimate flatly contradicts President Bush on at least two key points. One, the war in Iraq has made the “War on Terrorists” even worse. Two, we’re losing in Iraq. Bush’s solution is to come out and play his usual poker game, claiming the NIE supports his claims – but only his diehard followers believe this crap at this point. President Bush is either a liar or delusional, but it’s an academic question. He’s unfit for leadership. But let’s note the pattern — Republican is incompetent, tries to cover it up, lies about it, is exposed and denies and downplays everything.

2. Abramoff and his staff visited the White House close to what, 500 times, versus the few times Scott McClellan, Karl Rove and George Bush claimed – hardly surprising, given the tightness of the Rove-Norquist-Reed-Abramoff-Ralston circle. E-mails with Rove show Abramoff had real influence, too (Rove offered to block a nomination at Abramoff's request). So — the Republicans are corrupt, try to cover it up, lie about it, are exposed, and try to downplay everything.

3. Like Cofer Black on Rice: The most explosive revelation so far of Bob Woodward’s new book, State of Denial, is that George Tenet and Cofer Black demanded a meeting with then National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice to warn her about the pressing threat of Al-Qaeda. Rice and the other Bushies brushed this and all warnings off, continuing to be more concerned about missile defense. This past Friday, Rice admitted the meeting took place, but as of this Monday is trying to pretend it never happened, let alone that she received such dire warnings. Meanwhile, members of the 9/11 Commission are upset that they were never told of this crucial, central meeting. Rice’s meeting took place on July 10th, 2001, about a month before a CIA briefer flew out especially to Crawford, Texas to brief Bush (since Bush doesn’t like to read and prefers personal briefings). The CIA agent delivered an important PDB, “Bin Laden Determined to Attack in U.S.” and Bush responded, “All right, you’ve covered your ass now.” So — the Republicans are incompetent, try to cover it up, lie about it, are exposed, and try to deny and downplay everything.

4. GOP pedophile Mark Foley wrote sexually predatory e-mails and IMs to at least one teenage boy in the Congressional page program. The GOP House leadership knew about it for at least ten months, but Hastert initially denied this, then didn’t, then offered qualifiers before issuing a denial with dubious explanations. It took the GOP a few days to get their stories straight. And the GOP tried to cut a deal with ABC’s Brian Ross to prevent him from exposing the predatory e-mails and IMs. The GOP, the supposed party of family values and national security, had no problem with one of their congressman asking a teenage boy who their institution was charged with safeguarding about how often he masturbated. While some of the details of the IMs versus the e-mails are a little unclear, and who knew what when, what’s crystal clear is the GOP should have launched an investigation and didn’t, and that they put their obsession for continued political party control ahead of the safety and well-being of minors in their care. They also attempted, and are still attempting, a cover-up. So — the Republicans are corrupt and creepy, try to cover it up, lie about it, are exposed, and try to deny and downplay everything.

Call me crazy, but I’m sensing a pattern here. And even some the rightwingers are getting disgusted now. (Foley is a perfect litmus test to see who's sane and who's erupting Kool-Aid from every orifice as they lead cheers for the apologist GOP faithful.)

What ever happened to “the buck stops here?” (Never mind – it’s been outsourced to India, along with the GOP’s credibility. Meanwhile, India has thoughtfully exported something back in return — a nifty concept called karma.)

The Republicans have always been corrupt and incompetent, it's just that the Foley scandal - and the lies around it - are very easy to understand on a gut level and produce the visceral outrage that should have been there all along for people that have remained on the sidelines, or supported the wrong side. Here's hoping for a high bounty count in the House.

Oh, and Denny, and Condoleezza, and Bush, and Tony Snow, and the rest of you? Keep on lying, please. It's political gold. ;-)

Yom Kippur

A happy Yom Kippur to all those who observe it.

Yom Kippur, the "Day of Atonement," is the holiest day of the Jewish calendar. Judaism 101's introduction is here and the Wikipedia entry is here.

Rightwing Cartoonist Watch (9-30-06)

Over at The Blue Herald, I have the first installment of a feature I've long been intending to do, Rightwing Cartoonist Watch. Here's the link.

Elegy (and Call to Arms) for the United States Constitution, 9/28/06

I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep forever.
—Thomas Jefferson, 1785, on slavery.

Against all logic, common sense, basic understanding of the United States Government, and morality, the Detainee/Military Trial Bill has passed.

The wounds inflicted upon America on 9/11/01 were deep and real; none of us alive and cognizant at that time will ever forget them. But those grave events were inflicted by a foreign enemy, Al-Qaeda. In tragic, horrific contrast, the wounds inflicted upon America and the United States Constitution today, 9/28/06, are self-inflicted. It's as if a mugging victim, shaken by his experience, decided the best way to prevent future harm to himself was to slit his own wrists.

The best way to avoid being prosecuted for war crimes is - don't commit war crimes.

Sadly, it seems this option has not been considered by the Bush administration and the Republican party, as evidenced by their move to legalize torture, eliminate habeas corpus, and undermine the 4th Amendment through warrantless surveillance. We can catch any bad guys without these measures, and these measures harm the very cause they claim to further. Violence, crime and terrorism are solved through a greater commitment to justice, not through violence towards the Geneva Conventions, the United States Constitution and core American values. The Nuremberg trials confronted true evil by upholding rather than undermining the rule of law and principles of basic human decency. There's a reason why so many military personnel, intelligence officials, and JAGs oppose Bush's measures. America should not torture, nor attempt to strip anyone of essential civil rights.

The best way to fight evil is with good.

As Glenn Greenwald observes, “it is not hyperbole to say that this is one of the most tyrannical and dangerous bills to be enacted in our nation’s history.” As Patrick Leahy (D-VT) said, “Why would we allow the terrorists to win by doing to ourselves what they could never do, and abandon the principles for which so many Americans today and through our history have fought and sacrificed?” As the line from Henry V goes, “Shame and eternal shame, nothing but shame!”

Lincoln must be rolling over in his grave. What is wrong with the Republican party? I cannot pretend to the moral authority or compassion to say, “forgive them, for they know what they do.” I am not inclined to forgive them. And I suspect they do know what they do. Cassandra’s curse was to know the future, and shout it out, but never to be believed. The difference here is that Cassandra, here played by liberals and all those conservatives and moderates who revere justice and the rule of law, have been heard, but still dismissed by those in power. It is not that those in power do not hear (and they may even believe); they just do not care. As the passage by Pastor Martin Niemöller goes:

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

The GOP either assumes no one will ever come for them — or fears it so much they are acting to prevent any legal repercussions for when it finally happens. I tend to think they simply cannot imagine the possibility that innocents will be arrested and harmed and soldiers endangered by their measures. Nor can they imagine not being in a position of power and privilege. Civil rights are a concern for the little people, not those sitting in the first-class seats.

To the GOP:

Are you so fearful of terrorists that you will betray the very same essential values that spurred the creation of America in the first place?

Are you so incompetent you cannot convict a real terrorist in a fair trial?

Are you so lazy you cannot get a warrant to pursue our enemies?

Are you so ignorant that you would needlessly throw out the United States Constitution?

Are you so selfish that the safety and well-being of American soldiers is less important to you than your own re-election and your party keeping power?

Are you so proud of your performance to date waging the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, in investigating war profiteering, in general congressional oversight, in Katrina (and Iraq) reconstruction, in fiscal management and demonstrating unimpeachable ethical standards, that the Democrats cannot be trusted to continue your holy mission?

Are you so unpatriotic as to betray everything that has made America great?

America has been a great nation, despite its faults. Among its greatest shames are slavery, the treatment of Native Americans, the Japanese Internment Act, and the prolonged delay of civil rights for all Americans. But America has always been about pursuing the ideal, about evolving and progressing, about self-correcting. At its heart, at its best, it is a progressive nation. When Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke out against the injustice of his era, he spoke not of a new, radical revolution, but of America honoring its own ideals.

Our national honor has been horribly stained — in the name of our nation. It is time for all men and women of conscience to rescue America from the same false patriots who shriek so loudly that that the only way to protect America is to strip us all of our essential freedoms.

I’m reminded of two stirring, quintessentially American pieces. One is an elegy. The other serves as a call to arms.

The Elegy: Walt Whitman wrote “O Captain, my Captain” after the assassination of Abraham Lincoln in 1865:

O Captain! My Captain!

I. O Captain! my Captain! our fearful trip is done;
The ship has weather'd every rack, the prize we sought is won;
The port is near, the bells I hear, the people all exulting,
While follow eyes the steady keel, the vessel grim and daring.
But O heart! heart! heart!
O the bleeding drops of red!
Where on the deck my Captain lies,
Fallen cold and dead.

II. O captain! my Captain! rise up and hear the bells;
Rise up! For you the flag is flung, for you the bugle trills:
For you bouquets and ribboned wreaths, for you the shores a-crowding:
For you they call, the swaying mass, their eager faces turning.
O Captain! dear father!
This arm beneath your head;
It is some dream that on the deck,
You've fallen cold and dead.

III. My Captain does not answer, his lips are pale and still;
My father does not feel my arm, he has no pulse nor will;
The ship is anchor'd safe and sound, its voyage closed and done;
From fearful trip the victor ship comes in with object won!
Exult, O shores, and ring, O bells!
But I with mournful tread,
Walk the deck my Captain lies,
Fallen cold and dead.

The Call to Arms: Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered the following famous speech at the Lincoln Memorial on August 28th, 1963:

I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation.

Five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today, signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Negro slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of their captivity.

But one hundred years later, the Negro still is not free. One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. One hundred years later, the Negro is still languished in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land. And so we've come here today to dramatize a shameful condition.

In a sense we've come to our nation's capital to cash a check. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the "unalienable Rights" of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note, insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check, a check which has come back marked "insufficient funds."

But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. And so, we've come to cash this check, a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice.

We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of Now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to make real the promises of democracy. Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice. Now is the time to lift our nation from the quicksands of racial injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood. Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God's children.

It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment. This sweltering summer of the Negro's legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of freedom and equality. Nineteen sixty-three is not an end, but a beginning. And those who hope that the Negro needed to blow off steam and will now be content will have a rude awakening if the nation returns to business as usual. And there will be neither rest nor tranquility in America until the Negro is granted his citizenship rights. The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges.

But there is something that I must say to my people, who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice: In the process of gaining our rightful place, we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again, we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force.

The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to a distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. And they have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom.

We cannot walk alone.

And as we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall always march ahead.

We cannot turn back.

There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights, "When will you be satisfied?" We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality. We can never be satisfied as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities. We cannot be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until "justice rolls down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream."

I am not unmindful that some of you have come here out of great trials and tribulations. Some of you have come fresh from narrow jail cells. And some of you have come from areas where your quest -- quest for freedom left you battered by the storms of persecution and staggered by the winds of police brutality. You have been the veterans of creative suffering. Continue to work with the faith that unearned suffering is redemptive. Go back to Mississippi, go back to Alabama, go back to South Carolina, go back to Georgia, go back to Louisiana, go back to the slums and ghettos of our northern cities, knowing that somehow this situation can and will be changed.

Let us not wallow in the valley of despair, I say to you today, my friends.

And so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.

I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I have a dream today!

I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of "interposition" and "nullification" -- one day right there in Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.

I have a dream today!

I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, and every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight; "and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together."

This is our hope, and this is the faith that I go back to the South with.

With this faith, we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith, we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith, we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.

And this will be the day -- this will be the day when all of God's children will be able to sing with new meaning:

My country 'tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing.

Land where my fathers died, land of the Pilgrim's pride,

From every mountainside, let freedom ring!

And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true.

And so let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire.

Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York.

Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania.

Let freedom ring from the snow-capped Rockies of Colorado.

Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of California.

But not only that:

Let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia.

Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee.

Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi.

From every mountainside, let freedom ring.

And when this happens, when we allow freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual:

Free at last! Free at last!

Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!

"No Excuse" for Detainee Bill

The Specter-Levin amendment to the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (the "Detainee Bill") to preserve the Great Writ of habeas corpus failed by three votes, with the vote splitting almost completely along party lines. You can see the scoundrels and their vote breakdown here.

It's all over but the shouting. Not only have the GOP gutted the United States Constitution, they've assaulted the essential values that caused us to start the American Revolution in the first place - core principles that go back to the Magna Carta in 1215. Such is the awesome leadership, moral clarity and unerring judgment of President George W. Bush. Such is the fear that drives the GOP – not so much of terrorists, but of not getting re-elected, and losing party dominance.

I'll have to research which level of hell in Dante's Inferno this merits them ( Aha. I'm going with the Eighth Circle).

Dan Froomkin supplies another splendid entry that round-up most of the best commentary on the bill itself (the amendment vote had not occurred yet):

From today's New York Times editorial: "Here's what happens when this irresponsible Congress railroads a profoundly important bill to serve the mindless politics of a midterm election: The Bush administration uses Republicans' fear of losing their majority to push through ghastly ideas about antiterrorism that will make American troops less safe and do lasting damage to our 217-year-old nation of laws -- while actually doing nothing to protect the nation from terrorists. Democrats betray their principles to avoid last-minute attack ads. Our democracy is the big loser. . . .

"Americans of the future won't remember the pragmatic arguments for caving in to the administration.

"They'll know that in 2006, Congress passed a tyrannical law that will be ranked with the low points in American democracy, our generation's version of the Alien and Sedition Acts."

Mark Benjamin and Walter Shapiro write in Salon: "Despite the far-reaching implications of the legislation, the Senate galleries were virtually empty throughout the day, while most news coverage treated the congressional debate as of far more transient importance than the recent television confrontation between Bill Clinton and Fox TV host Chris Wallace. Many legislators had only a shaky understanding of what was in the Senate bill since its provisions were still being revised, after consultation with the White House, Tuesday night. As California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein complained in a Tuesday interview, 'I don't understand this rush other than to make it very political. This is a huge thing that our people are going to have to live by . . . It is important not only that it works, but that it also be just.'"

Dahlia Lithwick, writing in Slate, marvels that senators working in avowed ignorance of what precisely the administration has been doing are now approving legislation that they themselves don't understand.

"For the five years since 9/11, we have been in the dark in this country. This president has held detainees in secret prisons and had them secretly tortured using secret legal justifications. Those held in secret at Guantanamo Bay include innocent men, as do those who have been secretly shipped off to foreign countries and brutally tortured there. That was a shame on this president.

"But passage of the new detainee legislation will be a different sort of watershed. Now we are affirmatively asking to be left in the dark. Instead of torture we were unaware of, we are sanctioning torture we'll never hear about. Instead of detainees we didn't care about, we are authorizing detentions we'll never know about. Instead of being misled by the president, we will be blind and powerless by our own choice. And that is a shame on us all."

I found one more commentator, Andrew Cohen, at his Washington Post legal blog Bench Conference, who also really nailed it. Here's his comments, in full. Here's the link to the original page, as well as the comments.

This Time, Congress Has No Excuse

Of all the stupid, lazy, short-sighted, hasty, ill-conceived, partisan-inspired, damage-inflicting, dangerous and offensive things this Congress has done (or not done) in its past few recent miserable terms, the looming passage of the terror detainee bill takes the cake. At least when Congress voted to authorize the Iraq War legislators can point to the fact that they were deceived by Administration officials. But what's Congress' excuse now for agreeing to sign off on a law that would give the executive branch even more unfettered power over the rest of us than it already has?

It just keeps getting worse. This morning, esteemed Yale Law professor Bruce Ackerman published this fine essay in the Los Angeles Times. His lead? "Buried in the complex Senate compromise on detainee treatment is a real shocker, reaching far beyond the legal struggles about foreign terrorist suspects in the Guantanamo Bay fortress. The compromise legislation, which is racing toward the White House, authorizes the president to seize American citizens as enemy combatants, even if they have never left the United States. And once thrown into military prison, they cannot expect a trial by their peers or any other of the normal protections of the Bill of Rights.

"This dangerous compromise," Professor Ackerman continued, "not only authorizes the president to seize and hold terrorists who have fought against our troops 'during an armed conflict,' it also allows him to seize anybody who has 'purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States.' This grants the president enormous power over citizens and legal residents. They can be designated as enemy combatants if they have contributed money to a Middle Eastern charity, and they can be held indefinitely in a military prison."

Scary enough for you? But wait, there is more. The legislation also appears to allow illegally-obtained evidence-- from overseas or right here at home-- to be used against enemy combatants (which gives you an idea of where this Congress really stands on the National Security Agency's domestic spying program). And wait, there is this: the Administration's horrible track record when it comes to identifying "enemy combatants" and then detaining them here in the States. Two of the most famous ones, Yaser Hamdi and Jose Padilla, both ended up having the highest courts in our land back up their legal claims, which is why the government had to release Hamdi outright and then turn Padilla over to the regular civilian courts (where he is a defendant in a weak case against him).

Do you believe the Administration has over the past five years earned the colossal expanse of trust the Congress is about to give it in the name of fighting terrorism? Do you believe that Administration officials will be able to accurately and adequately identify so-called "enemy combatants" here at home so as to separate out the truly bad guys from the guys who just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time? Did you want your legislative branch to abdicate so completely its responsibility to ensure that there are adequate checks and balances upon executive power even in a time of terror? You might have answered "no" to all three questions. But your answer doesn't matter. And neither does mine. To Congress, the answer is "yes, sir." Our Congress is about to make yet another needless mistake in the war on terror and this time the folks making it won't be able to say that the White House tricked them into it.

It's hard to believe this is still America.

Banned Books Week 2006

September 23-30 is Banned Books Week, as observed by the American Library Association. Here’s their key press release, from 3/7/06:

“It's Perfectly Normal” tops ALA's 2005 list of most challenged books

CHICAGO – One of the most frequently challenged authors of the past decade has two books on the American Library Association's (ALA) list of the most frequently challenged books of 2005. Robie H. Harris' “It's Perfectly Normal: Changing Bodies, Growing Up, Sex, and Sexual Health” heads up the list, while “It's So Amazing! A Book about Eggs, Sperm, Birth, Babies, and Families” rounds out the top 10. Both books drew complaints for sexual content.

The ALA Office for Intellectual Freedom received a total of 405 challenges last year. A challenge is defined as a formal, written complaint, filed with a library or school requesting that materials be removed because of content or appropriateness. The majority of challenges are reported by public libraries, schools and school libraries.

According to Judith F. Krug, director of the ALA Office for Intellectual Freedom, the number of challenges reflects only incidents reported, and for each reported, four or five likely remain unreported.

The “10 Most Challenged Books of 2005” reflect a range of themes. The books are:
• “It's Perfectly Normal” for homosexuality, nudity, sex education, religious viewpoint, abortion and being unsuited to age group;
• “Forever” by Judy Blume for sexual content and offensive language;
• “The Catcher in the Rye” by J.D. Salinger for sexual content, offensive language and being unsuited to age group;
• “The Chocolate War” by Robert Cormier for sexual content and offensive language;
• “Whale Talk” by Chris Crutcher for racism and offensive language;
• “Detour for Emmy” by Marilyn Reynolds for sexual content;
• “What My Mother Doesn't Know” by Sonya Sones for sexual content and being unsuited to age group;
• Captain Underpants series by Dav Pilkey for anti-family content, being unsuited to age group and violence;
• “Crazy Lady!” by Jane Leslie Conly for offensive language; and
• “It's So Amazing! A Book about Eggs, Sperm, Birth, Babies, and Families” by Robie H. Harris for sex education and sexual content.

Off the list this year, but on for several years past, are the Alice series of books by Phyllis Reynolds Naylor, “Of Mice and Men” by John Steinbeck and “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn” by Mark Twain.

(If Huck Finn were here, he might well be disappointed he didn’t make the list.)

The website has plenty of other resources, including a list of The 100 Most Frequently Challenged Books of 1990–2000 (alas, the ALA used to list the reason for the challenges, but that doesn’t seem to be available on the site this year).

Last year’s installment, with a snazzy poster, is here.

(crossposted at The Blue Herald)