Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

“...the self-licking ice cream cone that passes for Bush's coterie of advisers...” McGovern on Gates

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 (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-10-06 03:56 AM
Original message
“...the self-licking ice cream cone that passes for Bush's coterie of advisers...” McGovern on Gates
The Constitution took a new hit and so did the credibility of Democrats who gave Gates a pass.


Ray McGovern: Constitution Takes New Hit from Senators at Gates Hearing
http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/contributors/615

At Tuesday's Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the nomination of Robert Gates to be secretary of defense, it felt like I was paying last respects to the Constitution of the United States. The Constitution, though, was not the recipient of the praise customarily heaped on the deceased. Rather, the bouquets were fulsomely shared back and forth among the nominee and the senators -- all of them "distinguished," but none more so than the very reverend John Warner, gentleman from Virginia and departing chair of the committee, who presided at the wake.

Distinguished? The Warner committee is indeed distinguished for the obsequious way it keeps genuflecting to the executive branch. Beneath the pomposity lies a dearth of courage. Led by gentleman Warner, the committee allowed itself to be co-opted by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his deputies Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith and sat silently as they disregarded and even ridiculed those few generals with the courage to testify truthfully -- Gen. Erik Shinseki, for example, the Army Chief of Staff who warned that more troops would be needed for Iraq. In effect, the committee abnegated its constitutional responsibility to prevent misadventures like launching a war of aggression on Iraq based on transparently false pretences and feckless planning.

<snip>

As I sat at the hearing, truly distinguished Virginia statesmen rushed to mind -- men like Patrick Henry, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and George Mason who gave their life's blood to ensuring that checks and balances, and protections of individual rights, were embedded in the U.S. Constitution. And I thought about how those patriots must be rolling over in their graves, weeping at the flaccid timidity of their 21st Century counterparts. I was on the verge of weeping myself, when the thought struck me that in less than a month another Virginian, plain-speaking Senator-Elect James Webb, may be able to apply the brakes to the more recent tradition of substituting mutual fawning for the exercise of senatorial responsibility. With a son fighting with the Marines in Iraq, it seems a good bet that Webb will be able to inject some reality and urgency -- and a dose of appropriate anger -- into Senate deliberations.

But on Tuesday, it was a sorry spectacle, as pretentiousness and patrician etiquette trumped courage and vitiated the advise-and-consent prerogative granted to senators by the framers of our Constitution.

<snip>

Ironically, Tuesday's charade at the Senate Armed Forces Committee included repeated allusion to the biblical injunction to "speak truth to power." This has never been Robert Gates' forte. Rather, his modus operandi has always been to ingratiate himself with the one with the power, and then recite  -- or write memos setting forth -- what he believes that person would like to hear. Thus, while CIA Director Bill Casey's "analysis" suggested that the Soviets would use Nicaragua as a beachhead to invade Texas, Gates pandered by writing a memo on Dec. 14, 1984 suggesting U.S. air strikes "to destroy a considerable portion of Nicaragua's military buildup."

This makes me wonder what may be in store for Iran, should Cheney solicit Gates' help in making a case for bombing Iran's nuclear facilities.

Gates may have "fresh eyes," but if past is precedent he will add only marginally to the flavor of the self-licking ice cream cone that passes for Bush's coterie of advisers. What Bush has done is replace Sugary Gates for Rumsfeldian Tart. Otherwise, the Cheney/Bush recipe is likely to remain the same as the U.S. draws nearer and nearer to the abyss in Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
enough Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-10-06 09:05 AM
Response to Original message
1. k&r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-10-06 11:44 AM
Response to Original message
2. Every Dem in the current Senate voted for him. Every one.
What does that say about them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-10-06 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. In the committee, Dick Durbin praised Gates' "candor"
:evilfrown: and that made the headlines.


"What does that say about them?" I dunno. They wanted to go home for Xmas? :shrug: They're scared shitless? They're a bunch of hypocrites?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-10-06 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. oops-- it was Carl Levin -- too late to edit...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-10-06 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. Sadly, they are consistent. Never seem to challange Bush too much.
Maybe because their foreign policy is not all that different?

Clinton kept sanctions on Iraq that albright admitted resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths... what was that about?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cool user name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-10-06 06:40 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. Sadly, you are absolutely correct. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
petgoat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-11-06 12:34 AM
Response to Reply #8
13. Albright validated the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children due to
sanctions, and said "it was worth it." On "60 Minutes".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-10-06 12:35 PM
Response to Original message
4. They ALL gave Gates a pass.
what gives?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-10-06 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. No one seems to know
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-10-06 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. they are corrupt, war-mongering politicians. That would be one
explanation.

That would explain a lot of things.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bleever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-10-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
7. Is concern for the Constitution an "outside the beltway" phenomenon?
I hope he's right about James Webb being able to make a difference in this "culture of contentment".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SeattleGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-10-06 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. It appears to be so, bleever
I'd be surprised if any of them ever gives the Constitution a thought.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gulfcoastliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-10-06 06:20 PM
Response to Original message
11. So nice the dems allowed the repukes one last spasm of vileness during the lame duck session
Arrggh! pink tutu dems!
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 May 03rd 2024, 08:47 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) 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