John Dean says to censure Bush

In a sense, it’s no surprise what John Dean of the Nixon Administration thinks of the Bush Administration; he wrote Worse Than Watergate a couple of years ago. But now he is speaking with even more evidence at hand and more people are listening.

I have to say I’m impressed by Arlen Spector (again). Of course, his fellow Republicans dispise him. mjh

John Dean says to censure Bush By Maeve Reston, Post-Gazette National Bureau

Former White House Counsel John Dean, a central figure in the Watergate scandal who served time for his involvement in the Nixon administration cover-up, told a panel of senators yesterday that President Bush should be censured for authorizing the government to eavesdrop on Americans’ international phone conversations. …

“I think I have probably more experience first-hand than anybody might want in what can go wrong and how a president can get on the other side of the law,” Mr. Dean said. “Had a censure resolution been issued about some of Nixon’s conduct long before it erupted to the degree and the problem that came, it would have been a godsend.”

Mr. Dean said wiretapping by the Bush White House was “a part of a very consistent, long-term, early-announced policy of this presidency that they are seeking to build presidential power for the sake of presidential power.” And he said censure was appropriate to restore the balance of power.

Rolling Stone : John Dean on Censure

No presidency that I can find in history has adopted a policy of expanding presidential powers merely for the sake of expanding presidential powers…. It has been the announced policy of the Bush/Cheney presidency, however, from its outset, to expand presidential power for its own sake, and it continually searched for avenues to do just that, while constantly testing to see how far it can push the limits. I must add that never before have I felt the slightest reason to fear our government. Nor do I frighten easily. But I do fear the Bush/Cheney government (and the precedents they are creating) because this administration is caught up in the rectitude of its own self-righteousness, and for all practical purposes this presidency has remained largely unchecked by its constitutional coequals….

DeLay’s Top Aide

DeLay’s righthand man was on the take. So, was DeLay oblivious or involved. Which do you like better: inept or corrupt? mjh

A Force Behind the Power By Juliet Eilperin and Jeffrey H. Birnbaum, Washington Post Staff Writers

When Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) was working his way up the leadership ladder in the 1990s, he often turned to an athletic assistant named Tony C. Rudy.

Rudy, now 39, was known as a bare-knuckle political operator who was trusted explicitly by his ambitious boss. … With Rudy’s help, DeLay rose to the No. 2 position in the House Republican leadership.

Key events in the Tony Rudy investigation

Antagagnosticism

I had a chance encounter with a colleague recently. Waxing philosophic,

he began to address great issues of creation. I didn’t object; I like him and he’s no bible-thumper. But, there came a point when I had

to say, somewhat to his surprise: I am an atheist. I don’t say that very often, though I’m not ashamed of it.

I have a friend who is probably the most literate person I know on matters of the

bible. She asked me recently, in effect, what do atheists believe, in the sense of what satisfies our common human need to understand or

explain difficult things.

Sometimes I half-jokingly refer to myself as an “antagagnostic” (antagonist + agnostic), defining such

as one who doubts there is a god but hates him just the same. Indeed, I hate the god of the bible, it is true. I have expressed that in

far stronger language on many occasions.

I don’t mind if you are a believer, even though I know many believers mind very much

that I don’t believe. I don’t seek to change believers, though many seek to change me. Doesn’t quite seem fair, but that’s just a

trivial bit of evidence that there either isn’t a god or s/he is extremely distant or heartless and unjust. There is far greater

evidence everywhere you look.

Oh, but what of all the good people I love, some of whom have faith? What of my sweet dog, Lucky,

who is the nicest person I know. What of those glorious morning glories that so inspire me, the mammoth mountains, waterfalls,

rainstorms, everything I love in the world. I do love it all, but I have no need to thank a god I don’t believe in for it. I’m grateful

and feel lucky — I just believe it was random chance that brought me here and will sweep me out of all memory in time. Misfortune and

sorrow are just part of the balance, as are joy and gratitude. mjh

Local Talking Heads

I’m still not quite happy with The Line on KNME (7pm Fridays). What brings me back is the hope the guest panelist will make it all work better for me. Friday night, the combination of Janice Paster and Susan Conway did just that. Afterwards, I wrote theline@knme.org :

There is one important defect in comparing the assimilation of European immigrants of the early 1900’s with immigration today. They had just left Europe, and clearly so. An Irish immigrant in Boston had a long way to go “home”; a Mexican immigrant in Las Cruces does not; a native New Mexican in Las Vegas has been “home” for centuries. Hispanics have been in the southwest and west longer than the United States itself or any English speakers. It makes for a significantly different set of facts.

Janice Paster is such a great addition to the line up; she’s cool, articulate and bright. I appreciate much about Margret Montoya and I think you do well to have at least one Hispanic perspective; can’t you have both Montoya and Paster? Are two-fifths too much yin?

Susan Conway is also an excellent counter-balance to John Dimdahl. Let’s see her again.

Dimdahl said the ACLU argues an employer cannot make employees speak English. Nonsense — why didn’t one of the others challenge him? The issue is employers trying to *prevent* their employees from ever using something other than English — even during breaks. That’s a very different matter. But Dimdahl gets his sly digs in, no matter how far from the truth.mjh

Search blog for Dimdahl.

"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." — Sam Adams