Salon Des Geeks

Gonzales Resigns.

I must say that I am relieved. I think that the most importnant thing to reflect on is what we knew at the time of this man\’s confirmation. We knew that he was the author of the infamous torture memo. We knew that he drafted executive orders which flagrantly violated the constitution.

Most damning, we knew from his confirmation, that his conscience held no regret.

Despite this, he was confirmed. So, I do not lay all the blame for his infamy as Attorney General on him. Some portion must also go to us.

So in a NYT’s article discussing Southern Methodist Universities selection as a finalist for the Bush Presidential Library I came across the following:

What’s more, Southern Methodist [University] stands to lose prestige and donor support if it were to fail in its bid for the [G.W. Bush Presidential] library at this stage… Both the interim provost and the president of the Faculty Senate cautioned “outsiders” not to mistake vigorous academic debate for widespread opposition.

It struck me as a reflection of the Bush Doctrine. Asking observers not to confuse debate with widespread opposition. Or the more pernicious meta-argument: do not debate lest it be interpreted as widespread opposition. Regardless, I have a new euphemism.

I heard this quotation on the radio(Fresh Air was interviewing the author of “State of War”):

“The fact that we’re discussing this program is helping the enemy.”

Bush of course, back in Decemeber.

It made me think of two things:
1) Bush believes that war is a zero-sum game.

I believe that the Geneva Convention proves that war is not a zero sum game. Moreover, by passing laws which require everyone to act honorably, we provide more for ourselves than our enemies. We would have acted honorably anyway, so it costs us nothing, and affirms our honor. But those who act with dishonor are doubly damned, by natural law, and man’s law. I recall a book I read recently where a character observed that societies ban what they most want to do so perhaps I am wrong about what McCain and Bush each desire.

2) I see a parallel between my complaints about Bush and Antony’s funeral oration.

No, I don’t think that Bush is Caesar. The American Caesar is the Constitution. It grants to us in its will its freedoms. But the The Bill of Rights was overly ambitious, grievously so, and for this fault Bush, who loves the Constitution slayed it, and Bush is an honorable man.

Antony’s conclusion also holds. Lest the crowd be incited to violence, wronging these honorable men, I should sooner wrong myself, wrong our dead liberties, and wrong you.

This quote from today’s NYT’s hinges around the word however neatly bridging the reasonable statement, and reasonable quotation from the Constitution. The by line was “By DAVID E. SANGER and JOHN O’NEIL.”

General Hayden defended the program’s constitutionality. He said the lower, “reasonable belief” standard conformed to the wording of the Fourth Amendment, asserting that it does not mention probable cause, but instead forbids “unreasonable” searches and seizures.

“The constitutional standard is reasonable,” he said. “I am convinced that we are lawful, because what it is we’re doing is reasonable,” he said.

The Fourth Amendment, however, reads: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”