I think this deserves its own post
Nov. 11th, 2004 05:53 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sisyphusshruggedSo I'm getting together some stuff on Mr. Gonzales, Our Fearless Leader's nominee at Justice [sic] and I'm struck by what's been left out of some of the stories.
The Washington Post editorial on the subject which attributes Mr. Gonzales' enthusiastic written advocacy of trashing the Geneva Convention to "Mr. Ashcroft's Justice Department" and suggests that the best reason to oppose the nomination is the questions raised by the "long tradition of presidents naming close friends, campaign managers and even relatives to head the Justice Department" is, I think, in the finest tradition of their coverage of this administration and its works. Go ahead and read it, keeping in mind that the newspaper that printed this masterpiece of convolution and equivocation is the same paper that wouldn't print Walter Pincus' factual coverage of the case against their pet war because it was too complicated for its readers to follow.
Sometimes, though, obfuscating someone's role in war crimes just isn't enough. A newspaper that really gets behind an administration has to make that leap to active support.
For that, you need the Boston Globe.
Because, see, if you want a prominent legal scholar to say that the choice of Mr. Gonzales is uncontroversial, you can't do better than a quote from a former Deputy Assistant Attorney General who also happens to be the man who actually wrote the memos advising the White House that the Geneva Convention doesn't apply to us (memos available here)
Even the Post can't quite get behind that.
In the interest of balance, though, you'd want to make sure that you do not identify Professor Yoo as, outside of Mr. Gonzales, the single person most involved with the uncontroversial decision to allow torture and unilaterally remove the United States from the responsibilities and protections of the Geneva Convention.
The use of Mr. Estrada as a representative nominee rejected by the Senate leading into a discussion of Mr. Gonzales' role as a hispanic trailblazer is also nicely judged, I think.
Wild applause. Really. You guys must be so proud.
The Washington Post editorial on the subject which attributes Mr. Gonzales' enthusiastic written advocacy of trashing the Geneva Convention to "Mr. Ashcroft's Justice Department" and suggests that the best reason to oppose the nomination is the questions raised by the "long tradition of presidents naming close friends, campaign managers and even relatives to head the Justice Department" is, I think, in the finest tradition of their coverage of this administration and its works. Go ahead and read it, keeping in mind that the newspaper that printed this masterpiece of convolution and equivocation is the same paper that wouldn't print Walter Pincus' factual coverage of the case against their pet war because it was too complicated for its readers to follow.
Sometimes, though, obfuscating someone's role in war crimes just isn't enough. A newspaper that really gets behind an administration has to make that leap to active support.
For that, you need the Boston Globe.
For his first major appointment since reelection, President Bush turned to a close friend, a mild-mannered centrist -- and a candidate who will probably cost him little of the ''political capital" he said he earned at the polls last week.
Alberto R. Gonzales, tapped to be attorney general yesterday, has his critics. As White House counsel over the last four years, he has overseen some of the most controversial legal decisions of the administration, generating opinions about the treatment of terror suspects and executive-branch secrecy that infuriated many advocates of civil liberties and human rights.
Gonzales, a former judge, also helped direct the selection of judges to the federal bench -- a process that led Democrats to block conservative nominees, such as Miguel A. Estrada, during the Senate confirmation process.
Gonzales, 49, a Texan who would become the first Hispanic to lead the Justice Department, is unlikely to face more than a tough grilling from Democrats before he is confirmed, officials on both sides said. And whatever qualms senators may have about him, Gonzales is almost certain to be less polarizing than the outgoing attorney general.
''We will have to review his record very carefully, but I can tell you already he's a better candidate than John Ashcroft," said Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, a Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
''I don't think Gonzales will be as much of a lightning rod," said John Yoo, a professor of law at the University of California at Berkeley, who served as a deputy assistant attorney general under Ashcroft until last year. ''Many of the civil liberties groups would have attacked whoever was the attorney general after Sept. 11, given what the government had to do to respond. But because of his background, Ashcroft was maybe more of an inviting target than Judge Gonzales will be."
Because, see, if you want a prominent legal scholar to say that the choice of Mr. Gonzales is uncontroversial, you can't do better than a quote from a former Deputy Assistant Attorney General who also happens to be the man who actually wrote the memos advising the White House that the Geneva Convention doesn't apply to us (memos available here)
Even the Post can't quite get behind that.
In the interest of balance, though, you'd want to make sure that you do not identify Professor Yoo as, outside of Mr. Gonzales, the single person most involved with the uncontroversial decision to allow torture and unilaterally remove the United States from the responsibilities and protections of the Geneva Convention.
The use of Mr. Estrada as a representative nominee rejected by the Senate leading into a discussion of Mr. Gonzales' role as a hispanic trailblazer is also nicely judged, I think.
Wild applause. Really. You guys must be so proud.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
What has really freaked me out
Date: 2004-11-11 03:38 am (UTC)And this is the guy who is willing to tear down the Geneva Conventions, as well to take bribes and write up what are essentially death-warrants.
He's the sort of slimy weasel who belongs to the pages of Procopius or another Byzantine historian - he's the classic Evil Henchman who sidles along enabling all the worst policies of the Dark Side, looking for the most powerful warlord to attach himself to.
But why is this also being treated as if he were some clueless civilian who didn't know any better, and has some reasno perhaps to think that the Conventions are outdated, given his idea of war comes from war movies, when in fact there is *no way* he could not know about what their purposes are?
This, also, should put the rest to any idea that McCain will be of any use - if a pilot who suffered from the lack of the Conventions won't speak up in this regard, why would anywone expect *more* of him?
Re: What has really freaked me out
Date: 2004-11-11 03:44 am (UTC)I guess if I were responsible for enabling the sort of thing these people are doing I'd want to feel as if I weren't alone.
I usually stay away from the Globe, for various personal reasons, but this was just too disgusting to pass up.
Re: What has really freaked me out
Date: 2004-11-11 11:01 am (UTC)Re: What has really freaked me out
Date: 2004-11-11 11:56 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-11 09:05 am (UTC)When he was hired, look at whom he hired to work with him. Even the most cursory examination of his background reeks of partisanship and possible conflict of interest.