Kangaroo Courts and Show Trials

A debate is raging over the wisdom of the administration's decision to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM) in a civilian court in New York City. Those opposed to the decision assert that it's simply too dangerous, that a military tribunal in Guantanamo would be better, and that it's foolish to afford any constitutional protections to terrorists. They argue that KSM and other terrorists should be held under the law of war-- that their actions were not crimes, but rather acts of war and are therefore undeserving of access to our normal criminal justice system. There is so much wrong with this way of thinking, it's difficult to know where to begin to refute them. I think I'll go on a point-by-point basis. Those opposed to civilian trials initially cite security concerns. For example, see this bipartisan letter from six senators to Attorney General Eric Holder. The typical argument goes like this:

The security and other risks inherent in holding the trial in New York City are reflected in Mayor Bloomberg’s recent letter to the administration advising that New York City will be required to spend more than $200 million per year in security measures for the trial. As Mayor Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Kelly know too well, the threat of terrorist acts in New York City is a daily challenge. Holding Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s trial in that city, and trying other enemy combatants in venues such as Washington, DC and northern Virginia, would unnecessarily increase the burden of facing those challenges, including the increased risk of terrorist attacks.

Continue ReadingKangaroo Courts and Show Trials

This is why Elizabeth Warren is one of my heroes

Elizabeth Warren is doing exactly what she was hired to do--speaking up for ordinary Americans:

Banks and brokers have sold deceptive mortgages for more than a decade. Financial wizards made billions by packaging and repackaging those loans into securities. And federal regulators played the role of lookout at a bank robbery, holding back anyone who tried to stop the massive looting from middle-class families. When they weren't selling deceptive mortgages, Wall Street invented new credit card tricks and clever overdraft fees.
This is more than I can say for Barack Obama. He should be taking full advantage of his bully pulpit and cranking on Wall Street and the financial "services" industry, but he is only giving lip service. This makes me wonder why he isn't using that silver tongue week after week to shame Congress into enacting reform. And he shouldn't wait for the banks and Congress to give him support for reform. Screw the banks, and enact reform. Don't wait for the banks to get in line. We need credit card agreements that people can read and understand, for starters. We are more than a year into Obama's Presidency and nothing significant is happening to clean up our corrupt financial system. This young President needs to go read his campaign speeches to remind himself of what he needs to do. And if Congress is so corrupt that none of his campaign promises can be accomplished, then shame Congress, week after week.

Continue ReadingThis is why Elizabeth Warren is one of my heroes

The one who’s name must not be mentioned.

No, I'm not referring to Voldemort of the Harry Potter movies. I'm referring to Sarah Palin, who I've resisted mentioning, because she has been serving as the perfect freak show for our conflict-obsessed media, which uses her freakness simply to sell faux "news." Or maybe not. Depending on who you listen to, she might actually be the future face of the Republican Party, despite the fact that she has never uttered an idea useful for solving a real-world political problem. Or maybe, as Andrew Sullivan writes, she is not a political phenomenon at all, but a religious leader. If you doubt Sullivan's claim, check Palin's recent quote, which Sullivan quotes at length in this post from The Daily Dish. Sullivan's characterization of Palin doesn't surprise me, though; I've come to see most religions as special cases of politics. Both are elaborate systems that use vague and largely unsubstantiated fables and threats to enable small elite groups to coordinate and control much larger groups of people, for better and worse.

Continue ReadingThe one who’s name must not be mentioned.

Eisenhower warns of the military industrial complex

In this video from 1961, President Dwight Eisenhower explained the grave implications of the existence of the military industrial complex. In my opinion, he was spot on in this speech (which was his exit speech from the presidency), and this phenomenon of the MEC explains the horrifically warped U.S. national budget and our equally warped sense of national priorities for decades:

Continue ReadingEisenhower warns of the military industrial complex

Exhibit A regarding Congressional dysfunction

How is it that one senator can stifle government function? Tim Rutten of the LA Times explains:

In the face of these daunting issues, what was it that preoccupied the Senate on the eve of its long weekend recess? The legislative drama du jour is the standoff between the White House and Sen. Richard C. Shelby (R-Ala.), who has put a personal hold on more than 70 executive branch appointments until the Obama administration agrees to fund a couple of pork-barrel projects he has earmarked for his state. One involves tens of millions of dollars for an FBI laboratory focusing on improvised explosives -- something the bureau doesn't think it needs. . . . Unless the administration agrees to give Shelby what he wants, he intends to invoke an archaic senatorial privilege that allows him to prevent the chamber from considering any of the administration's nominees to executive branch vacancies, no matter how crucial. Without the 60 votes to force cloture -- another archaic convention -- there's nothing the Democrats or the White House can do.

Continue ReadingExhibit A regarding Congressional dysfunction