Top Scoops

Book Reviews | Gordon Campbell | Scoop News | Wellington Scoop | Community Scoop | Search

 

Marc Ash: Chuck's Senate

Chuck's Senate


By Marc Ash
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110707J.shtml

On the day that Senator Charles Schumer used his vote on the Senate Judiciary Committee to all but assure that George W. Bush's latest pick, Michael B. Mukasey for attorney general, would be confirmed, The New York Times obliged him by publishing - in a featured Op-Ed - his reasons for doing so. The Times did not see fit to publicize any other senator's thoughts on the matter. That is fitting, because the only voice that mattered in the end was Chuck Schumer's.

In his Op-Ed, Schumer spelled out numerous reasons for his decision. He appears to argue that Mukasey can help to turn around and repair a Department of Justice badly damaged by Bush's last two picks: John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales. All this would be possible, in Schumer's view, due to Mukasey's independence from George W. Bush, and his professionalism. Mukasey's testimony, of course, clearly indicated he was - as is always a prerequisite for Bush appointees - first a guardian of Mr. Bush's interests, and perhaps after that a guardian of the nation's interests. Make no mistake. Michael Mukasey will serve at the pleasure of the president.

When Mukasey says that he will enforce a law banning waterboarding, "if Congress passes one," he is saying several things: a) That torture does not exist. Because if waterboarding is not torture, then nothing is. b) That torture is not currently illegal under US law, or that each act of violence against a detainee has to be specifically deemed to be illegal, whichever you prefer. c) That no one in Mr. Bush's entourage can be held responsible legally for authorizing acts of torture, which is what international law, and the Geneva Conventions - to which the United States is a signatory - require. d) That both he and Mr. Bush are supremely confident that Congress would never dare to pass legislation confirming that torture is illegal under US law.

This is a darker day still. In addition to personally making the decision that Michael Mukasey would be confirmed, Schumer now leads Congress by proxy to ratify torture as legal under US law, by virtue of its inaction. Game, set, match: Bush, Mukasey and Schumer.

One reason that Republicans can get away with whatever they like is that, in the end, they always stick together. Some call it lockstep, others call it goose step, but whatever you call it, they don't break ranks. Democrats do - regardless of the consequences. In this case, Mr. Schumer played the role of the powerbroker fatale. It was Schumer who assured the White House that, if nominated, Mukasey would be confirmed. So Schumer promised, and so he delivered.

Congress, the Democrats and the Nation be damned.

*************

You can send comments to Truthout Executive Director Marc Ash at: director@truthout.org. [an error occurred while processing this directive]

© Scoop Media

 
 
 
Top Scoops Headlines

 

Julie Webb-Pullman: Jacinda, THAT Tweet, And Gaza

The MFAT tweet condemning rocket fire from Gaza while failing to condemn the Israeli extrajudicial assassinations and civilian killings that generated Islamic Jihad’s rocket-fire in defensive response, reveals the hypocrisy at the heart of New Zealand’s so-called “even-handed” foreign policy and practice towards Palestine. More>>

Hope For Nature: A New Deal For The Commons

Joseph Cederwall on The Dig: To fully understand the biodiversity crisis and explore what comes next, it is necessary to address this mind-virus at the heart of our modern civilisation – the dominion worldview. More>>

ALSO:

Peace Plan: Ten Ways To Tackle Online Hate

A Helen Clark Foundation project to reduce online harm will be presented today in competition at the Paris Peace Forum... 'The Christchurch Principles' is the only Australasian initiative out of the 120 international projects chosen to be highlighted at the forum. More>>

ALSO:

Good Death: A Historical Perspective On Euthanasia

Some critics of the bill present religious and moral objections against euthanasia, while proponents have focused on the trauma and pain of terminally ill patients and their families. All these arguments have a long history. More>>