Of Mice and Straw Men

Now that we've figured out, six years into it, that the war in Iraq wasn't about fighting Al Qaeda, but straw men, it's time to turn our attention to the Senate who singlehandedly showed that the times they are indeed a changing this week..

And, despite the stalwart efforts of the mainstream media to ignore it, there is a strong likelihood that the next President may be facing a majority of Democrats in both the House and the Senate which could make it immensely difficult to slip an activist conservative Supreme Court justice through the cracks, should the White House next be occupied by McCain.

This could get interesting, especially in light of Mr. Bush's new role as fundraiser-in-chief, and lobbyist, for McCain. Reportedly, the president will be working to raise cash for the Arizona senator next week at three private fundraisers in Arizona and Utah, and the dynamic duo will make their way like that famous pair in Steinbeck's novel.

While it is customary for fundraising events, in private residences, to be closed to the public, White House Press Secretary Dana Perino says that it is common practice for McCain to shut out the media at all events in which money changes hands. Wonder why that could be? Could it be that the Senator doesn't want the public to see the maverick image he worked so hard to create is nothing more than a straw man?

Now that McCain has made his feelings known about pastor McGee; now that we know what he thinks of two Bush appointments to the Supreme Court, John Roberts and Samuel Alito, as well as the Bush tax cuts, both of which he heartily endorses, one would be remiss not to ask how the wannabe commander-in-chief feels about current recruiting, by the FBI, of college kids in Minneapolis, and elsewhere, to serve as plants, and informants, at the Minneapolis-St. Paul Republican National Convention in early September?

One might expect something like a "been there, done that" response as, after all, planting people to attend conventions, and political events, then report back to intelligence is nothing new----hearkens back at least to the Nixon era. What does he think of the USA Patriot Act which all but dissolves Fourth Amendment rights to due process? Does he think it okay to infiltrate peace and environmental groups, and any others who exercise their First Amendment right to freedom of assembly in an effort to extract information that may later be used to bring "homegrown terrorist" charges?

Indeed, what does Senator McCain think constitutes domestic terrorism? What does he think of electronic surveillance by the National Security Agency? What does he think of granting retroactive immunity to telecoms, and other corporate giants, who compromised consumer privacy, so they could cooperate with a covert, and maybe illegal investigation?

And, in the midst of a Memorial Day weekend, and the President's request that we pause to honor those who have served this country, there can be no better way to serve them than by telling the truth. Truth it, while he served his country honorably, something that cannot be said of our current commander-in-chief, John McCain has shown, by his actions, what he thinks of our veterans - he vetoed the GI Bill, the Senate just passed, that would enhance funding for a college education for those whose service has taken them to Iraq, and Afghanistan.

But, what is McCain's thinking about the staggering figure of 1,000 veterans committing suicide per month, and more suicides than combat fatalities as a result of this war, and of the plans, by some Veterans Administration psychologists, to broaden the definition of PTSD such that benefits to some returning soldiers will be cut exponentially, just as the definition of torture was expanded such that "unlawful enemy combatants" would lose protection otherwise afforded by Geneva and international law. How does this jive with his idea hat America is a "Christian nation?"

What about those other straw men, the "unlawful enemy combatants," created by Donald Rumsfeld to circumvent human rights obligations under Geneva? Candidate McCain deserves to be asked what he thinks of the designation "unlawful enemy combatant," and if due process can ever be rightfully denied to anyone we detain.

May we also expect a McCain Pentagon to be embedded in the mainstream media, and for retired military members to make scripted appearances converting broadcast news into a propaganda delivery vehicle? Does McCain see his role as that of a unitary president, and one that can invoke executive privilege, signing statements, and the almighty veto whenever it is politically, and ideologically, expedient, as well as neutralize the federal courts, and fire those U.S. attorneys who refuse to play ball on voter fraud cases?

More importantly, should he become president, will John McCain acknowledge that the "war on terror" is itself the most insidious straw man---the pretext of invading Iraq based on an argument intended to be knocked down by something more substantive, and yet more military exploits to fill an already bloated war chest.

It has become a virtual cliche to acknowledge that there was no Al Qaeda in Iraq before we got there, just as it is now common knowledge that Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with blowing up the Twin Towers nearly seven years ago.

But, as the Republican National Convention approaches, in the Twin Cities, the signs of hubris, and abuse of power, are fast becoming evident as even the press retreats from asking whether McCain will try to strongarm, and neutralize, news coverage, as well as micromanage media coverage of the war in Iraq, and the build-up to Iran, the way George W. Bush has.

That Bush and McCain are aligned like two peas in a pod is no secret now nor is anyone hiding Bush's new role in funneling cash into McCain's campaign. As reported, the pair have been "coordinating their messages behind the scenes." But, no one is asking which messages are being coordinated, specifically, and who will most feel the impact. One message, to the conservative wing of the Republican party, is not to worry, regardless of how he may appear to shift, or differ, from the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, McCain will stay true to course by stacking the highest court in the land, and federal courts, with those who are anti-choice, pro-gun, and opposed to affirmative action, or any attempt at economic equity.

It is the role of Congress to start coordinating their messages, too, a task which, happily, the Senate has already begun by ensuring President Bush's war funding bill includes protection for countless Americans who have been most impacted by his policies---the poor, and those most deeply scarred by combat in Iraq, and Afghanistan. Hopefully, those who erected that straw man in Baghdad, and brought about the anguish, and unspeakable pain of hundreds of thousands of returning soldiers, will get to visit with the despair that they have inflicted on so many.

A Congress that is autonomous, and independent from a bully executive, or a bully pulpit, is what the framers had in mind, and not a straw man, or dummy purchaser. By adding billions of dollars in enhanced programs for veterans, and extending unemployment benefits by thirteen weeks, the Senate is showing that it is capable of being president-proof, something that may prove to be immensely important, after November.

That is, of course, unless George W. Bush finds his way to his favorite V-chip -- the veto. With any luck, he'll stumble upon his refill of Viagra first.

Comments

[jayne]

oooops, hit "post" too quickly. My previous comment erroneously said "all but one" when, in fact, it was only one comment that dealt with the McCarthy-ite mentality in America today which was posted by someone who lives abroad.

[jayne]

First, to the person who is aware of only one definition for the phrase "straw man," I invite you to look it up in the dictionary. You are speaking, specifically, of a "strawman argument," but there is also the term "straw man" which means something lacking substance which, increasingly, applies to candidate McCain.

As for the Freudian slip, yes, of course, it's Reverend Hagee--how silly--clearly, McGee was a slip---an intriguing one; nevertheless, one that was unintentional; mes apologies.

Oh, yes, and while we're at it, I'm not a constitutional scholar, but I believe that the Fourth Amendment provides protection against illegal search and seizure, which protection is challenged by the USA Patriot Act as is Miranda. That local law enforcement is now deputized, and imbued with intelligence-gathering powers also doesn't seem to be on any of the candidates top ten list of what to talk about next.

Fascinating, isn't it, how all but one person picked up on the "homegrown terrorist" issue, as well as the threat to lawful dissent. Overall, there appears to be more concern with "pedantic quibbles" than substantive debate on dissent, and a culture in which diversity of opinion will soon go the way of the dinosaur.

[DennyCrane]

McCain's maverick image is a media creation. I get so sick of journalists who describe him as a maverick. It's as if they all read from the same script. They use the label, but never give examples to show it. And this campaign has shown that McCain is just like all the other Republicans, big on war and using fear, sucking up to the religious right, and in bed with lobbyists.

[illinoisan]

Can't argue with anything here except the use of the phrase "straw man". A "straw man" is an argument one falsely attributes to a debate opponent in order to knock it down. It's Rush Limbaugh's stock in trade but I don't see any example of it brought forth in the post.

A good example of a straw man that McCain actually deploys is when he says Obama wants to appease terrorists and then goes on to say why that would be such a bad idea.

There are all sorts of expressions for what McCain has done in terms of presenting a false front on issues he pretends to care about but "straw man" isn't one of them.

[charon]

I suspect a deal has been worked out between Bush and McCain in which Bush gives as much help as he can to McCain in exchange for McCain pardoning Bush and helping in every way possible to hide bushco's illegal activities. Even now the shredders are working overtime in the Executive office buildings in DC, but there isn't enough time to destroy all the evidence.

Basically, McCain will play the role of Gerald Ford to Bush's Nixon.

[quakergirl]

Hi Jayne
Thanks for writing that. Living in Europe I see see how the mostly widely spoken German language blogs are worried about America. They see the slide into fascism and the 1930s all over again, especially with the Thought Crime bill passed by a landslide in the House. Bill S 1955 is coming up for the senate. This is a thinly disguised bill to imprison people like those in the anti-war groups, as well as people like

[TexasDem0]

You mentioned pastor McGee. Did you mean Rev. Hagee?

The right to due process is guaranteed by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The Fourth Amendment deals with search and seizure.

[arglebargle]

I like a lot of what you say here. Two pedantic quibbles:

--it's Hagee, not McGee.
--McCain didn't "veto" the GI Bill; he voted against it.

[sarge]

Thank you, Jayne. Another great piece.

This line caught my attention:

"It has become a virtual cliche to acknowledge that there was no Al Qaeda in Iraq before we got there"

Ah, but Jayne, there WAS al Qaeda in Iraq before we got there, and in my mind it is the most damning reality of the Bush/Cheney era.

The fact that al Qaeda, in the form of a Zarqawi led terrorist camp/chemical weapons lab existed in N. Iraq at the time of our invasion because the Bush administration REFUSED multiple Pentagon requests to take them out, so they could have one more bogus excuse for war, is the most under-reported, unknown crime of this Administration; one that in my mind rises to the level of treason.

Among other places, I wrote about it here ("How Cheney, Bush, NSC Killed Nick Berg, et al"):
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/2/3/01922/21851/53/448446

[cynubie]

Yo, sarge,
You have only one crime in mind? Dubya took an oath, defend against all enemies foreign and domestic, who challenge the security of the United States. Ever since failing to kill or capture Osama bin Laden in November of 2002, this commander in chief has consistently and with obvious malice of forethought completely abandoned this oath to engage in a military action based on personal policy--not national security. After mission accomplished, the capture of Saddam, or yesterday--the Traitor-in-Chief has not taken any of the steps necessary to capture or kill the single most dangerous individual confronting US security. In fact, he seems intent of appeasing the government of Pakistan which is undergoing political strife (assinations anyone?) and has publicly acknowledged making deals with the warlords who give Mr. bin Laden safe haven--this is a country that is in possession of over 60 nuclear weapons as well (gee, maniac in a country with nukes--I thought that was a reason to pre-emptively attack?).

So, I ask you again sarge, are you sure you can only think of ONE crime?
Respectfully submitted,
Francis Jens Erickson

[lmore]

I feel like we have been raped by this administration. Repeatedly.

I hope for justice.

[benjaminblue]

Is Mr. Bush reimbursing the public and replenishing the U.S. Treasury for all the hours he spends doing his business, and the business of the Republican party, instead of doing "the people's business" as Oval Office occupant?

It is time for the public to calculate his hourly rate and demand that he refund his wages for all hours he wasted on his own foolish pursuits.

It is also time for the public to demand that he quit his current job. What employer other than the U.S. Government allows its employees to do full-time efforts for other employers, such as the McSame campaign, while still collecting full-time pay?

[pratliff94]

Jayne,
Very good article and all very good questions.
Would it not be nice to hear Senator McCain and Senator Obama answer those questions in a national debate; however, I am not going to hold my breath?
I am sure the questions will be much more important such as how many homosexuals and lesbians married in California this summer?
How many assault rifles are too many for a home owner to possess?
How many abortions should a woman have before she is forced to have her tubes tied?
How long should prayer last during the first period in every school in America?
These are the all important questions that controlled the last election, Jayne, you know the ones that affect our lives so directly.
We don't want to deal with those non-essentials questions such as something that has to do with national health care or these you asked. Who really cares about torture or habeas corpus anyway? Does it really make a difference that fifty million citizens in the US have no health care?
If there is a Presidential debate, maybe we could sneak you on the panel. Would be interesting. Would it not?
OBHG,
Phil
.