Are Post 11/7 Dems giving Iran Contra/CIA figure Gates a pass to be in charge at the Pentagon? Why?

[omega minimo]

We are in the messes we're in due to the refusal of previous Congress Democrats from demanding accountability from previous Republican administrations, including Ronald "Iran/Contra" Reagan's.

Now is not the time to send a veteran of Iran/Contra and Reagan's non-impeachment to "run" the war in Iraq.

NOW is the time for Dems to stand up and work for the American people. AT LEAST asking the right questions and entering REAL concerns into the Congressional record is the FIRST STEP for Democrats that show that they work for us and they intend to hold Bushco. accountable when they control the Congress.

[grytpype]

1. OH NOES!!!! IMPEACH MENT NOWWWW!!!!!

[yurbud]

2. bigger fish to fry, wait until January

[omega minimo]

3. care to elaborate?

[yurbud]

8. just wishful thinking on my part, and I'm one who hollered for them to block Alito, Condi, and

Torquemada.

[Larry Ogg]

4. Ha… Look at the new boss… He’s just like the old boss…

Nothing will change until the puppet masters are gone…

[omega minimo]

5. ,

[Old and In the Way]

6. There is no good answer.

I'll be looking to see what the Democratic Senators have to say in the debate before the full session.

[Larry Ogg]

9. Ah yes, a time for great speeches… and doing nothing!

I would sure like to be surprised.

[omega minimo]

10. Yes, let's give them the benefit of the doubt, but if this is another lame dog n pony show

................. it does not look like much will change at all....................
:evilfrown:

[Larry Ogg]

13. I would like to see Iran contra revisited big time

just to refresh everyone’s mind, and lay out the whole scenario leading up to the Iraqi war…

[MADem]

7. First, the GOP still has the Congress until the new session. Second, it's a 'spirit of

bipartisanship' move, a way of saying "Look, we aren't trying to SCREW you, BushCo, we're just holding your feet to the fire." The Dunce has the right to pick whosoever he desires to do the SECDEF job; the Senate has a duty to advise and consent re: his choice. Gates answered the key question 'correctly.' Iraq war--a mistake? YES. He'll have a three or four month honeymoon to get his shit together and come up with a plan to extract us from that hellhole. Gates' motivation, I suspect, is history--unlike the Dunce, he cares what the history books say. He'd rather go down in history as the guy who swept up after the elephants shit all over the world than be remembered as the misremembering Iran-Contra dude. So, he's got a stake in doing it right...

We shall see, I guess. All the ranting in the world isn't going to change the fact that this is a done deal, absent some horrific new detail coming to light about the guy.

[omega minimo]

11. "some horrific new detail coming to light about the guy" That's the friggin POINT!

"We shall see, I guess. All the ranting in the world isn't going to change the fact that this is a done deal, absent some horrific new detail coming to light about the guy. "

:wtf:

Aren't the "horrific OLD details" bad enough? With his background, Democrats are gonna let him be a "slam dunk"? :puke:

That statement I quoted is just unbelievably clueless-- THIS is WHY we're in the mess we're IN.

[MADem]

12. That statement you quoted is the damned truth, and if you don't like it, you don't get

how politics works. Mister Smith does NOT go to Washington. Rich people who have millions or who can con other people out of millions and can who afford to buy themselves a seat in the Senate do. But this isn't "news."

Don't take it out on me because the people actually participating in the system and casting the votes haven't reached your level of outrage over this nominee, or possess your measure of ideological purity. I call 'em as I see 'em, and I don't live in Fantasyland.

The horrific old details are NOT enough, and the brutal truth is that it is just too damned bad if you don't like that. If they WERE enough, the guy would have been convicted for his misdeeds and done a long stretch in the pen. But he didn't--he ended up having a distinguished postgovernment career in academia, and now, he wants another shot at having something nice said about him in the footnotes of history, because he knows there are stains on his reputation, and this is a chance to minimize them. And the Senate IS gonna give him that shot, and again, it's too bad if you or anyone else doesn't like it.

My statement wasn't "clueless" in any way, shape or form--I'm telling you how things actually work up on the Hill, how it's gonna go down, and you're giving me sanctimonious, "high dudgeon" grief because of it--as though I am personally responsible for the vote. Well, seeing as I don't have a desk on the Senate floor, I won't be casting a vote for the nominee. But he will be approved for the position, and there's not shit you can do about it.

Oh, well....go :puke: all you want, it ain't gonna change reality.

[omega minimo]

15. "Reality" or complacency?

"If you ain't part of the solution, you're part of the problem"

:thumbsup:


*Referring to an appropriate level of outrage as "all the ranting in the world won't change..." or "ideological purity..." or "sanctimonious, "high dudgeon" grief".....

+ Calling Gates "the misremembering Iran-Contra dude..."

+ Dismissing his background with "absent some horrific new detail coming to light about the guy..."

+ Blithely predetermining the outcome: "I'm telling you how things actually work up on the Hill, how it's gonna go down..." "....But he will be approved for the position, and there's not shit you can do about it...."

= Strategery, = Complacency, = the same casual, (hypocritical?) assumptions and self-fulling prophecies that perpetuate the same crimes and the same cast of characters down the decades.

So yes, you ARE "living in Fantasyland."

You believe in the inevitability of a negative outcome that lets you off the hook.

I believe that we and our representatives are responsible for not PRETENDING that someone ELSE is ALWAYS to blame for NOT DOING THE RIGHT THING AT THE RIGHT TIME.

[paulk]

23. do you really think that posting your outrage

anonymously on an internet discussion board makes YOU part of the "solution"?

LOL!


"Fntasyland" is denying reality, and the reality is that Gates will be Bush's next Secretary of Defence.

[omega minimo]

25. Is that the only thing you can think of to DO? That's really sad.

Flippant, cynical apathy is pathetic, hypocritical and THE REASON WE ARE IN THIS MESS. AGAIN.


"Fantasyland" is thinking you're safe from the consequences of all your apathetic cleverness.

[paulk]

34. what should I do, then?

Should I go out onto the sidewalk and start shouting at the passing cars?

GATES SUCKS! GATES SUCKS!

Who's your choice to replace Rummy?

I mean, you could always e-mail Bush and tell him who YOU want. That would probably be as good a use of your time as posting your dissatisfaction with the Dem. response on DU....

[omega minimo]

42. Up to you. The OP was looking for info or facts, not cynicism and conjecture

Thought someone here might know..............

[MADem]

65. The facts are that the guy was gonna get the job in a walk. With little to no oppo.

That's not cynical, and that wasn't conjecture. It was info, and it was the facts.

Everyone knew how it was going to go down, and that IS how it went down.

[MADem]

39. Sorry, there sport, I don't buy that solution/problem bullshit

Especially with regard to THIS lunacy. You aren't gonna 'guilt' me with that idiotic meaningless quote o'nonsense. Some people are neither--they have other, compelling priorities, they live in the real world, or they are just bystanders to some events, without influence, and aren't participating in your particular and personal "outrage du jour" because they are smart enough not to waste their time on foregone conclusions. But hey, beat your head bloody against a brick wall and feel superior for it. You KNOW you wanna....

As for my 'blithe predeterminations' of the outcome (which might be more accurately described as understanding reality, but doing no 'predetermining' whatsoever--it's simply basic logic, actually), check your newspaper and we'll see who is RIGHT at the end of the day about how that vote goes down. I'm betting on the outcome I indicated. The Senate isn't going to rise up like Godzilla and crush Dr. Gates, much as you'd like that to happen. You may as well have a good cry about that now and get it out of your system, seeing as you're about to be horribly disappointed, being so intensely invested in the result (and angry at me for challenging it, as though there's any question at all how it will end).

And where you get this "lets you off the hook" shit, I've no idea. I think you get a little wrapped around the axle when analyzing these issues. You get excessively personal, it seems. Attack the messenger, eh? Makes you feel better? A bit unhealthy, that sort of attitude. The projection about what I think and how I feel about matters is a little unusual, too. You might want to check yourself, there.

I worry about things that CAN be changed, I don't tilt at every fucking windmill like a cracked-out Don Quixote. I also understand the nature of political compromise, a concept that is apparently quite foreign to your churlish and didactic "My way or the highway" world view.

[omega minimo]

43. See H2O Man's "Awake" for a reality check on "My way or the highway" world view

That's not it at all.

[MADem]

46. No thanks. See the newspaper for the outcome of this Senate vote. NT

[omega minimo]

49. yes, fatalistic complacency is so comfy, cozy, ain't it?

:pals:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2858984

[MADem]

62. Well, to my point of view, spending your time fighting battles one can WIN is a better use of one's

energies. YMMV!

http://www.lompocrecord.com/articles/2006/12/06/ap/headlines/d8lrm9p81.txt

Overall, 52 Republicans, 42 Democrats and one independent voted for Gates. Three lawmakers _ Sens. Joseph Biden, D-Del., Evan Bayh, D-Ind., and Elizabeth Dole, R-N.C. _ did not vote.

Two Bush allies, Sens. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., and Jim Bunning, R-Ky., voted against Gates, citing his criticism of the war and his view that the U.S. should engage Iran as part of a solution.

"Mr. Gates has repeatedly criticized our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan without providing any viable solutions to the problems our troops currently face," Bunning said. "We need a secretary of defense to think forward with solutions and not backward on history we cannot change."

Santorum, who lost his re-election bid last month, mocked the idea of engaging dictators and talked at length of the evils of "radical Islamic fascism." When it comes to reaching out to Iran to discuss the security of Iraq, Santorum said of Gates, "I think he is in error."

[Name removed]

54. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[omega minimo]

82. It's important to see the Big Picture and connect the dots. Gates history's relevant & objectionable

If people want to accept "foregone conclusions" and "slam dunks" and "done deals" ahead of time and not even bother learning, caring, lifting a finger or a telephone.................... the "foregone conclusion" is more likely to happen.............

If it really was "predetermined" to happen anyway, it might have happened differently. At the least, the right questions and relevant historic background could be ENTERED INTO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, for the benefit of those who may (not be too inconvenienced to) care about this in the future. And for those in the present who are paying attention.

No one ever really knows ahead of time how anything will turn out.

Gates background is relevant to the establishment and continuation of the Bushco. group, as well as the future of the war on Iraq. Now he's the head of the Pentagon with no telling how soon Bushco. will be removed. Many of the comments I saw on DU regarding this "slam dunk" attitude were people ASSUMING (i.e. "predetermined") that this was okay for now b/c Bush would be out soon enough............... assuming with no way to know that for sure.

"You aren't gonna 'guilt' me with that idiotic meaningless quote o'nonsense. Some people are neither--they have other, compelling priorities, they live in the real world, or they are just bystanders to some events, without influence..."


You can't have it both ways-- or be "neither." That's not an attempt to "guilt you" -- that's reality. Your "reality," your personal, American real world is dependent on the (currently criminal) actions of deciders at the top, who are living in a state of unreality ("We define Reality") and unaccountable because no one will call BULLSHIT. Gates appointment was BULLSHIT. If people give up "influence" without even TRYING, then again, the self-fulfilled prophecy comes to be.


"And where you get this "lets you off the hook" shit, I've no idea. I think you get a little wrapped around the axle when analyzing these issues. You get excessively personal, it seems. Attack the messenger, eh? Makes you feel better? A bit unhealthy, that sort of attitude. The projection about what I think and how I feel about matters is a little unusual, too. You might want to check yourself, there."

People who believe in the inevitability of negative outcomes and take no action, let themselves off the hook. They end up being right and they don't even have to do anything :think:

"You may as well have a good cry about that now and get it out of your system, seeing as you're about to be horribly disappointed, being so intensely invested in the result (and angry at me for challenging it, as though there's any question at all how it will end)...I don't tilt at every fucking windmill like a cracked-out Don Quixote. I also understand the nature of political compromise, a concept that is apparently quite foreign to your churlish and didactic "My way or the highway" world view."

Does all that unecessary snarkiness "make you feel better? A bit unhealthy, that sort of attitude. You might want to check yourself, there."

Here is Martin Luther King making the point, which may help show that the concept is far from a churlish and didactic "My way or the highway" world view.(From "Awake" H2O Man quotes MLK):

"On some positions," King said, "cowardice asks the question, is it expediant? And then expedience comes along and asks the question – is it politic? Vanity asks the question – is it popular? Conscience asks the question – is it right? There comes a time when one must take the position that is neither safe nor politic nor polite, but he must do it because conscience tells him it is right. … And I submit that nothing will get done until people of good will put their bodies and their souls in motion."

[Zhade]

70. More like cowardice.

Yeah, I fucking said it - about time SOMEONE does.

These people are SCARED of trying to change things. They think a mere Dem majority is enough.

The rest of the world knows better.

And they won't wait forever for us to change things. They'll watch us fall, gladly. And I can't blame them, with 'allies' like these.

[Zhade]

69. So your message is "don't try to do better, just accept criminals as status quo."

As politely as I can, FUCK THAT.

[omega minimo]

74. I think you hit the nail on the head

"just accept criminals as status quo."


That's the picture that appears as we (potentially) emerge from this 26 year fog.

If Gates was such a "$lam dunk" makes ya wonder where the prioritie$ of Congre$$ really are.

[MADem]

77. No, that is NOT my message at all. Why don't you try READING what people actually WRITE

and stop with the bullshit "little toughie" confrontations and projection of your immature "I'm the most lefty" assumptions about others in creating these absurd strawmen?

It's childish, moronic, and fucking WRONG, frankly.

Where you get "don't try to do better, just accept criminals as status quo" from a basic recitation of the FACTS of what occurred in the Senate most recently, I've no idea. Nowhere do I say that. You pulled that right out of your biased little mind.

You might grow up, learn to read, and stop making false assumptions about what people's "message" is.

Sheesh.

[Zhade]

68. It wasn't a 'mistake'. It was a premeditated CRIME.

NT!

[omega minimo]

75. I think you hit the nail on the head

[MADem]

78. Well, tell ya what--write a letter to Doctor Gates and complain to him, not me.

Those were HIS words, not mine. If you watched the hearings, you'd know that, and not infer that this was my opinion.

[steve2470]

71. I think you hit the nail on the head.

I"d like to think they were keeping powder dry until the battle next year, but I guess I"m dreaming :/

[Rageneau]

14. Lee Hamilton's Whitewash Service -- GOP cover-ups a specialty

[blm]

16. My take is that Poppy's way is the only way to bring the end to the war through Saudi

pressure.

Seriously - it will take them the whole two years to make it happen, since Bushboy screwed up their fascist agenda so badly.

The key will be to make sure in 2009 that the Dem who takes office is NOT going to pull a Clinton and continue covering up for the BFEE and their crimes of office.

This country needs an anti-corruption, open government Democrat in Jan 2009.

[omega minimo]

17. "This country needs an anti-corruption, open government Democrat in Jan 2009."

Agreed. Good point blm.

After Alito and Roberts were greased onto the SCOTUS and AFTER 11/7 it is MUCH TOO MUCH to see this nomination treated as another ho hum inevitability.


"The key will be to make sure in 2009 that the Dem who takes office is NOT going to pull a Clinton and continue covering up for the BFEE and their crimes of office."

To say so must take more faith than I have left at this point. NOW is the time. If Dems want to wait til January to take strong stands, at the Very Least, SOMEONE has got to enter the right questions and the relevant history into the Record.


I'm not sure why I should wait for next year and pay any attention to any of it after this nomination/confirmation, if it is a "done deal" a "slam dunk." It will be proven that we are a nation of historically-retarded hypocrites.


Any words of wisdom to shore up my last shreds of rebellious non-cynicism? :hi:

[blm]

18. Check this out - BET documentary that ran last night - American Gangster

it was all about the CIA - Contra drugrunning that targeted the inner cities and actually chronicled the demonization of Gary Webb. I contacted BET and thanked them for reporting on an issue that so many want swept away, because we know darn well they're doing it still, especially with the booming Afghani opium/heroin market.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2867222

[omega minimo]

19. thanks and backatcha

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/120506.html

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Democrats Cave on Gates Nomination

By Robert Parry
December 6, 2006

Democrats on the Senate Armed Services Committee floundered though inept questioning of former CIA Director Robert M. Gates,

Bush’s new choice for Defense Secretary, failing to nail down the nominee’s precise thinking on any aspect of the war strategy or

even to secure a guarantee that the Pentagon would turn over documents for future oversight hearings.

<snip>

Lost History

The Democrats also avoided any queries about evidence that emerged in the 1990s contradicting Gates’s earlier sworn testimony

that he had no substantive roles in Reagan-era covert policies to arm both Iraq and Iran during their eight-year war.

For instance, there was no reference at the hearing to a 1995 affidavit from Howard Teicher, one of Ronald Reagan’s National

Security Council aides, who placed Gates in the middle of operations to arrange third-country weapons for Saddam Hussein in the

1980s.

The effort to arm the Iraqis was “spearheaded” by CIA Director William Casey and involved his deputy, Robert Gates, according to

Teicher’s affidavit. “The CIA, including both CIA Director Casey and Deputy Director Gates, knew of, approved of, and assisted in the

sale of non-U.S. origin military weapons, ammunition and vehicles to Iraq,” Teicher wrote.

Though the Teicher affidavit followed Gates’s last confirmation hearing to be CIA director in 1991 – and put in question Gates’s

credibility – it didn’t exist for the Democrats who questioned Gates at his Dec. 5, 2006, hearings.
Secret World of Robert Gates.”]

At the Dec. 5 hearing, it was also noteworthy that Gates was introduced and endorsed by former Sen. David Boren, the Oklahoma

Democrat who was Senate Intelligence Committee chairman at the time of Gates’s 1991 confirmation hearings.

Boren’s appearance underscored the coziness that had limited those 1991 hearings. In Gates’s memoirs, From the Shadows, Gates

even thanked his friend, Boren, for shepherding his CIA nomination through the Senate Intelligence Committee.

"David took it as a personal challenge to get me confirmed,” Gates wrote.

What Boren did not do in 1991 was seriously investigate allegations linking Gates to a variety of corrupt activities involving Iran, Iraq,

Central America and the politicization of intelligence – albeit Boren’s review in 1991 was a lot more thorough than what the Senate

Armed Services Committee did in its one-day hearing on Dec. 5.

Even with almost 3,000 American soldiers dead in Iraq and estimates of more than a half million Iraqis killed in a war that has now

lasted longer than the U.S. participation in World War II, the Democrats on the Senate Armed Services Committee set aside their

constitutional duty to examine the fitness of Cabinet appointments, sacrificing that principle on the altar of “bipartisanship.”


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. His latest book, Secrecy &

Privilege: Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq, can be ordered at secrecyandprivilege.com. It's also available at

Amazon.com, as is his 1999 book, Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the Press & 'Project Truth.'


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3004744

The late Democratic Congressman from Texas, Henry Gonzalez wanted to impeach 41. Rep. Gonzalez had this entered into The

Congressional Record-it is pertinent to today.

Kissinger Associates, BNL, and Iraq
http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/congress/1991/h910502g....

Simultaneous to BNL was BCCI and Kissinger Associates-Iran/Contra again, and Mr. Gates was prominent.
http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1992_rpt/bcci/20kiss.ht...

[hootinholler]

52. I'm on board with that!

You most always are making sense to me blm.

-Hoot

[omega minimo]

20. bob geiger's notes and 12/5 DU Hearing links

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3004642

Yesterday's Hearing link:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2860688

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

21. Politics as usual. Just because the guy has blood on his hands...

It's not as if he did something really naughty like wearing the wrong tie to the hearings.

[omega minimo]

22. Well TyL "politics as usual" produced a nation of cynics, spectators, hypocrites and zombies

:yoiks:

[librechik]

24. gotta get rid of RUMMY ASAP--install any warm body other than RUMMY

that's why

[catmandu57]

26. That's the way I see him

Just a seat warmer, he's the least odious option that poppy and baker could come up with right now, rummy had to go of that there can be no question. If his future address isn't the federal penitentiary in leavenworth I'll be very surprised.
If the investigations are done correctly, this whole misadministration is going to fold very quickly, they're all going to prison, let them have their seat warmer, he's just been put back into the fire.

[omega minimo]

29. even if that were true, why is that acceptable?

"the least odious option that poppy and baker could come up with right now"

[librechik]

31. it's a bad situation, but we don't have any "good" choices

so forward. a little mussed.

[omega minimo]

32. "A LITTLE MUSSED"? !!!!!!!!!!!

:wtf: :evilfrown: :rofl:

"Forward"? How bout Back To The Future?

wow. there's real different perceptions about what is going on here. :hi:

[librechik]

33. politics is nothing but a series of compromises

and nose holding exercises. With an occasional Howard Dean yell. Being crushed and disappointed is normal.

Do I wish it were different? I haven't totally lost my ideals. However, I've been watching since before Watergate. Wishes are not a plan. And power corrupts. It's better to know that than break your heart trying to change it, IMHO.

[omega minimo]

36. understood. yet there's difference b/w "compromises' & capitulation/complacency

thanks for your thoughts on that :thumbsup:

question: if you been watching since Watergate and Iran/Contra non-impeachment ("Ollie North's a hero" BS), what is your outrage level for Gates as Sec-Def nominee?

[librechik]

50. I'm disgusted with his nomination--more BFEE trash to distrust

I would have preferred to see Zinni or somebody without so obvious an agenda and with more understanding of the military. But to paraphrase my man Mose Allison, ever since the world ended, the choices have been reduced.

[catmandu57]

40. It's not acceptable

right now we need someone to hold the spot, I may be wrong, but, couldn't hearings on gates prior dealings be revisited?. President Pelosi can appoint her own secretary when all the vermin have been swept out.

[omega minimo]

27. and there was only one choice?

Anybody But Rummy is good enough for you?

[Hubert Flottz]

28. Still afraid of Bush I guess...

I hope I'm wrong for the country's sake.

[omega minimo]

30. oh, that

[SoCalDem]

35. Here's the thing. The real dirt on Iran Contra is still locked away

and hidden in a Texas University. Dems are still afraid of being accused of being mean and petty..

They might also fear some "terror attack" that might occur between now and the time they actually take over., Can you imagine the hubbub if "they refused to confirm a new SecDef"?

They are all just being political.. It's what they are..they can't help it.

[omega minimo]

37. Right. Isn't Gates the one responsible for keeping it locked away in Texas?

"MEAN AND PETTY"!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :wtf:


don't mind me-- i'm gonna start working on my blase, snarky cynicism.....

"They might also fear some "terror attack" that might occur between now and the time they actually take over."

The blase, snarky cynics may be masking :scared: total paranoia with a "whatever" attitude, eh?

[blm]

56. Heads up for you, SoCal. BET had a documentary last night on ContraCocaine

and included alot about Gary Webb and his investigation.

I called and thanked them, because I NEVER expected to hear about this in the media ever again.

Check it out -
http://www.bet.com/BETShows/americangangster_rickyross.htm?Referrer={29DD8259-B68D-4D70-BCF8-F3262AC0CAF1}

[H2O Man]

38. There are a couple of reasons.

Though listing the reasons by no means indicates any level of agreement with them, here is why Gates was allowed in so easily:

There is a general concern that this administration has brought us to the brink of a war far larger than just Iraq. A regional conflict in the Middle East could easily become WW3.

Within the administration, there were not people with the insight or ability to change the direction that Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld were taking this country, much less Iraq. The Baker Committee, which is primarily a tool of the Bush1 group, needed to install one person within the administration. Rumsfeld was the obvious target to replace, as neither Bush nor Cheney will leave without great pressure. (At some point, I may even write a thread about impeachment options!)

For the democratic leaders, there was a shared belief that it would be better to try to cooperate with the Bush1 group, than to make it a more acrimonious atmosphere before they enter the positions of leadership in congress.

It is also worth noting that most of the democrats in the House and Senate recognize that the administration has put us in such a terrible position that there is no good choice right now. There are not good options. Besides withdrawing -- and we must -- there is a need for communication with other countries in the Middle East. It has to be done. The members of congress cannot do that -- the Constitution does not allow it. It is Executive territory. But there is no one in the administration who is able to, even if they were sincere in wanting to. Thus, Gates was put in, in order to pressure Bush to appoint a special envoy.

Our job continues to be to exercise our rights as defined by the Bill of Rights. Lobby Congress. Tell our elected representatives to end the US occupation of Iraq. And, of course, to impeach Dick Cheney.

[SoCalDem]

44. yep.. choices are limited.. shit sandwich? or shit sandwich with bacon?

we are stuck with these fools until January

I would like to see a rule that in election years, all the "business" of congress must be completed before the election, and the 2 months after election and before the new crop takes over would be their "vacation time" ALL of it.. No other vacations or recess any other time..

Congresspeople don't "need" spring break..or summer vacation..

The time between the election and the new session would give people plenty of time to get the transition well ordered..and it would eliminate kamikaze legislation.

[paulk]

51. It wouldn't surprise me to see a move to impeach Cheney

come from within the Republican ranks. It seems an understanding has been reached within the Bush Pere wing that Dimson can damage not just the party, but possibly, like you say, start WW3 - and that war - with it's potential for disrupting the flow of oil - would be way bad for bidness.

[omega minimo]

58. Why Gates?

"The Baker Committee, which is primarily a tool of the Bush1 group, needed to install one person within the administration........ Thus, Gates was put in, in order to pressure Bush to appoint a special envoy."

[H2O Man]

59. Because he is

an Agency man. The "old agency" is regaining power.

[H2O Man]

60. PS:

Keep in mind Rumsfeld and Cheney attempted to gain power over the Agency.

[bloom]

66. "The "old agency" is regaining power."

But Rumsfeld and Cheney were all a part of the Bush1/Reagan/CIA thing - they were all a part of the covert - hidden gov't schemes, weren't they?

So now we have Gates/CIA/Bush1/Rumsfeld/Cheney + the little Bush.


Yes - Cheney, etc. have been doing power plays with the CIA - but I'm not so sure that they aren't all in this together.

Gates seems slicker than most. Less likely to be OBVIOUSLY ridiculous. All the easier to be the big, bad wolf (dressed up as the grandmother). :shrug:

[omega minimo]

73. slick enough that some

comments here today were that Gates is okay in there for now, cuz "they'll all be out of there soon enough....."

And Levin praised his "candor" :wow:

[H2O Man]

79. Interesting points.

There is value in examining the Rumsfeld/Cheney issue in both the macro- and micro- .... It is certainly true that Cheney was part of the bigger picture with Bush1. Rumsfeld was famously not -- his relationship with Bush the Elder has always been acrimonious.

Likewise, when examined closely, Cheney's relationship with the Agency has been one of conflict for a long time. I would suggest that the best evidence that Cheney and the Agency are not "all in this together" is found in the Plame scandal. There is a school of thought that the Plame scandal is not real, and is merely a charade to distract and confuse the public. I think that belief is without merit.

[omega minimo]

61. Indeed. Hence the "outrage du jour" & "churlish and didactic "My way or the highway" world view"

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :evilgrin:

[Generator]

41. Of course they are!

Please don't be under the illusion the Democrats we have are going to save America. Every time I watch this alternate reality on Democracy Now, I see that it's all a sham. They aren't going to challenge Gates. Iran Contra was absolved. Most of the congress has no problem being obsolete in their power, as long as they get paid. And pretend, and delude and lie to themselves and you.

Don't expect them to change. And we have no media that except for above program that EVEN points out how rotten Gates is. And the Democrats won't even question him. Because at least he's not Rumsfeld! That't the level of competency, and depth we have from our government.

[omega minimo]

45. perhaps it's overreaction to having Negroponte and Gates "running" the war in Iraq

:eyes:

[MissWaverly]

53. look I agree with you, I dislike both immensely

I have not forgotten the death squads and other dirty tricks that occurred down in South
America with the CIAs blessing. But, I have the feeling the Democrats endorsed Gates so
they would not be blamed for the Iraq disaster that's shaping up, this administration's instinct
is not to act responsibly but to spread blame like a manure spreader, they don't really
care what happens as long as they have a stooge to blame. I do not trust those involved
in the Iran-Contra debacle and I don't see them as capable of rescuing us or the Iraqis. But,
the ball for handling the Iraq War is now back in Bush's court, he can't say he has no
secretary of defense to handle the situation now, and if ever we needed a rep at the UN,
it's now and not the walrus.

[pat_k]

47. The lunacy of bipartisanship in Bush World

Opposing Gates nomination would be an EXTREMELY effective way to expose the the insanity of the agenda that the tiny cabal of new American fascists has been advancing for decades.

Tragically, the DC Dems' addiction to the path of least resistent drives them to pass up yet another golden opportunity.

Gates could EASILY be taken down for ONE thing: Manipulating intelligence on the assasination attempt of the Pope.

Just as the bushcheney WH was hell-bent on getting what they needed to terrorize us into a war with Iraq -- and made sure Tenet provided it, Gates was hell-bent on pinning the assasination attempt on the Russians.

His single-minded obsession allowed the assassin to escape scot-free. The current Congress has all they need from hearings that included testimony from analysts.

Not only would Gates egregious actions expose long term pattern of lawlessness and willingness to go to any lengths to advance their agenda, there are a lot of Catholics and concerned citizens in this country who would be VERY interested to learn that Gates undermined this particular critical investigation.

The song remains the same and so do the players. More on Gates and his "Friends in High Place" from Robert Parry http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/printer_120406K.shtml">here]

On the Lunacy of Bipartisanship in Bush World

As a general proposition, Americans want the ideal of a bipartisan Congress in which reasonable people on "both sides" work together to find reasonable solutions. But on Nov. 7th, the voice of the people declared that the most essential ingredient of that ideal -- reasonable people on "both sides" -- doesn't exist in Bush World.

When they rejected Bush and his rubber stamp Congress as intolerably incompetent/corrupt/extreme they were not calling for "bipartisanship" with Bush at the helm.

Their message was loud and clear: "We want out of Bush-World!"

Apparently DC Dems didn't get the message that was delivered. If they had, they'd be implementing strategies that tap into the power of the outrage that drove the "wave," instead of doing their best to suppress it.

The "conventional wisdom" and exhortations we've heard since the election -- "impeachment is off limits," "it's about issues, issue, issues," "suppress anger," "don't overreach," etc. -- aren't new. We heard them last month. We heard them last year. We have been hearing similar admonitions to be "pragmatic" and "tactical" or to "keep our powder dry" for decades because such admonitions are grounded in assumptions and patterns of thought that have resisted change for decades.

For the sake our national soul, the best thing the drivers of Democratic strategy could do would be to Get Out of Town, reconnect with reality.

[omega minimo]

57. "tap into the power of the outrage that drove the "wave," instead of doing their best to suppress it

"Apparently DC Dems didn't get the message that was delivered. If they had, they'd be implementing strategies that tap into the power of the outrage that drove the "wave," instead of doing their best to suppress it.

"The "conventional wisdom" and exhortations we've heard since the election -- "impeachment is off limits," "it's about issues, issue, issues," "suppress anger," "don't overreach," etc. -- aren't new. We heard them last month. We heard them last year. We have been hearing similar admonitions to be "pragmatic" and "tactical" or to "keep our powder dry" for decades because such admonitions are grounded in assumptions and patterns of thought that have resisted change for decades."


".....patterns of thought that have resisted change for decades..................."



Thanks pat_k :yourock:

Maybe you can tell me, after watching these unopposed appointments for Alito, Roberts and (Post 11/7!!!!!!!!1) Gates, why one should even stay tuned.........?

[pat_k]

67. With every effort (e.g., Jan 6th, fighting for Alito filibuster). . .

. . .we learn how to get through more effectively. And, we chip away at their dysfunctional patterns of thought and rationalizations. Since the same rationalizations get reused over and over, every concerted lobbying effort "softens up" the ground for future efforts. And every DC Dem we engage in a given fight will be that much easier to engage in the next fight.

The most important lesson that we've taken from our experiences in the January 6th and Alito filibuster lobbying efforts is that we must confront and challenge our "leaders" (and their staffers) in face-to-face dialog. (see http://thedeanpeople.com)

Calls and letters effectively show the breadth of support, but one-way communication is limited. All too often, what we tell them just slides off their system of rationalization like water off a ducks back.

There is no sufficient substitute for in-person dialog, which allows you to directly contradict the many rationalizations and excuses given for inaction.

A corollary to that lesson is that they are just people -- people who inhabit a closed social system. And all closed social systems -- business units, organizations, business sectors, social worlds like the "beltway bubble," or political factions -- create their own reality to some degree. Shared "insider" assumptions are rarely challenged or tested against reality. Unless challenged by outsiders, faulty assumptions beget faulty interpretations, which beget assumptions that diverge further and further from reality "outside."

The only way to keep the created reality you inhabit rooted in reality is to:

• bring in outsiders and take their challenges and observations VERY seriously;
• identify assumptions and challenge them;
• Get Out and spend a significant amount of time in other "worlds."

As far as we can tell, the DC Dems are making no effort to do ANY of these things.

Since they aren't bringing outsiders in, some of us "outsiders" have to insert ourselves into their world if we want to insert reality.

Citizen lobbyists can be incredibly effective. Interest groups spend millions on people doing this type of work. We can do it on our own behalf. A hundred citizen lobbyists can do more than 10 million bucks worth of "professional" lobbyist muscle.

It can be a daunting thing to do, but they are more accessible than most people realize -- the first step is to simply fax a request for a meeting (http://january6th.org/files/meeting_corzine.pdf">Jan6th example, http://january6th.org/mtg_request_menendez_fax_all.pdf">Alito example)

Newly formed citizen groups and "netroots" activists are just beginning to "learn the ropes." Assuming we can only get better at it, this is a source of enormous hope for the future. Even early stumbling and bumbling efforts have yielded significant victories.

Everyone told us we would never, never, "get a Senator." Even House staffers on "our side" in the fight for an objection to the Ohio electors dismissed our efforts as futile. And guess what? We "got a Senator."

In the weeks running up the vote on Alito it was universally believed that his confirmation was a "done deal" -- and then the folks "out here" stood up and said "Hey, it ain't over 'til it's over!" Within just a week or two, the efforts began to pay off. The word "filibuster" was finally heard. Reid, Kerry, and many other lobbied their colleagues publicly and forcefully. Until it happened, it was unimaginable the insiders.

Lobbying them is just part of the equation -- and is a task that doesn't actually require big numbers, just a few people in each Congressional district. Just as important, if not more so, is challenging each other. The more we break down the rationalizations "out here" the more effectively we can challenge them "in there." (Which is why I periodically spend a good bit of time here on DU targeting, and hammering on, a few "poisonous beliefs." Undoubtedly the repetition can be annoying, but I've come to the conclusion that it is necessary.)

Here's something on the subject that I posted somewhere on DU early this year:

Hope and confidence can be elusive, and there are times that I find myself falling into despair. But hope is the key to action (and action the key to hope), so when I feel hopeful I try to spread it around a bit.

These days my hope is rooted in the progress I've seen in the past three years. I know that this probably sound nuts to you, but if you had plucked me up in February 2003 and plunked me down today, I would be thrilled with the changes.

By February 2003, I felt like I had finally been beaten into permanent silence by a world that had seemingly gone stark, raving, mad. After months of seeking sanity somewhere, I stopped reading newspapers, talking to colleagues, watching TV, listening to the radio.

Today, a search in Google for Impeach Bush gets hits -- the only hits that came up at the end of 2002 were somehow related to Nixon or their failed attempt to impeach Clinton. In today's New Yorker, Jane Mayer's "http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=503566">The Memo" demonstrated the very best in journalism -- something that seemed to have completely disappeared by the end of 2002. This issue of Harpers has a fantastic article on the Case for Impeachment. Back at the beginning of 2003 it seemed like the groups I had connected with in the fight against the theft of the 2000 election had completely packed it in. Today, I have tickets to Harpers "Case for Impeachment" event in NYC on Thursday.

We are forward looking creatures. We are wired to be on the lookout for the next challenge; we aren't so hot at keeping track of the progress we make over time. When I do look back, I see some pretty great things.

Sen. Boxer stood with Rep. Tubbs-Jones on January 6th, 2005 and objected to the Ohio electors. In 2001, we had 100 Senators complicit with the theft of that election. Having one Senator shed the bonds of complicity in 2005 was an incredible victory that EVERYONE told us would NEVER happen. Throughout the past three years, John Conyers has been a beacon of light in the fight against fraudulent elections, voter suppression, Bush Syndicate War Crimes, and on and on. Harry Reid has done some gutsy things too, like shutting down the Senate, a move that seemed out of the realm of possibility not long ago. (That great photo of him is pinned up in my office).

The incredible increase in citizen participation in the various 2004 campaigns has left a great legacy. Countless neighborhood, regional, and national groups that came together then have survived and grown. People are turning their complaints into concrete action.

Every time I hear someone at a meeting or event say some variation of "I've never done anything like this, but I just had to do something," my hope grows because ultimately, taking our country back means driving decisions from the bottom up. When people on the "bottom" who have never been prompted to act before start making noise and standing up "because I had to do something," that's when things start turning around.

As hard as it is to witness the level apathy that persists, I'm not frustrated with the Americans who remain alienated and apathetic. Most have internalized the immobilizing belief that solving our common problems is not something they can participate in -- or they believe that nothing they can do would make a difference. Given their beliefs, I don't expect them to be anything but willfully ignorant. People always avoid looking at problems they believe they are powerless to solve.

Their apathy doesn't undermine my hope because I know that people can shift overnight. People have a basic need to contribute and be effective. Belief in powerlessness can block that drive, but the belief that there is "nothing I can do" can disappear in an instant and completely change the dynamics.

I also don't tend to be disillusioned with elected officials and candidates who fail us, because I don't see them helping us increase our power and influence with them. For that, I look to my fellow citizens. As we connect with each other to lobby for Impeachment or to support candidates who believe in "people power," I firmly believe that we will create powerful associations that endure beyond any specific campaign.

We don't need a movement, we just need to move -- and I am seeing more people join the ranks of the "moving" everyday.

[omega minimo]

76. "We don't need a movement, we just need to move...."

Thank you, pat_k. Beautiful. Brilliant. Perfect. Might even work :evilgrin: :applause:


First, thank you for the perfectness, as well as the beauty and brilliance of this reply. In all the fishing I've done at DU this is outstanding; when I really was looking for something revitalizing in the face of the "long, hard slog............" thank you for this.


"With every effort (e.g., Jan 6th, fighting for Alito filibuster) we learn how to get through more effectively. And, we chip away at their dysfunctional patterns of thought and rationalizations."
.................
"Newly formed citizen groups and "netroots" activists are just beginning to "learn the ropes." Assuming we can only get better at it, this is a source of enormous hope for the future. Even early stumbling and bumbling efforts have yielded significant victories."
..................
" Just as important, if not more so, is challenging each other. The more we break down the rationalizations "out here" the more effectively we can challenge them "in there." (Which is why I periodically spend a good bit of time here on DU targeting, and hammering on, a few "poisonous beliefs." "


Citizen lobbyists meeting face to face (as 1,000 roaring, applauding people did with Rep. Waters and Mike Malloy at the CA Impeachment Forum) with legislators (smaller groups of course!) can "chip away at their dysfunctional patterns of thought and rationalizations." Get that hope/action/hope/action thing going. The rationalizations "out here" are discouraging, as it shows the power and pervasiveness of perception management. Which has bred this bizarre defiant, snarky, apathetic acquiescence!

This is beautiful:

"As hard as it is to witness the level apathy that persists, I'm not frustrated with the Americans who remain alienated and apathetic. Most have internalized the immobilizing belief that solving our common problems is not something they can participate in -- or they believe that nothing they can do would make a difference. Given their beliefs, I don't expect them to be anything but willfully ignorant. People always avoid looking at problems they believe they are powerless to solve.Their apathy doesn't undermine my hope because I know that people can shift overnight. People have a basic need to contribute and be effective. Belief in powerlessness can block that drive, but the belief that there is "nothing I can do" can disappear in an instant and completely change the dynamics."

"Most have internalized the immobilizing belief that solving our common problems is not something they can participate in...."

The schizoid defiance/apathy masks immense fear......................... :scared:

The whole post, all the suggestions are perfect. And can work. And you point out that any interested folks can do this (thanks for the links)

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

The brainwashing is working. Perception management has people "even on DU" saying what they're SUPPOSED to say, giving in exactly as they're groomed to, to those limp self-fulfilling prophecies. Don't Worry Be Happy You Already Know How It Will Turn Out. IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

Today the SF Chronicle had the Gates story not on the front page but at the top of an A sub-section (Nation and World). Over a beaming photo of a well-nourished happy shiny Gates, this bold headline across the top of the page:

"Candid Gates Gives Lawmakers Hope"

:evilfrown:

The Chronicle Washington Bureau provided a lengthy article with his background: CIA, Iraq Study Group, university and ZERO mention of Gates' Iran/Contra infamy.

The second paragraph began "Remarkably straightforward........" and the third quoted Carl Levin: "said Gates brought a 'welcome breath of honest, candid realism......'"

"Remarkably straightforward..." "welcome breath of honest, candid realism......'" except of course FOR ALL THE QUESTIONS HE WASN'T ASKED (and oh-- by the way-- he wasn't sworn in to testify under oath).

On the inside page, the article continued under a repeat of the soothing "move along nothing to see here folks" line "CANDID GATES GIVES PANEL HOPE." A sidebar "Robert Gates' finances reports that he serves on the board of a defense contractor, NACCO, holds up to $250,000 in stock with NACCO and if confirmed would "step away from any Defense Department matters involving NACCO for at least a year."

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

So I like your real world, face to face, "reality based community" concept of activism, cutting through the "dysfunctional patterns of thought and rationalizations," empowering people and encouraging them to not drink the pablum they're spoon fed every day through the corporate euphemedia.

Encouraging them to quit believing ahead of time that it's a "slam dunk," a "done deal" and stop playing right into the hands of the perpetrators.

[pat_k]

48. Hey, Let's see some more Kicks 'n Recs for this !! (nt)

[conscious evolution]

55. Is it possible they

are setting up for war crimes charges?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

63. We're In The Mess We're In Because Of Democrats? No, I Don't Think So.

We're in the mess we're in because of greedy, power-hungry, no respect for human life, deceitful, dishonest, shameless republicans.

[Name removed]

64. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[omega minimo]

72. refusal of previous Congress Democrats from demanding accountability from previous Republican admin

"We are in the messes we're in due to the refusal of previous Congress Democrats from demanding accountability from previous Republican administrations, including Ronald "Iran/Contra" Reagan's."

[Perky]

80. Because they are stuck with Rumsfeld otherwise

[omega minimo]

81. Why is there only one choice? Why Gates?