Andrew Sullivan: Betrayal

[Hissyspit]

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/10/betrayal-1.html

Betrayal

It's perhaps worth reminding some readers that my first response to reports of abuse and torture at Gitmo was to accuse the accusers of exaggeration or deliberate deception. I simply didn't believe America would do those things. I'd also endorsed Bush in 2000, believed it necessary to give the president the benefit of the doubt in wartime, and knew Rumsfeld as a friend. It struck me as a no-brainer that this stuff was being invented by the far-left or was part of al Qaeda propaganda. After all, they train captives to lie about this stuff. Bottom line: I trusted this president in a time of war to obey the rule of law that we were and are defending. And then I was forced to confront the evidence. He betrayed all of us. He lied. He authorized torture in secret, and then, when busted after Abu Ghraib, blamed it on low-level grunts. This was not a mistake. It was a betrayal.

Jack Balkin adds:

An essential component of the rule of law is transparency. The laws must be knowable, not only so that people can structure their behavior with fair warning, but also to prevent government officials from engaging in abuses of power. The Bush Administration has used the shibboleths of terrorism and national security to violate this basic principle.

The Administration said, "Trust us." And then this is what they did in secret.
Hilzoy nails it:

The techniques in question are repugnant. But in many ways, the administration's disregard for the law is worse. When your policies violate treaties you have signed and laws that are on the books, you are not supposed to come up with some clever way of explaining that appearances to the contrary, what you're doing is not illegal at all. You're supposed to stop doing it.

[neuvocat]

1. He works for the news media and he only gets it now???

[gateley]

3. He got it quite a while back, I think. nt

[gateley]

2. Hissyspit, we need to put you on salary. You're always finding and posting

the best things!

And this is a case in point. I really like Andrew Sullivan because I saw him rip apart Bush on Bill Maher a while back and his sense of betrayal and outrage was moving. I think those on the other side who step away, admit the truths and say it like it is are to be commended.

Thanks yet again.

[KT2000]

19. Agree!

and he is good to cats too!
Pay the man!

[UTUSN]

4. Another one of these come-latelies. One of the eternal questions:

How come all of us here, withOUT any special resources, no access to important inside informants, or profound intel resources-----KNEW from Day 1 what a p.o.s Shrub is and what a phony war the illegal Iraq Attack was, while all of these oh-so-smart-and-connected jerks could NOT find themselves out of Shrub's paper bag?!1


One of the other eternal questions: Why would ANY member of a minority--Hispanic, African American, Gay, women---EVER be a wingnut?!1

[trashcanistanista]

21. Amen.

I knew * would be a disaster before he was even appointed.

[Glorfindel]

5. Andrew Sullivan is a wretched, pathetic creature

He helped to get B*shit selected, and now HE feels betrayed? He should crawl back into the sewer whence he emerged. We'd all be better off. :puke: :puke:

[MH1]

7. Helped get B*shit Selected

not "elected."

[Glorfindel]

8. I stand corrected...you're exactly right & I shall edit my post

thank you! :blush:

[MH1]

9. ..

:thumbsup:

And, otherwise your post was just about right.

[Hieronymus]

17. I've been very disappointed in Sullivan as well.

[tularetom]

6. "...knew rumsfeld as a friend" Yeah sure.

And my guess is that Rumsfeld knew Sullivan as a useful idiot. As long as he was cranking out pro bush propaganda.

[shanti]

10. yeah, he was a tool for awhile

but after watching him on bill maher a few times, he's definitely changed his tune. he seems like an intelligent man, i wonder what took him so long? :shrug:

[keopeli]

14. arrogance, ego and pride. You have to think pretty highly of yourself to willingly drink thekoolaid

[Cha]

16. Yip, and looky where

rummy is now. I don't know but at least he's outta sight.

[upi402]

11. Of course. He's a Bush crime family member. Betrayal. Of course.

He's a Bush

[mmonk]

12. A recommend from me.

I can put up with Sullivan if he continues to expose the bush lies.

[illinoisprogressive]

13. I find Sullivan interesting. he is always evolving and soul searching

I don't agree with his search for the ideal of conservatism, though much I believe was influenced by Reagan and he is caught with his ideal of Reagan and the way the whole movement has devolved.
However, he is honest and he is willing to look at and accept new ideas and thinking. I don't find he is an ideolog so much as a former reagan supporter going through what many thinking conservatives have been going through the past several years.
It is interesting to see him evolve and grow

[Cha]

15. Trusted bush at his own Peril.

Yeah, we Lefties will make up shit about torture..NO, that's the fascist rightwing that makes up shite. Get your wings straight, Andrew.

[defendandprotect]

18. Any chance here that this is a rat leaving a sinking ship -- ????

Yeah, Andrew Sullivan may be this dumb -- may be this lacking in curiosity, critical thinking --

but, I'd say he's just looking to protect himself against a changing situation --

But -- I also go with dumb -- either way, he's an idiot and not worth my time.

[Hamlette]

20. the homophobia against Sullivan is distressing

here on DU. Others who used to be republicans but who now trash Bush are given a pass but Sullivan, who day in and day out for the last several years trashes Bush and the kool aid drinkers on the right is still trashed in the strongest (most disgusting) terms.

I gave up posting from Sully long ago because of the vitriol he is greeted with here. I'm glad someone else is brave enough.

Everyone should read him everyday. He often points out where the right is wrong. Helps to know they enemy.

[Marr]

22. What exactly were the methods revealed in this latest memo?

I'm curious because there's been plenty of evidence to support the accusation of torture for a long time-- but suddenly people seem to be taken aback by the notion that we've been torturing people or that- *gasp*- GW Bush would lie about it.

Does that memo admit to some previously unknown or even more offensive techniques? Why all the shock and awe?