When outgoing Attorney General John Ashcroft called Supreme Court rulings restricting presidential powers to deny due process rights “dangerous and constitutionally questionable,” and “profoundly disturbing,” he outlined the problem with the way this administration uses language perfectly. Ashcroft, as our highest level law-enforcement officer, was sworn to protect the people and the Constitution, not the president and his megalomaniacal grabs for power. Yet his rhetoric, in characteristic Orwellian fashion, implies the opposite of what it actually advocates.
Ashcroft’s statement revealed a complete ignorance of the Constitution and its purposes and, in particular, of the role of the court to safeguard civil liberties. A Knight Ridder story of the time quotes the ACLU’s Anthony Romero as saying that Ashcroft’s comments showed “clear disdain for the rule of law.” And he is absolutely right. Maybe the trite phrase “freedom isn’t free” is more correct than is at first clear: it has to fought for every step of the way – from threats both foreign and domestic. It’s most disturbing when that threat comes from the very top.
“Freedom isn’t free” has long bothered the philosophy student in me, not just for its obvious jingoism, but for the implied fallacious equivocation upon which it plays. We use “free” in a couple of different ways, both of which are in use in this phrase. The first, meaning political freedom, and the second, meaning “no cost” are pretty clearly different in this particular construction, so no actual fallacy takes place. But that’s not exactly how we think about it, especially in the case of that second “free.”
“Free” as in “no cost” could mean literal price. We have to pay to secure our liberty. And that much is true: we do have to pay for basic infrastructure, police, courts, defense, and, vital for a functioning democracy, education. But the word isn’t being used that way. It is being used almost exclusively to mean the cost in lives in military combat.
Arguably, that hasn’t actually been the case since World War II. The Cold War, idealistically anyway, pitted two theories of liberty against one another. And while the Soviet Union never lived up to its “workers’ paradise” ideals, the Soviets really thought early on that they were fomenting popular revolution. All of the other wars we’ve fought since WWII have been about somebody else’s freedom, and even then we as often as not were not on the side of freedom at all, as in Nicaragua. Kuwait is free from Saddam’s army, but ask Kuwaiti women if they feel free. Afghanistan is free from the Taliban, but ask them if they’re free from warlordism. Iraq may be free from the Ba’athists, but ask if they have actual self-determination. The current terrorist threat is also not really about freedom, despite Bush’s rhetoric. Al Qeada couldn’t care less about our freedom, about whether or not we watch Baywatch or wear bellyshirts or screw our secretaries on the terraces of our office parks. They only care about our policies toward the Arab world – and whether or not those involve Baywatch or bellyshirts or office debauchery.
Another way to formulate all this is to ask if there’s anything inherently pricey about freedom. If our revered national documents are any indication, the answer is a resounding “no.” The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution assume that our basic rights are “endowed by our Creator,” a part of being born homo sapiens. The price we pay for being free under that formulation is merely being human. From this point of view, it is those most directly in charge of securing and protecting the institutional safeguards of freedom that we must police most diligently. If this last election is any indication, not just Ashcroft et al. have failed to do this, but the American people themselves.
So Secretary of State Colin Powell has decided to resign. Good for him. The trouble is he completely lost all his credibility by not resigning a long time ago.
Powell’s problem has always been that he’s a very principled man, but loyalty to his Commander-in-Chief is his most basic principle. That’s too bad, because he was sworn to serve and protect the country, not the president.
Powell should have resigned when the “enemy combatants” went to Guantanamo, with the understanding that the president, by allowing that to happen, was in violation of the Geneva Conventions and was putting U.S. troops at risk of being treated the same way.
If not then, Powell should have resigned when the Bush administration asked him to lie in front of the U.N. about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. Though he claims now that the intelligence he used for that hearing was the best available, his military experience and the word of the international inspectors should have told him otherwise. The Powell we get in Bob Woodward’s Plan of Attack knew better, understood that Iraq was not going to be the cakewalk that Bush and Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz envisioned, knew that if we broke it, we’d own it. Instead of allowing his resignation to send a message to an administration deaf to his reasoned warnings, instead of trumpeting it before the World and the American people, Powell decided instead to shill for his Commander-in-Chief.
We’re still paying the price for Powell’s misplaced loyalties. So I think it’s good that Powell is resigning. It’s just far too late to matter much now.
From Gold-Star Correspondent Hezekiah Allen Taylor:
“Experts note that the casual use of antibiotics for everything including the flu and the common cold – against which antibiotics are useless – is fueling the rise of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Even antibacterial soaps containing triclosan have come under fire for creating an environment where triclosan resistant bacteria can flourish.”
I grew up on a farm where you got dirty and covered in every type of bacteria/nastiness. We didn’t go to the doctor, and I’ve only had antibiotics twice in my lifetime (after the only two surgeries I needed). I attribute my general good health to this one fact: I do NOT let the doctor prescribe me ANY antibiotics or pills unless absolutely necessary (and they try a LOT, especially with my migraines). The body needs to be able to fight off infection/disease/pain itself, and throwing it out of whack with drugs only makes it harder to come back in the future.
If we keep on this drugged-up, “pill-poppin’ for health” track, you’re going to see a major plague from drug-resistant diseases in the very near future. Why doctors aren’t letting cold and flu patients get over this stuff themselves is just beyond me. Most of you will NOT die. My advice for Western civilization: Suck it up a little. Yeesh.
And I haven’t even delved into what excess doctor trips/prescriptions and hospital visits do to increase your insurance premiums. You may not go to the doctor unless you have to, but I guarantee you can name someone who goes if they have a freakin’ hangnail. And then gets put on antibiotics for possible infection.
More on resistant bacteria:
href=”http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=235781&page=1 “>
from a Very Disappointed Special Correspondent T.S. deHaviland
Now that we’re done talking our progressive friends down off ledges, let’s take a look at what the next four years might have in store.
1. Expect Roe v. Wade to be challenged.
It looks inevitable that W. will nominate at least one new Supreme Court justice. If that’s Rehnquist, we won’t see much change. But if he has a shot at John Paul Stevens’ seat, given that he has vowed to nominate someone like Justice Thomas or Scalia, the delicate 5-4 split for choice will surely become a 5-4 split against it. The only thing standing in the way are the 45 Democratic senators. That they would have the political will or political capital to block a Bush “strict constructionist” nominee is doubtful.
2. Expect a health care plan. Expect it not to work.
If the Republican ties to the insurance lobby and his existing prescription drug plan are any indication, a future Bush health care scheme would simply pump more money into a broken system instead of fixing the system by keeping costs down. His calls for tort reform could account for a .5% decrease in the cost of health care according to the government’s own bean counters. With costs rising 20% a year above the rate of inflation (which is itself between 1% and 3% annually) it’s difficult to see how that would help. And if you think Medical Savings Accounts are going to fix the problem, ask yourself this: where is the money to put in those accounts going to come from? That’s right, your pocket. Furthermore, MSAs still fail to address the problem of rising costs.
3. Expect more degradation of civil liberties.
The current Supreme Court was nice enough to deny people seeking redress of grievance under the Americans with Disabilities Act the right to sue the states. A more conservative Supreme Court would probably just rubber stamp whatever fascistic legislation Bush wants to set up. The current administration has lobbied hard for essentially unchecked power in times of war (like right now), which our current Supreme Court has denied. A Bush-packed court might not be so kind. With congress stacked in favor of it, The USA Patriot Act shows no signs of sunsetting. American conservatives, Bush included, run on a platform of upholding and defending freedom, yet the only freedom they have consistently upheld is the 2nd Amendment. The theory behind this is that with the right to bear arms We the People can defend our other rights from individuals and government alike. This is simply stupid. If you try to contest your eroding due process rights by taking your deer rifle to congress, you’ll simply get arrested. You may have a lot of guns, but as Ruby Ridge and Waco have shown, the government has more.
4. Expect a further erosion of international relations.
Bush’s particular brand of religious fundamentalism won’t allow him to see both sides of the Israel/Palestine problem, which is the major issue in the Arab world. Combine that with the mess in Iraq and Bush’s saber-rattling against Iran and Syria, and you’ve got the perfect storm for blowing up new levels of Islamic militantism. Bush has already managed to alienate much of the world even with the moderate Colin Powell at the helm at the State Department. If Powell gets the axe in favor of a more Bush-friendly Secretary of State, Bush’s “fuck the world” foreign policy could run unchecked.
5. Expect the gap between the rich and poor to widen.
Bush’s commitment to “tax reform” in his second term is just a euphemism for a flat tax. A flat tax would hit the poor and middle classes hard while lowering the tax burden on the very wealthy even more. The top 2% of income earners already control 90% of all wealth in the U.S. The Republicans’ history of corporate welfare (remember the $138 billion in tax cuts corporations got a few months ago?) and the Bush administration’s on-record support for offshoring American jobs indicate that wages and benefits, much less job security, are not likely to rise substantially in the next four years.
6. Expect high gas prices.
There are two things at work here. One is steadily increasing demand. Bush’s pro-production energy policy won’t help that here at home, and China’s booming economy won’t help that abroad. With both Bush and Cheney having strong ties to the oil industry, chances are any attempt to reign in prices will be scuttled quickly. Higher prices = more profits in a tight market, and you don’t really expect Bush and Cheney to forget where their bread is buttered, do you? The Bush family history is to go back into oil after serving in office, as George H.W. Bush’s post-presidency career path has indicated. What W. does now is just padding his resume for when he gets out of office in 2008. How can a fellow survive on a measly $200,000 a year government pension anyway?
7. Expect more environmental damage.
Remember those hydrogen-powered cars we were supposed to have by 2005? I’ve looked at both Car and Driver and Road and Track and haven’t seen them anywhere in the lists of new models. Bush’s pro-big business and pro-production energy policy comes into play here too. The idea that environmental legislation destroys jobs, while specious to begin with, is gospel in the White House. Bush’s solution is to let the corporate foxes guard the ecological hen house. Such policies in Texas while he was governor made his home state one of the most polluted in the nation. Would you like your planet baked or fried?
All of this stuff has been in the news over and over again for the past few years. It should be common knowledge. But if we look at it all laid out like this, the path becomes quite clear: it’s a long, oil-slickened slide to the bottom. Let’s hope we can get find a handhold or two along the way.