An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right
Water Water Everywhere
After some telling radio silence, Bush administration defenders have finally given a defense of Alberto Gonzales and Andrew Card’s “friendly” hospital visit to John Ashcroft. First tries are always weak.
But I’m sure, given enough time, they’ll come up with something vaguely plausible. Just like they’ve done with the Attorney Purge.
27 Responses to “Water Water Everywhere”
The attorney general issue demonstrates how disingenuous the Democrats have been when claiming that they wanted to exercise oversight over the government. The performance or retention of Alberto Gonzales does not affected one America and will not affect Americans in the future. The immigration bill will affect all of us for decades.
The Democratic leadership in the house and Senate will probably spend much more time on scoring political points with hearings on the attorney general rather than holding hearings on immigration. Every committee and subcommittee in both houses should be having hearings on the immigration bill since it will affect all aspects of America to include taxes, commerce, education, health, the environment, etc. Yet all I see are the Democratic leadership trying to get as far away from the issue as possible.
Once again, the leadership in Washington is totally lacking. I guess when you live in an excusive neighborhood, your children go to exclusive private schools and they work in industries that are not affected by immigration, that the leadership just cannot care about the impact of everyone else.
I totally disagree with you about the attorney scandal. If the Justice system is politicized, a president can choose to use the Attorney General to go after his political enemies. The attorneys that were removed all came from key swing states, where the administration wanted to either prove Democratic corruption right before the election (which is itself illegal) or prosecute Democratic voter fraud right after the election in the hopes of reversing the results. Voter suppression charges, naturally, were a very low priority.
Now the USA’s have to be second-guessing themselves when pursuing these kinds of cases. If they press too hard in a Republican corruption case or not hard enough in a Democratic corruption case, they can be replaced.
AR-
You forgot to mention how much worse Clinton was.
kritter,
Do you arms every get tired from carrying water for the Democratic Party? The firing of a few political appointees who serve at the pleasure of the president versus 12 million or more individuals who are in this country illegally and whose very prescence are causing internal migrations of native born Americas.
Do you really think that Congress should spend more time on Republican scandals than on the future on everyone in the U.S?
SD- I think they can do both- and its more than just a few firings. There was bipartisan support for the immigration bill-so why are you directing your anger only at the Democrats? Do you know how many congressional investigations were being conducted in the 90′s? The Democrats have run far fewer investigations and issued far fewer subpoenas than the GOP did back then. Everything else they have tried to pass has faced Republican obstruction.
Certainly, in a nation composed almost entirely of immigrants and the children of immigrants, immigration policy deserves close attention.
None the less, the possibility that the Bush administration has used its power to perpetuate petty party aims over those of the public at large is an issue that potentially affects all arms of the government.
Certainly potential corruption of the Department of Justice is a matter that can impact, not just one particular issue, but a basic tenet of our civilization: the rule of law.
SD,
I think it’s a bit misleading to suggest that Congress, as a body, is focused solely on these hearings. They’re conducted by the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is composed of 19 Senators. Additionally, the House Committee on the Judiciary is also looking into the situation, and that committee is composed of 40 members. Taken as a whole (100 Senators and 435 Representatives in the House), this is a mere fraction of Congress.
Additionally, if you check either Committee’s web site, you’ll see that their calendars are actually full of meetings on other issues – not all their time is spent investigating the AG issue. In fact, I see the House Judiciary subcommittee on Immigration is, in fact, meeting today to discuss Immigration reform. An issue apparently near and dear to your heart.
It’s kind of silly to suggest that Congress is only able to handle one item of business at any given time. Committees and subcommittees meet all the time, and on varied topics. For instance, I’m fairly certain that the house committee on Education and Labor hasn’t met to discuss Alberto Gonzales…Rest assured, Congress is able to discuss immigration AND the AG issue without losing track of one or the other…
kritter,
The Democrats are the ones that run Congress. That is why the immigration bill is going to be debated for one day before the Memorail Day weekend and without committee hearings. The Democrats really do not care about oversight. They care about scoring political points. They get everything they want with the immigration bill (millions of future Democratic voters and a massive expansion of the government) but they get no political points. thus , no hearings and no oversight.
Kang, maintaining the borders of a country and deciding who is a citizen and who is not is a function of law. Of course, both politicalparties have abdicated their duties in those areas. If the Democrats really care about oversight, they would have the head of DHS and ICE in front of committees and asking hard questions about the new bill and whether it could ever be enforced and what problems it creates. I have seen none of that.
Causing internal migrations! Say it ain’t so! Like my feudal European ancestors, I had planned to never travel more than 20 miles from my birthplace all my life. But thanks to immigration, I’ve been forced to leave my comfortable confines in Maryland, and attend college all the way out in Minnesota! I may have to attend grad school someplace even further! And Lord knows where my first job will be. All this….migration–the mere thought of it gives me a migration. And it’s all the fault of immigration–those 12 million dastardly fellows who have the temerity to want to work for a living and be treating like human beings. Buying into the American dream–don’t they know Ellis Island closed down decades ago? Honestly. You’d think they were people.
I’m not going to even respond to this whole “serves at the pleasure of the President” nonsense, because its hacktastic claptrap, for one, and for two I’m awaiting the complaint (as mentioned in the post) that Archibald Cox “served at the pleasure of the President.” Respect our intelligence a little less, why don’t you.
SD- they have tried to pass numerous other bills, as you very well know on the war, on the minimum wage, on the environment, which have been blocked by the GOP. The President wants the immigration bill- and it was sponsored by John McCain. Last I heard, neither of them are Democrats. Its a bipartisan effort.
david,
The NY Times had an article about internal migrations inside the U.S. In the last three years, over 100,000 whites have left California because there is no future for them there. Even in your own Maryland, the number of middle class whites is going down because they have no future.
Look at the citizens at Farmer’s Branch Texas who have high crime and lousy schools due to the massive numbers of Hispanic immigrants.
Most whites are not as rich as your family and cannot afford to escape the effects of unlimited immigration nor do they have the large extended families that is required to comment with them on housing and jobs. So what are they suppose to do?
*sniff* poor Whitey. Latinos always keeping him down. Of course, Whites have significantly higher crime rates than immigrant Latinos. Of course, “White flight” is a well-documented phenomenom, and it occurs not because there are “no opportunities” for Whites in their old homes, but because they just can’t stand living in diverse communities (which is what California is becoming). And of course, Maryland (and California) both have booming economies that offer opportunities for people (White, Black, Latino, Asian, whomever) of all classes a fair shot at the American dream.
My pity, as you might suspect, is limited. Not only do people of all races move rather frequently in America (and I’m not convinced its a bad thing), but I’d have to smoke some bad granola to feel sorry for White people terrified at the prospect of having neighbors of different races. Get over it.
David,
You grew up in a county without virtually no blue collar whites. You grew up in a culture where menial work is left to blacks, hispanics, and immigrants. So I guess your opinion in understandable. Whites are suppose to be white collar, educated, and wealthy.
And you have picked a career field that is the least affected by immigration. Whites are not moving into Maryland but are moving out because the economic and lifestyle opprotunities are better in Georgia, Tennesse, and North Carolina instead of in Maryland. And no, the economy is not booming and depends on government spending instead of the private sector.
Whether it came from the NY Times or not, I really think it is a mistake to assert that 100,000 whites have left CA because there is no future here for them. First of all, where are the statistics to back that claim up? Second, I happen to live in Southern California, and while people are, in fact, leaving, it isn’t because they can’t find a job as a dishwasher, strawberry picker, or gardener.
Many people I know of have left southern CA because they could sell their house here for a tremendous amount of money, and essentially move out-of-state and pay cash for a home in a place like Texas or Arizona. The lure of living mortgage free is awfully strong, and giving up the CA climate is an easy choice for some. Others, I’m sure, have left – but more likely it is because they evaluated the cost of living here (where the MEDIAN price of a home can be over $600,000) and determined that it will never be possible for them to reasonably buy a home without taking out a 50 year mortgage, or having both parents work 1 or more jobs.
But I’d really be interested in seeing statistics that show that white flight is caused because white people are convinced they have no future in CA – due to illegal immigration. I highly doubt the accuracy of that statement.
Jwiedner,
I agree. And despite requests, SD never seems to be able to find a link to this story.
Any luck yet SD?
David,
Are you saying 3/5ths of the populace are racist “whiteys?”
“Fifty-six percent (56%) of American adults favor an enforcement-only approach to immigration reform. Only 29% are opposed.
However, support falls sharply when “a path to citizenship†for illegal aliens already in the United States is added to the mix. Just 42% support the more “comprehensive†approach while 44% are opposed. This proposal was similar to a “grand bargain†announced by Senator Arlen Specter earlier in the week. ” (Rasmussen, 5/12/07)
http://www.rasmussenreports.com
If you will look at
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/17/us/17census.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print
You will see in the story, “New Demographic Racial Gap Emerges” is that whites are leaving the Northwest and the west coast. Even the number of whites living in metropolitian DC is going down because they are being pushed out by Hispanic immigrants.
There are 2 groups backing this amnesty crap. The one world Lexus liberals, and the pro-corporate/religious fundamentalist conservatives.
Left out in the cold are the largest group of all, the working class american. I am in that group, and my voice is being totally ignored by both sides of which crafted this piece of garbage parading as an immigration bill.
2 years ago I got “insourced” along with 5-7 other legal citizens at the landscaping company I worked for (sorry I guess that makes me unimportant to those who earn more apparently). I was unknowingly training my own replacement for 2 weeks before I got the axe. I knew the guy was here illegally, as he didn’t even know what a green card was (asked him) and couldn’t speak more than 2-3 words of English. After 2 weeks I was called into the bosses office (with his head supervisor outside in another room as I think he thought I’d freak out…but didn’t) and was informed I was being let go (right to work state so he didn’t even need an excuse). This same scenario was repeated several times I was informed of in the follwing weeks untill the only legal citizens were supervisors by that point. The INS was informed, but gave the lame excuse that it wasn’t within their duties to do anything about it, which is total crap of course. I spent many long months searching for more work in the field and heard the same thing was happening in house building, brick laying, and any other fields of the type. People were being replaced by workers willing to do the same jobs they did for years for half the pay (under the table in almost all cases). So for both sides of the guilded clubs they are part of, yes it does harm the citizens of this country directly, and your asses as well when you have to pay the state, and fed tax increases that are eventually going to have to happen to make up for this practice that has been going on for years now.
But don;t worry they haven’t made it into the tech fields, or buisness rackets….yet. And when they do, or your job gets outsourced I will give you a hearty get bent when your ass cries about it suckers, because I will remember this well…..David.
Steve: It really isn’t that inconceivable to me that a majority of White Americans might be racist. After all, for the bulk of our nation’s history, the majority of White Americans have been, well, racist. If you’re telling me we’ve bucked the trend, the burden of proof is on you, not me.
SD: You power-tagged that NYT article. It says nothing about Whites being “pushed out.” And there’s no reason to think that they are. It’s not like California or Maryland have sluggish economies. Both my parents are employed private sector. Most of the public sector folks I know are in the medical field (either local hospitals or researchers at NIH). And I can’t imagine that other states don’t envy our standard of living. So, if we’re cynical, the reason Whites are leaving is classic White flight. If we’re optimistic, it’s because they can use sky-high real estate values to move someplace nice at a far cheaper price. Either way, it’s not like the immigrants are doing anything wrong. Either way, I don’t see any catastrophe (or benefit–I just don’t think its a big deal) if less Whites are living in a given location. In fact, I’d like for my hometown to have a bit more diversity present–demographic dispersion is a positive for me. And finally, given that much of the increased Latino population are quite legitimate US citizens, they have every right to enjoy as much of the American Pie as they can handle.
Pyst: 1) It sounds like the big problem here is that you live in a right-to-work state. 2) I’ve argued before that legalizing immigrants and then enforcing wage and other workplace laws would take away much of the immigrant competitive advantage. Employers like illegal immigrants because they’re (for obvious reasons) afraid to report violations of wage and safety laws to the authority. That logic doesn’t work for legal immigrants or for citizens. Legalize their status, and then you can compete on fair grounds.
And finally, to all y’all, this culture of White victimization has to stop. Seriously, people, take some personal responsibility. Stop blaming society or “Latty” for keeping you down. If you’re not able to compete in the American economy, it’s clearly because you’re not working hard enough [/sarcasm].
SD & Pyst: Join a union.
LMAO Holly damn funny, they don’t have unions for what I was doing, and unions are dying off anyways.
And don’t give me that white victimization bullshit David, I’m partially native american which makes me partially the same thing as the people flooding into my state. Maybe different tribes, but bloodlines aren’t very far off.
And a good part of the reason employers like illegal labour so much is they are here, and the governement doesn’t give a damn.
Take your whiney one world BS and check Mexico’s illegal alien laws then compare. I think you are barking at the wrong country about being “fair” to those poor immigrants. Always someone that hasn’t felt a damn bit of hardship from anything to gloss over things, you make me sick with your untouched behind preaching anything about this to me.
David – why limit it to White Americans? I would say the majority of ALL people are racist against at least one other group. It is, unfortunately but realistically, the natural state of mankind. Fear of ‘others’.
Of course, there is no reason to otherize people of different “races”, and in fact the construction of race in its current form is of relatively recent vintage.
Also, I’d say there is little-to-no proof that across most of American history, Blacks were racist towards Whites. I’d surmise that they had relatively hostile attitudes towards Whites, but that’s quite understandable and legitimate. Jews presumably felt hostilities to Nazis, but that’s not bigotry. Slaves feeling hostility to their slaveowners, or men and women suffering under Jim Crow feeling hostility towards their oppressors is quite fair and not akin to the White racism towards Blacks that effectively has defined the majority of our country’s existence.
David – know any metropolitan area police? If so, ask about race relations between Black and Hispanics, or Hispanics and Asians, etc.
And we are talking about today (after all, this is in reference to a recent poll). I am no apologist for White racism, but to sweep aside even the possibility that Whites are not the only people who can be racists is intellectually dishonest. And your comments do move awfully close to complete apologist territory for Blacks.
And please cite to me the source of your contention that ‘otherness by race’ is a recent invention? Heck, there were discussions going on this board recently because of the movie 300. Is it you view that the Persians and Greeks didn’t have an attitude and fear of each other based on ‘otherness’?
David, if an individual black person is in a position to hold power over an individual white person and chooses to use that power in a discriminatory way, is that “racism” by your standard? Or is it excused by the legacy of other white people who had previously used power to discriminate against other black people?
Otherization is an ancient phenomona, otherization along the grounds we call race dates, at most, back to the 18th century. Alain Leroy Locke, “Race Contacts and Interracial Relations: Lectures on the Theory and Practice of Race,” (1916) discusses this, but the wikipedia article on “race” also notes the development of the idea of “race.” There have always been fears of “others”, but who is “like me” and who is “different” varies wildly across history (including contemporary history–up until recently, the Irish were considered to be a non-White people. See Noel Ignatiev, “How the Irish Became White” (1996)). There is nothing static about the boundaries of the groups we construct. Certainly, Africans were not always seen to be scary others by Europeans–as the Roman proconsul cried, “Semper novi quid ex Africa!” and he was delighted. And I’m skeptical that Persian/Greek fear/otherness was considered to be “race-based”.
I’m perfectly willing to concede racial tensions including racism between different minority groups (for theoretical issues with minority-minority racism, see Mari J. Matsuda, “Public Response to Racist Speech: Considering the Victim’s Story.” Michigan Law Review, Vol. 87, No. 8, 2320-2381. Aug., 1989. esp. 2363-64). And to take Jason’s example, I believe that it is possible for an empowered Black to be racist towards a disempowered White (I’ve made that view public, too), though I think that the example must be contextualized more.
But the latter is a rare case (which is important in of itself–the degree to which I’m called upon to condemn anti-White racism is far, far out of proportion to the amount that it is present or the harm that it is caused. My allies in the anti-racism movement have chided me for taking my eyes of the ball by talking about anti-White racism–they think that it’s just a distracting tactic used to divert attention from ending the far more serious and pernicious majority-on-minority racism. I’ve argued back that things aren’t zero-sum and that I gain credibility when I condemn racism in all forms that can be used to buttress my arguments on majority-on-minority racism–but my experience over the past few years has badly shaken that hypothesis), and the former is not what we’re talking about. We’re talking about whether White people have a unique history of racism towards minorities that isn’t replicated against them.
There is a different burden set on how Whites behave towards minorities and how suspicious we are that their actions are based off of feelings of racial superiority. To use a crime analogy, Blacks are by and large innocent (perhaps a few misdeamanors here and there) of racism against Whites, while Whites are out on parole for the umpteenth time on mass homicide charges. At this point in our history, when the subject is Black/White relations, the burden is on White people to show they’re not acting in a racist manner (see generally Alan Freeman, Legitimizing Racial Discrimination Through Antidiscrimination Law, 62 MINN. L. REV. 1049 (1978)).
Hispanic isn’t a race.