Secretary Gates
I urge you to immediately ask for the resignation of Under Secretary of Defense Eric Edelman for his inappropriate communication to Senator Clinton in response to the exercise of appropriate oversight functions of the United States Senate. Specifically, I understand that he sent a response to Senator Clinton’s request for briefings on contingency planning for the withdrawal of U.S. Troops from Iraq that appeared to be a refusal to provide the requested information and in addition claimed that the very request “reinforce[s] enemy propaganda.”
Included among the many causes that I see for the troubles we face in Iraq, is a period during which Congress largely abdicated its oversight responsibility. Given this situation that has committed the nation to policies that have cost hundreds of thousands of casualties, millions of refugees, a trillion dollars of treasure, and a decidedly dissatisfied American public, I am frankly utterly disgusted that Under Secretary Edelman, acting on behalf of the Department of Defense, appears, now, to be arrogantly resisting appropriate oversight and engaging in what appears to be a campaign to impugn and intimidate a Senator for performing exactly the Constitutional oversight function that is fundamentally necessary to the effective functioning of my government.
I must conclude that Under Secretary Edelman is not serving the interests of the country and I urge you to immediately ask for his resignation.
Sunday, July 22, 2007
Thursday, July 19, 2007
BDS
Some commentators pejoratively refer to Bush Derangement Syndrome, an epithet which is most frequently used to marginalize resistance to this administrations policies. But the reactions that manifest as what is called BDS are based in large part for many simply on long experience with the utter incompetence and destructive record of the Bush administration.
When Bush was first elected I was put in the the position of comforting a crestfallen colleague of mine – incidentally, one of the most brilliant individuals I have ever known – with what I genuinely believed to be a reasonable case in defense of Bush: I told him that I agreed with him that the evidence was that Bush was probably not well qualified to be President and that he would probably be somewhat incompetent, but that the checks and balances in our system of government could adequately handle such a situation, indeed had in the past, and that the consequences, overall would be minimal. That is, I argued with him that, all in all, things wouldn’t turn out much different, no matter who was elected, that he should give the Bush administration a chance and that Bush’s election wasn’t a priori a disaster. I report this experience only to establish my bonafides as not having suffered from BDS, at least initially.
But now with a simply breathtaking record of incompetence, dishonesty, and partisan hackery I simply do not trust the Bush administration to do ANYTHING. I have worked in scientific laboratories where for the sake of safety and to protect delicate instrumentation the policy for visitors is “put your hands in your pockets and do NOT under any circumstances take them out.” THAT is the policy I want the current administration to follow. Their every act seems the apotheosis of farpotchket at best, like the moron who tweaks a mirror on an optical table that has taken six months to align. Act on a nuanced and delicate situation? Jeebus, I’d rather Bush perform my laproscopic gall bladder removal, and the evidence suggests a better chance of success!
I resent the marginalization of resistance to actions of this administration as Bush Derangement Syndrome: my resistance is based on an expectation from painful experience and on a desire to stanch the unremitting flow of disasters, and is well summed up by the sentiment: “…fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again."
When Bush was first elected I was put in the the position of comforting a crestfallen colleague of mine – incidentally, one of the most brilliant individuals I have ever known – with what I genuinely believed to be a reasonable case in defense of Bush: I told him that I agreed with him that the evidence was that Bush was probably not well qualified to be President and that he would probably be somewhat incompetent, but that the checks and balances in our system of government could adequately handle such a situation, indeed had in the past, and that the consequences, overall would be minimal. That is, I argued with him that, all in all, things wouldn’t turn out much different, no matter who was elected, that he should give the Bush administration a chance and that Bush’s election wasn’t a priori a disaster. I report this experience only to establish my bonafides as not having suffered from BDS, at least initially.
But now with a simply breathtaking record of incompetence, dishonesty, and partisan hackery I simply do not trust the Bush administration to do ANYTHING. I have worked in scientific laboratories where for the sake of safety and to protect delicate instrumentation the policy for visitors is “put your hands in your pockets and do NOT under any circumstances take them out.” THAT is the policy I want the current administration to follow. Their every act seems the apotheosis of farpotchket at best, like the moron who tweaks a mirror on an optical table that has taken six months to align. Act on a nuanced and delicate situation? Jeebus, I’d rather Bush perform my laproscopic gall bladder removal, and the evidence suggests a better chance of success!
I resent the marginalization of resistance to actions of this administration as Bush Derangement Syndrome: my resistance is based on an expectation from painful experience and on a desire to stanch the unremitting flow of disasters, and is well summed up by the sentiment: “…fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
