Wednesday, October 31, 2007

Bellying Up to the Political Bar

RUSSERT THE WEDGE SNIFFER. Everybody thought that the main theme of last night's Democratic debate was the attacks on Hillary Clinton. But nobody noticed that Tim Russert was really looking for wedge issues that would be difficult for any Democrat to answer. Russert's question about illegal immigrants getting driver's licenses was a classic. The Republicans could care less about governing and wouldn't give second thought to having tens of thousands of unlicensed illegal immigrants on the road. Only concerned about "looking tough," Republican candidates would reject any most non-law enforcement approaches to immigrant issues out of hand. For the Democrats, the symbolic issues are more complicated because of their identification with Hispanic voters. Likewise, they would want to "do something" about the governance issues related to the illegal immigrants who are already here. By posing the driver's license issue, Russert put the Democrats in a bind and he did that all night.

HILLARY SUPPORTER FOR ATTACKING HILLARY. Don't get me wrong. I'm glad Russert was sniffing out the wedge issues and I'm all for the attacks on Hillary by Obama and Edwards. Face it, Hillary needs the work. She needs to be able to respond to attacks in ways that defend her position, segue back to her main campaign themes, and take some shots at Rudy Giuliani. Last night, she didn't get those things done in the Philadelphia debate. She needs to get better before facing off with the Republican nominee and the only way she's going to get better is if she's forced to respond to attacks from her opponent. I support Hillary's candidacy, but it would help her campaign enormously if she was attacked more often and more forcefully by her opponents.

THE DEMS STILL DON'T GET IT WITH MUKASEY. There are times when one has to think that the Democratic leadership is not that sharp. The Democrats think the question over whether Mukasey is going to acknowledge that waterboarding is torture is primarily a question of enforcing the law. Is Mukasey going to enforce the law or is he going to accept all of the Bush administration's vacuous reasoning for avoiding the law. But there are other questions for the Bush administration, especially the question of legal jeopardy. If Mukasey acknowledges the criminality of waterboarding, everybody involved in the Bush administration's "enhanced interrogation techniques" from 9-12 2001 onward is vulnerable to prosecution. That includes the interrogators, their supervisors, anybody who consulted with them, and policy-makers all the way up the line and George Bush, Dick Cheney, and Alberto Gonzales in particular. Mukasey seems to recognize the issue.
MICHAEL MUKASEY, U.S. Attorney General-Designate: ... I'm sorry, I can't discuss, and I think it would be irresponsible of me to discuss particular techniques with which I am not familiar, when there are people who are using coercive techniques and who are being authorized to use coercive techniques, and for me to say something that is going to put their careers or freedom at risk simply because I want to be congenial. I don't think it would be responsible of me to do that.

But it seems that the Democrats don't see it. What the Dems need to do is "belly up to the bar" and get Mukasey to recognize that being the next Attorney General means investigating the Bush administration and the American military and intelligence apparatus for violations of the whole range of American and international laws forbidding torture. If Mukasey doesn't recognize his responsibility here, he shouldn't be confirmed.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

It appears that todd will not respond to the plagiarism that was posted in a comment and then for all the world to see out front on the 10/23 post? have you contacted this guy ric? i hope its not one of your students posting on here. what gets me the most is how he said in another comment how call him out on it was stupid and wrong and ad hominum and coutler-esque. should shameless plagiarists be embarrassed as publicly as they used someone else's words? it may prevent later infractions. thoughts ric?

Ric Caric said...

I have contacted Todd but did not come to a satisfactory resolution. Todd is one of my students from Morehead State and I'm obviously not feeling like the smartest guy in the world for top posting his comments on RSI. Nevertheless, I've decided to leave the situation where it stands with Todd's post coupled with your comments and my acknowledgement of their validity. It would be best to resolve the situation with Todd and I want to leave things where they stand while waiting for that opportunity.

Anonymous said...

You mean to say you didn't notice the plagiarism a long time ago with all of his cutting and pasting?

Ric Caric said...

Cutting and pasting isn't plagiarism if someone is not trying to fool people into thinking the writing is their own.

Anonymous said...

That is fine by me. I see that this guy has disappeared from the comments, which may be an indication that you have told him to be gone. I feel sorry for you, since it is not your fault that he was trying to pass that off as his own work and thoughts. He was trying to pull on over on you as well as the rest of us. I am glad to see you acknowledge his dishonesty.
(BTW - I am the "anonymous" at the top of these comments and not the second poster.)

Ric Caric said...

Having thought more about your comments concerning Todd's post, I decided to incorporate your valid criticism and my acknowledgement of that into Todd's original post. That way, anybody who reads the post will also read your comments.