A tale of two Monicas

"What is it about George W. Bush that makes you want to serve him?"

This is one of the offensive and illegal questions that former Justice Department employee Monica Goodling asked job applicants before she made the decision to hire or not hire them.

There are others, according to the just released investigation by the Justice Department's Office of the Inspector General and Office of Professional Responsibility titled "An Investigation of Allegations of Politicized Hiring by Monica Goodling and Other Staff in the Office of the Attorney General."

In addition to discussing the applicants' views of gay marriage and abortion, Goodling asked:

"Why are you a Republican?"

"Tell us about your political philosophy. There are different groups of conservatives, by way of example: Social Conservative, Fiscal Conservative, Law & Order Republican."

"Aside from the President, give us an example of someone currently or recently in public service who you admire."

It is, of course illegal to politicize the Justice Department and to hire employees based on political philosophy, but the first question of Monica Goodling not only show that she violated the law, it shows she is a moronic sycophant, a Republican Monica Lewinsky (how interesting that they share the same name), ready to serve the president and demanding that anyone she hires serve him as well.

The first part of the question: "What is it about George W. Bush" implies that the job applicant is only there to be a toady of the president, that he or she only applied for the job because he or she is as enthralled, enchanted, and infatuated by the president as she is. Isn't it possible that someone wants the job because they want the experience, they believe in justice and the Constitutution, or that it is a step to something grander? Why must it be something about George W. Bush that has brought them to apply for a job? Because Monica Goodling has stars in her eyes, hero worships this inadequate man and thinks that must be what everyone else thinks?

The second part of the question "that makes you want to serve him" also smacks of hero worship. People don't work at the Justice Department to "serve the president." These were not, I believe, presidential appointments where one "seves at the pleasure of the president." They were career department positions, which should have nothing to do with one's political affiliation or even loyalty to any single president. As career appointees they would serve under many presidents, of both parties, which is why politics should never enter into their hiring.

Career employees serve at the Justice Department in order to preserve the Constitution and carry out its laws to the best of their ability. This nation, as is often said, is a nation of laws, not of men, and nowhere is this a more important principle than in the Justice Department, where those laws are enforced.

The fact that someone who worked for George W. Bush could be as sycophantic, as empty-headed and ignorant, as this woman is simply another reflection of the man she "serves." The fact that she would "serve him" by breaking the law so casually, so willingly, only shows us one more example of how much damage to the Constitution and to the rule of law this administration has done.

Monica Goodling is worse than another young woman, with the same first name, who used to fawn over a president. Monica Goodling is even more contemptible than Monica Lewinsky. At least Bill Clinton was smart enough not to give her the task of hiring anyone. And at least she didn't subvert the Constitution.

Amending the Constitution for God

Huckabee supposedly said last night at a campaign event in Michigan that the Constitution should be amended to ban both abortion and gay marriage to keep it in line with God.

Said Huck: "And that's what we need to do, is to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to change God's standards."

I didn't know it was an either-or, as in either we have to change the Constitution to get in line with what some people think are God's laws, or we have to change God's laws. What a bunch of ridiculous nonsense.

God's laws are perfectly fine the way they are, though there remains some disgreement about what they are. For example, while many people think abortion violates the law that thou shalt not kill, many of these same people think war does not.

Nevertheless, there is no reason that the Constitution must be in line with God's laws, whatever they really are. The Constitution is a secular document, not a religious document. I suspect Huck has never read it and is one of the millions of dolts in this country who mistakenly think God or the commandments are invoked in the Constitution.

If he did say this, Huckabee's candidacy has to be crushed. Bush with his coded language and fake religiosity was bad enough - this guy is certifiable. Amending the Constitution for religious reasons is one of the most dangerous things I can think of.

Good riddance 2007!

As the dreadful year 2007 is consigned to history, I can't help but think of all we have lost.

First are all the vibrant, young human beings who will never again take a breath: 899 military men and women who died in Iraq; 32 students and teachers at Virginia Tech; 13 drivers on a bridge in Minneapolis; 14 Californians in the wildfires of October; and a charismatic female leader in Pakistan.

These are just a few among many others who died as a result of war, genocide, poverty, AIDS, cancer, inadequate health care, inner city gun violence, drug wars and automobile accidents. We lost many beloved people in 2007, as we do every year, but many of these deaths were completely senseless and premature, the result of terrible governmental policies or crazed fanatics.

We also lost a lot of financial security in 2007. Millions lost jobs to mysterious corporate policies like "downsizing" and "outsourcing," and, because of greed that led to the mortgage crisis, millions more lost their homes. It is estimated that by the time the mortgage crisis is resolved, $1.2 trillion in property values will be lost. In the California wildfires of 2007, 1500 families lost their homes and the insured value is estimated at $1.6 billion.

With enormous implications for global warming, the Greenland ice sheet was recorded to have lost 10% more ice in 2007 than it did in its previous record year. The amount of ice lost is equivalent to two times all the ice in the Alps.

The biggest loss in 2007, however, was the utter and complete loss of trust and faith in the conservative republican government of the United States, led by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. Of course, this isn't new to 2007, merely a continuation of what began with the election of 2000 and the utter disregard for the Constitution by the Supreme Court, and continuing ever since then with the countless abuses of the Constitution by the Bush administration.

From the Patriot Act to the suspension of Habeas Corpus, from unlawful detainment of citizens to the torture and extraordinary rendition of non-citizens, from illegal eavesdropping to illegal "sneak and peek," from violations of the Geneva Conventions to illegal wars, from manipulated intelligence to refusal to honor Congressional subpoenas, from absolute secrecy surrounding White House activities to deleted emails and destroyed videotapes, from hundreds of signing statements to the unitary executive theory, from the illegal outing of a CIA agent to the commuted sentence of one of the guilty, from no-bid contracts for Cheney associates to work in Iraqi cities to broken promises regarding the rebuilding of an American city, this administration is responsible for the single most important thing we have lost this year and over the past seven years: trust and faith in our government.

And along with that loss, we have suffered the loss of many of our liberties guaranteed by the Constitution, and indeed we are on the verge of losing the Constitution itself.

In an editorial today, the New York Times summarized it well:

Out of panic and ideology, President Bush squandered America’s position of moral and political leadership, swept aside international institutions and treaties, sullied America’s global image, and trampled on the constitutional pillars that have supported our democracy through the most terrifying and challenging times. These policies have fed the world’s anger and alienation and have not made any of us safer.

In the years since 9/11, we have seen American soldiers abuse, sexually humiliate, torment and murder prisoners in Afghanistan and Iraq. A few have been punished, but their leaders have never been called to account. We have seen mercenaries gun down Iraqi civilians with no fear of prosecution. We have seen the president, sworn to defend the Constitution, turn his powers on his own citizens, authorizing the intelligence agencies to spy on Americans, wiretapping phones and intercepting international e-mail messages without a warrant.

We have read accounts of how the government’s top lawyers huddled in secret after the attacks in New York and Washington and plotted ways to circumvent the Geneva Conventions — and both American and international law — to hold anyone the president chose indefinitely without charges or judicial review.

Those same lawyers then twisted other laws beyond recognition to allow Mr. Bush to turn intelligence agents into torturers, to force doctors to abdicate their professional oaths and responsibilities to prepare prisoners for abuse, and then to monitor the torment to make sure it didn’t go just a bit too
far and actually kill them.

The White House used the fear of terrorism and the sense of national unity to ram laws through Congress that gave law-enforcement agencies far more power than they truly needed to respond to the threat — and at the same time fulfilled the imperial fantasies of Vice President Dick Cheney and others determined to use the tragedy of 9/11 to arrogate as much power as they could.

In the year 2007, the president and vice president have continued their abuses of the Constitution, and deprived the people of the United States of their rights, liberties, and reputation with the rest of the world.

We have a chance this year to overturn the nightmare of the past seven years. We have a chance to finally put in power someone who will restore the Constitution and truly represent the people of the United States of America.

This election is the most important in half a century.

We shouldn't elect someone because they oppose gay marriage, or go to the "right" church, or even because they believe in God. We must elect someone because they believe in the Constitution.

We shouldn't elect someone because they promise to protect our borders from Mexicans and Central Americans, but because they will protect the ideals and the liberties for which our forefathers fought so valiantly.

We shouldn't elect someone just because they scream "9/11" or promise to be the toughest guy on the planet, but because they know how to work with other countries and are more interested in peace than in war.

We shouldn't elect someone because they promise to lower taxes but because they promise to use tax money wisely.

We shouldn't elect someone who makes us afraid. Rather we must elect someone who promotes courage and hope.

In 2008, we will joyfully witness the end of the reign of George W. Bush and the criminal gang he brought to Washington.

In 2008, we have the opportunity to elect a wise and ethical leader who will restore our democracy and our Constitution.

So I'm not sad to see 2007 go. I'm looking forward to 2008.

Here's to a New Year, a new leader, and new hope.