Restitutor Orbis

Last night, 60 Minutes aired an interview with Barack Obama, which gave the president an opportunity to fire back at Dick Cheney. It is brilliant. And it's about time. Bush's "war on terror" has not made the US safer, and it has provided a recruitment tool for Al Qaeda:



Obama says we must remain true to our traditions, and I agree. If we destroy our country to save our country, what have we fought for? What have we saved?

Some good news has come in this morning (I'm getting spoiled): Eric Holder was sworn in Tuesday as U.S. attorney general, becoming the first African-American to lead the Department of Justice on a permanent basis. The Senate had voted 75-21 on Monday to confirm Obama's nomination of Holder, 58, who has previously served as a federal prosecutor, deputy attorney general during the Clinton administration, and briefly, as acting attorney general in early 2001. The man is eminently qualified and he is foursquare against torture. MSNBC reports that "Holder's chief supporter, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said the confirmation was a fulfillment of Martin Luther King's dream that everyone would be judged by the content of their character."

There was some opposition, of course: Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Kentucky, mentioned Holder's insufficient support for gun rights, for example, and all 21 of the "no" votes were, unsurprisingly, Republicans. They're afraid Holder will hold Bush and his cronies accountable to the law. We can't have that in the land of the free and the home of the brave. Even the Romans prosecuted corrupt consuls when their term of office ended but for Republicans, the violation of the law has become the rule of law. CNN reports

Bond, the ranking Republican on the Intelligence Committee, raised concerns that the administration would seek to prosecute U.S. officials involved in using what the Bush administration called "alternative" interrogation techniques, measures that critics said involved the torture of prisoners in U.S. custody.

Holder unambiguously called the use of waterboarding against suspected terrorists a form of torture that violated the Geneva Conventions, but he has said that prosecuting intelligence officials who followed Justice Department guidance would be "difficult."

Bond said that while Holder's answer focused on U.S. officials who were following the administration's legal advice, "I told him, and I believe he understood, that trying to prosecute these lawyers or political leaders would generate a political firestorm."

Yes, we can't have a political firestorm can we? Better to just violate the Constitution and International Law and then pretend it never happened. What are these people thinking, seriously? If we do nothing now, another president will come along eventually who is even worse than Bush, and we'll end up with a dictatorship.

Holder promises to act in a nonpartisan manner, which will be refreshing after Alberto Gonzales' Reinhard Heydrich impersonation. According to AP,

"I am determined to ensure that this shall be a new day for the dedicated career professionals that I am so honored to call my colleagues," Holder told various employees and dignitaries gathered for the ceremony. He said he was committed to remaking the department "into what it once was and what is always should be."

On another front, beset by questions about "back taxes and potential conflicts of interest," Tom Daschle has withdrawn his nomination to be Obama's Health and Human Services secretary.

"Now we must move forward," Obama said in a written statement accepting Daschle's surprise request to be removed from consideration. A day earlier, Obama had said he "absolutely" stood by Daschle.

Daschle, the former Senate Democratic leader and a strong backer of Obama's presidential bid, said he would have been unable to operate "with the full faith of Congress and the American people."

"I am not that leader, and will not be a distraction" to Obama's agenda, he said.

Also in the news today, Gallup reports that "Of seven actions Barack Obama has taken during the early days of his presidency, five are supported by large majorities of Americans."

MSNBC offers a good start to the day:

The relatively violence-free Iraqi elections mean “substantial” numbers of U.S. troops will be able to return home from Iraq within a year, President Barack Obama told NBC News on Sunday.

“We are in a position to start putting more responsibility on the Iraqis, and that’s good news for not only the troops in the field but also their families, who are carrying an enormous burden,” Obama said in an interview with Matt Lauer, anchor of NBC’s TODAY show.

The article goes on to say that "Obama gave no details, but he said his administration would make its intentions on troop levels in Iraq and Afghanistan known in coming days."
This is good news to Americans. Obviously, some of these soldiers will be going to Afghanistan instead, but over all we will still see a significant reduction in the numbers of US soldiers deployed overseas. The Iraq war has been ghastly in terms of lives and dollars and we'll be well out of there. Then there is the loss of Iraq as a recruiting ground for Al Qaeda. Once we are no longer there to stir up tensions, they will find fewer people willing to sign on for their global war. Contrary to Bush rhetoric, we will be safer from terrorism when we're out of Iraq.

On another front, Obama is being accused (rather gently, I think) of having broke his first campaign promise.

Really, every complaint I've heard about Obama so far, since he has taken office, is either petty or an outright lie. And when you consider what Bush and his cronies did to this country, it's really outrageous that anyone is complaining at all. I'm not used to seeing so much information made public. It's night and day compared to the Bush Whitehouse, which hid every damn thing it could lay its hands on.

Apropos of lies, Harpers ran a piece today condemning some tomfoolery, as they call it, in the Sunday Los Angeles Times.

n a breathless piece of reporting in the Sunday Los Angeles Times, we are told that Barack Obama “left intact” a “controversial counter-terrorism tool” called renditions. Moreover, the Times states, quoting unnamed “current and former U.S. intelligence figures,” Obama may actually be planning to expand the program. The report notes the existence of a European Parliament report condemning the practice, but states “the Obama Administration appears to have determined that the rendition program was one component of the Bush Administration’s war on terrorism that it could not afford to discard.”

Rendition, also known as "extraordinary rendition" and "irregular rendition" (I do love euphemisms) are, according to the definition on Wikipedia, "terms used to describe the apprehension and extrajudicial transfer of a person from one state to another,[1] and the term "torture by proxy" is used by some critics to describe situations in which the US has transferred suspected terrorists to countries known to employ harsh interrogation techniques that may rise to the level of torture."
In the words of Harpers, "The Los Angeles Times just got punked."

In the course of the last week we’ve seen a steady stream of efforts designed to show that Obama is continuing the counterterrorism programs that he previously labeled as abusive and promised to shut down. These stories are regularly sourced to unnamed current or former CIA officials and have largely run in right-wing media outlets. However, now we see that even the Los Angeles Times can be taken for a ride.

Of course, the Right Wingnuts are having a field day with all this. They're so eager to find anything wrong with Obama that they're clutching at straws, making up lies when one cannot be found. I've haven't seen such an outpouring of hatred and racism since the 60s when I was a little boy. It's frightening to see there is still so much of it.

It is the fourth day of the new Era. I can easily understand ancient dating systems that were reckoned according to the reign of a king. That is how clear the demarcation between January 19th and January 20th seems. Where nothing was possible before, everything seems possible now, and no critics have so far managed to rain on my parade. People are too quick to judge. No matter what Obama does, some will say he acted rashly, and others will say he acted too slowly. But it's the nature of people to think they know better (including me) as well as to be impatient. And can you blame them after the eight years we have endured?

There are concerns among some that Obama's executive orders of yesterday left too much wiggle room - too many things on the table that should not be on the table. For example, the army manual will be examined to see if anything needs to be changed. The ACLU fears methods might be added to the 19 methods of approved interrogation that could lead to further abuses and violation of international law. Apparently even the "isolation" of a prisoner is against international law and that is one of the 19 methods approved of by the army manual. An army general stated that it's much ado about nothing, that the military is constantly re-assessing its tactics and methods to improve them. I suppose this is one of those times we will have to wait and see what happens. Like the ACLU, I'm hopeful. We've been a rogue nation long enough and I do not believe Obama intends to further the alienation begun under Bush.

The big news today is the signing by Obama of another executive order, this one revoking the so-called "Mexico City policy" - a rule which prohibits U.S. money from going to international family planning groups that promote abortion or provide information, counseling or referrals about abortion services - first put in place by President Reagan in 1984, then canceled by President Clinton in January of '93 as one of his first acts in office, only to be reinstated by President George W. Bush in 2001 as one of his first acts. Obviously, the conservatives are unhappy over this but CNN tells us that "The group Population Action International praised Obama's move, saying in a statement that it will "save women's lives around the world."

Something is being made of the fact that Obama chose today - one day after the anniversary of Roe vs. Wade - to sign this order. Other presidents have chosen that day to act, and it has been suggested that Obama deliberately held off one day to show so-called "pro-life" groups that he is not looking for a fight. I doubt Obama is that naive. He will get a fight either way. The abortion opponents (I simply can't grant them their self-styled title of "pro-life") offer no quarter and no compromise. It seems to have been the only real platform of the Republican base in this past election, and it is certain to resurface in 2012.

Also arguing against this interpretation are Obama's own words yesterday. According to CNN Obama said that Roe v. Wade

"not only protects women's health and reproductive freedom, but stands for a broader principle: that government should not intrude on our most private family matters."

On the international front, there are complaints that Obama is continuing the policies of his predecessor with reports Friday (unconfirmed by US officials) of U.S. drones striking militant targets in Pakistan and killing 17 people. Here is the interview former Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf gave to CNN's Wolf Blitzer:

Perhaps there will be more news by tomorrow that will affirm or reject these claims.

All in all, though less newsworthy, this fourth day of Obama's presidency has been quite satisfying.