Bush Getting All Sneaky About FOIA Law

foia.jpgRemember George Bush’s penchant for signing statements — you know, those little “I signed the bill but now I’m saying it don’t apply to me” post facto add-ons to pieces of legislation. Well, he’s up to his old tricks again, this time seeking to eliminate part of the Freedom of Information Act legislation through an act of legerdemain.

But Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-VT., caught him:

In a paragraph improbably located in a portion of President Bush’s fiscal 2009 budget dealing with the Commerce Department, the White House calls for shifting from the National Archives to the Justice Department funds for an FOIA oversight office created under the recently enacted law.

The Office of Government Information Services would house an ombudsman charged with reviewing agency policies, speeding up responses and mediating disputes involving FOIA.

Creation of the ombudsman is one of a series of steps required under the FOIA bill, signed Dec. 31 by President Bush.

But the plan to move the office has caused Leahy and groups advocating government transparency to charge the White House publicly agreed to the measure, but then privately moved to scuttle it in a step comparable to the president’s use of signing statements suggesting he may not be bound by portions of laws he approves.

The Justice Department has long been criticized for its handling of FOIA requests. Basically, the DoJ is quick to deny and slow to fulfill such requests. Add to that the atmosphere of secrecy the administration has created, going so far as to not share the list of visitors Bush has entertained in the Oval Office. And don’t get me started about the millions of “missing” e-mails.

You do have to give the Bushies credit for coming up with a pretty clever, if sinister, tactic to get the Congress to repeal its own law by inserting a little phrase into the omnibus spending bill. And we know how closely those elected officials read important documents, right?

The language in Bush’s budget says the Justice Department will carry out “the responsibilities of the office” created in the bill. The language also says a portion of the FOIA bill dealing with the new office “is hereby repealed.”

Leahy called issuance of the language itself an effort to repeal part of FOIA law. But a Judiciary Committee aide said the provision would only take effect if Congress passed the budget with the section included.

Thank goodness Pat Leahy actually reads that stuff. Even so, the government’s transparency under George Bush is still, as we say in the South, clear as mud.

For a funny suggestion to the commander in thief, check this out.

Quote du Jour

My granddad, viewing earth’s worn cogs,
Said things were going to the dogs;
His granddad in his house of logs
Said things were going to the dogs;
His granddad in the Flemish bogs
Said things were going to the dogs;
His granddad in his old skin togs
Said things were going to the dogs;
There’s one thing that I have to state:
The dogs have had a good long wait.

— Perennial Journeys

The New Bush Legacy — Sticking Us in Iraq

iraq_multiple_bases.jpgA trillion-dollar federal deficit isn’t enough. A slime trail of obfuscation and secrecy is not enough. A record of trampling on our constitutional rights with secret wiretaps and illegal Internet monitoring is not enough. Now George Bush wants to cement his legacy by tying us to Iraq indefinitely by means of a “status of issue agreement.”

The agreement that Bush wants states that the United States will defend Iraq whenever and wherever — forever. There’s no end date, no out point. There has never been a clearer expression of Bush’s long-term goal in Iraq than the status of issue agreement, which ties us to the occupation indefinitely.

As far back as 2004 the army was building 14 “permanent” bases in Iraq. But somehow, Bush’s overall plan to maintain bases in Iraq long-term to use as launching pads for aggression against Iran or Syria, to protect oil supplies and quell insurgents continues to fly just under the media’s radar.

And the worst part of this status of issue agreement is that there are members of the Senate who say that Bush is within his rights as president to strike such an agreement without consulting Congress.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who sits on the Judiciary Committee, said she believes Bush probably does have the power to strike such a deal if he wants.

“He would have authority, I think,” said Feinstein. “Based on what I know, he would.”

Fortunately, there are some senators who are of the opinion that Bush would need the ratification of Congress for what is, in effect, a treaty:

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, had a one-word answer as to whether Bush had the legal authority he is claiming: “No.”

And Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.), who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told the administration in a letter that the proposed status of forces agreement obligates the United States to use force to protect Iraq’s security — the kind of commitment he says the Constitution requires Congress to bless.

“A commitment that the United States will act to assist Iraq, potentially through the use of our armed forces in the event of an attack on Iraq, could effectively commit the nation to engage in hostilities,” Biden wrote. “Such a commitment cannot be made by the executive branch alone under our Constitution.”

Tough talk, no doubt about it. But Congress has shown a marked inability or lack of will or just plain lack of intestinal fortitude when it comes to bucking this imperial presidency. Bush has ruled by proclamation, repetition and obfuscation for so long that he knows that all he has to do is repeat the same lies enough times and the citizens of the Benighted States of America will nod like the pod people we have become and let him get away with whatever atrocity du jour he proposes.

But we can’t allow him to tie us to Iraq indefinitely. That’s a legacy none of us can afford and one we shouldn’t have to even countenance.

In Desperation, Real Conservatives Seek to Open Up the GOP Campaign

Please join me in an all-out effort to keep Rush Limbaugh from voting in the 2008 election. But more on that later.

Our favorite right-wing nut job, Richard Viguerie, is up on his soapbox again. This time he’s calling on his fellow conservative Goldwater worshipers to call on the Republican Party to open up its convention next September in hopes that some party savior will materialize. Here’s Viguerie dreaming out loud:

The discombobulated state of the Republican presidential campaign means that it is still possible for someone to jump into the race. Such a candidate could serve as a kingmaker at the Republican convention in September, or even – yes, it’s possible – could become the party’s nominee.

Viguerie then goes on to critique the current batch of GOP candidates. Guess what? He finds that none of them is Ronald Reagan:

  • McCain has Reagan’s toughness, is a Vietnam War hero, supports a strong military, and opposes pork-barrel spending, but sides with liberals on immigration, freedom of speech, taxes, environmental extremism, and other important issues.
  • Huckabee is a Reagan-style populist and a conservative on social issues, but is sympathetic to Goreism, and he fought conservatives on taxes, spending, immigration, and other issues when he was governor.
  • Romney has adopted a mostly-Reaganite platform, but he is suspect because he converted to conservatism only after serving as governor, and, besides, many conservatives see him as a probable loser in November.
  • Ron Paul is the real straight-talker in the race, the one who stays truest to the libertarian beliefs that are, as Reagan said, “the heart of conservatism.” He is the one candidate who doesn’t confuse a strong defense with the failed policy of nation-building. But most conservatives want a powerful U.S. presence in world affairs and will never support Paul’s defense and foreign policy. In any event, Paul’s chance of getting elected, or even nominated, is infinitesimal.

But do you want to know how really bad it is? Viguerie lays it out like the voice of doom:

Even Rush Limbaugh has raised the possibility that he may not support the Republican nominee this year. The nomination of McCain or Huckabee, he said, would destroy the party as we know it.

Gasp! The Bloviator not support the GOP nominee? Man, things really do look bleak. Of course, they don’t look much brighter when Viguerie goes down his short list of possible party saviors: Former Virginia Gov. and Sen. George Allen, Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, Sen. Jim DeMint or Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina. That’s it? That’s the best you can do Richard?

Well, I think readers of Pensito Review could help out in Viguerie’s time of need by making some recommendations. Viguerie asks for them. He even provides an e-mail address to send them to: RAV@ConservativesBetrayed.com.

What about a Tom DeLay or Larry Craig? Not conservative enough? I hear David Duke’s out on the lecture circuit. But don’t let me tell you who to suggest. Let’s all e-mail Viguerie and do our part to keep Rush Limbaugh away from the polls.

Quote du Jour

All government, indeed every human benefit and enjoyment, every virtue and every prudent act, is founded on compromise and barter. Man acts from motives relative to his interests, and not on metaphysical speculations.

— Edmund Burke (1729-1797) British statesman, political writer

Will We Even Bother to Tune In to Bush’s Final SOTU Address?

miserable-failure.jpgI doubt it, and here’s why:

  • Less than 20 percent of us think the country is headed in the right direction.
  • President Bush’s approval rating is 31 percent, down three points from last month.
  • Four in 10 of us have “very negative” feelings toward the commander in chief, and about 70 percent predict that Bush will go down in history as a worse president than his most recent predecessors.
  • Only 29 percent of us approve of Bush’s handling of the economy, an all-time low for the president on that issue.
  • Only 27 percent give him a passing grade on foreign policy and only 28 percent gave him a passing grade on the Iraq war.

miserable1.jpg