The Republican Party is currently in transition to something
that resounds with more voters without betrayal of its core principals. Might I
humbly suggest actually supporting the troops instead of a corrupt D.C. Defense
Department elite?
How about taking a stand against the top-down judicial
activism that has made it perfectly legal to torture whistleblowers even if the
crime involved is treason for profit against our soldiers?
One of the stories that got buried in the aftermath of the recent election is how the 7th Circuit Court recently ruled that Donald Rumsfeld cannot be sued for torturing whistleblowers. In the case, Donald Vance and Nathan Ertel were “Americans working for a private security firm in Iraq. When Vance became suspicious that his employer was selling weapons to groups hostile to the United States, he went to the FBI. Vance and Ertel were then fingered as arms dealers. Military personnel arrested them in 2006 and held them for several weeks.” They not only detained them, they tortured them. This happened to citizens of a country that has a Constitution which clearly states that cruel and unusual punishment is forbidden. This is outrageous.
One of the stories that got buried in the aftermath of the recent election is how the 7th Circuit Court recently ruled that Donald Rumsfeld cannot be sued for torturing whistleblowers. In the case, Donald Vance and Nathan Ertel were “Americans working for a private security firm in Iraq. When Vance became suspicious that his employer was selling weapons to groups hostile to the United States, he went to the FBI. Vance and Ertel were then fingered as arms dealers. Military personnel arrested them in 2006 and held them for several weeks.” They not only detained them, they tortured them. This happened to citizens of a country that has a Constitution which clearly states that cruel and unusual punishment is forbidden. This is outrageous.
The Department of Defense, or indeed the Federal Governmentat large (at least under the 7th Circuit jusidiction), now has the
legal right to inflict cruel and unusual punishment on US citizens for any
reason no matter how frivolous and petulant with no fear of a civil lawsuit.
The first thing of note in this case is that a very serious
accusation-that the employer of Vance and Ertel was possibly selling weapons to
the people our troops were fighting- was somehow completely ignored. When the
Iraqi Occupation was in full force, we kept hearing “Support the Troops”
repeated ad infinitum as if questioning the wisdom of Bush and Rumsfeld was
tantamount to treason. What does this say of a Defense department leadership
when it would rather torture whistleblowers than get to the bottom of an
accusation that a contractor is selling weapons to the enemy? How exactly is
that “Supporting the Troops” and protesting the incompetence and corruption
that endangers those same troops “un-American”?
I remember calling into one of the farcical AM radio shows
early on in the invasion, when the host openly dared anyone who was protesting
to call in. I explained that the difference between what he was
advocating-‘Supporting the Troops” as a metaphor for the population taking
orders from on high in military matters without question and what I was
doing-protesting out of moral obligation was the difference between a subject
and a citizen.
Here in the United States of America we are not subjects. We
are citizens. With a citizen, if he has an honest disagreement with a policy he
has a moral obligation to say exactly that as loud as he can. A subject is to
be nothing more than a cheerleader for all policies whether they are moral or
not! Participation is implied when we use the term citizen to describe
ourselves! A citizen who is a whistleblower deserves our respect and
protection, not torture!
And on the subject of whistleblowers, the man who just won
another term in the White House, Barry Obama, directly broke a campaign promise
to protect whistleblowers after making a very similar observation in 2008. He
has been part of a “bipartisannormalization and legitimization of a national-surveillance state”.
If Republicans are
looking for new ideas to reinvent themselves- there one sits! The Republicans
can safely kick these advocates of a police state at the NSA whom Obama has
allied himself with to the curb and be completely consistent with an ideology
which fears excess of government more than anything.
But let’s return to the accusation by Yale professor Jack Balkin, that this is not a Democratic “normalization and legitimization of a national-surveillance state” but a “bipartisan normalization and legitimization of a national-surveillance state”. If that’s the case how cant he Republican party legitimately make a wedge issue out of this when it has been a part of this?
Frank Easterbrook, a Reagan appointee, wrote for the majority opinion. David Hamilton, an Obama appointee, wrote for the dissent. If you look at the composition of the 7th Circuit Court it is by far and large Republican appointed.
And this is just one case regarding the normalization and legitimization of a police state. There are others. The suspension of Habeaus Corpus. The FBI declaring that they have the ability to suspend the law. The list can go on for quite a long time.
But let’s return to the accusation by Yale professor Jack Balkin, that this is not a Democratic “normalization and legitimization of a national-surveillance state” but a “bipartisan normalization and legitimization of a national-surveillance state”. If that’s the case how cant he Republican party legitimately make a wedge issue out of this when it has been a part of this?
Frank Easterbrook, a Reagan appointee, wrote for the majority opinion. David Hamilton, an Obama appointee, wrote for the dissent. If you look at the composition of the 7th Circuit Court it is by far and large Republican appointed.
And this is just one case regarding the normalization and legitimization of a police state. There are others. The suspension of Habeaus Corpus. The FBI declaring that they have the ability to suspend the law. The list can go on for quite a long time.
Republican friends,
whose tears are drying from the Romney loss, cheer up. A Democratic President
means that the Democrats have to defend these monstrous policies or drop them.
The Republican party has nothing to lose and everything to gain by being true
to its small government ideology and making Democrats drop these policies!
Someone has to be
thrown to the wolves in the coming reinvention of the Republican Party. I’m
already getting the feeling that Joe Arpio, Jan Brewer, and every other
anti-latino bigot that has tried to get rid of the Probable Cause requirement
for law enforcement may just become casualties. Making enemies of the Nortenos
(Hispanic population on both sides of the border some of whom settled before
there was a USA) was an error and the Republican Party seems to be wising up to
what an error that was.
Please for the good
of our nation, can we add Easterbrook and every other top down Republican
elitist in the judiciary who are currently aiding and abetting Barry Obama in
his normalization and legitimization of a national-surveillance state? It
really would be no big loss.
Seriously, any judge who voted for Rumsfeld and against the American troops in this matter does not deserve Republican solidarity. If they’ll protect Donald Rumsfeld, they’ll protect Obama.
As much as I loathe Jesse Ventura and his conspiracy theory nonsense, I do have to take one quote he said as relevant in this matter. Governor Ventura was a 3rd party Governor and a pro wrestler. He said that the Democratic and Republican politicians were exactly like the good guy bad guy wrestlers in how they feign hostility in public and behind the scenes are laughing friends. He said that inwrestling the characters that one plays in front of the screen can be nothinglike what they are in private life. We see that so often in politics! We certainly saw it with the Romney 47% video. It is part of the reasons Republicans lose credibility when they talk of small government. They are party to creation of a police state.
If bipartisanship is only going to bring us a police state, then bipartisanship is worthless. C’mon, Republicans, if you really want to retake your credibility, forget the so-called “fiscal cliff”! Actually throw Arpio, Rumsfeld, Brewer, and these judicial weasels to the side and take a REAL stand for small government!
Seriously, any judge who voted for Rumsfeld and against the American troops in this matter does not deserve Republican solidarity. If they’ll protect Donald Rumsfeld, they’ll protect Obama.
As much as I loathe Jesse Ventura and his conspiracy theory nonsense, I do have to take one quote he said as relevant in this matter. Governor Ventura was a 3rd party Governor and a pro wrestler. He said that the Democratic and Republican politicians were exactly like the good guy bad guy wrestlers in how they feign hostility in public and behind the scenes are laughing friends. He said that inwrestling the characters that one plays in front of the screen can be nothinglike what they are in private life. We see that so often in politics! We certainly saw it with the Romney 47% video. It is part of the reasons Republicans lose credibility when they talk of small government. They are party to creation of a police state.
If bipartisanship is only going to bring us a police state, then bipartisanship is worthless. C’mon, Republicans, if you really want to retake your credibility, forget the so-called “fiscal cliff”! Actually throw Arpio, Rumsfeld, Brewer, and these judicial weasels to the side and take a REAL stand for small government!
