Skip to main content

Probably criminal, not to be hyperbolic.

When you consider the breadth of the taint and degrading effect of the Bush administration on all aspects of the government, the kindest thing you can say is that they were blinded by ideology. I don't think it's too out of bounds to ask if the results of their governance is their ideology; to essentially wonder if they are following the Grover Norquist handbook to weaken the government, leave it powerless to regulate any market or industry effectively. As was asked after Katrina, you could ask about their manipulations of every aspect of the government, "Was it deliberate malevolence or just criminal incompetence?"

The War on Terror has become the war to create terrorists.
No Child Left Behind has left most children behind.
The cakewalk war that would never become another Vietnam, has the potential to be worse than Vietnam, especially in terms of its effect on the stability of the region.
Rumsfeld's plan to create a fast moving sleek military has left it broken.
The VA is overwhelmed and underfunded and sweeping PTSD cases under the carpet.
The economy is in shambles.
Oil company profits are higher than they've ever been.
The rich are much richer, the poor and middle class are poorer.
People who have made their careers working for the government have resigned or been fired in droves; from generals, to lawyers, to accountants it almost seems like a purge.

My head starts to swim, the list goes on and on. So I need to take a moment to step back and take a look at the larger picture. Six+ years after 9/11 we have a President who has taken on king-like power in the name of making us safer, better, and there's nothing left to show for it except the king-like power to declare an individual an "enemy", a massive domestic surveillance apparatus, 2 wars going badly, terrorists bombings across the world increasing yearly, agreements between the Pakistan government and al Qaeda providing safe haven, and Hezbollah receiving the right to veto decisions of the Lebanese government. In other words, all that power gathered in the hands of one person and we're less safe. So if they're not making us safer, what are they using that power for?

The next president faces a tremendous challenge beyond Iraq. This administration has changed rules within agencies, functions of agencies, replaced professional bureaucrats with political hacks, all while obscuring their trail by not recording their actions, altering the record, or destroying the record. If the next president is smart he will take office with the perspective that the Bush administration was deliberately malevolent and will work to undue every rule change, re-fund every agency, and find every political hack, otherwise the government will never function effectively again.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why Are We Expending So Much Energy on Something Barely Half of Black People Want?

Presidential contenders are being asked about their support for reparations. One could be forgiven for assuming that reparations has broad support within the Black community, it seems like an easy bet. But only slightly more than half of Black people support the idea. So why has the idea suddenly gained so much traction? Neither Yvette Carnell nor Antonio Moore, originators of #ADOS (American descendants of slaves) have the following to drive a topic supported by less than a quarter of Americans into the national conversation. I suspect that it has everything to do with Bernie Sanders, the obvious frontrunner since announcing, and the ongoing attempt to portray him as racially blind and unaware. When asked directly about his support of reparations in 2016, Sanders answered, "Its likelihood of getting through congress is nil. Second of all I think it would be very divisive." He then went on to explain how his policies would have a disproportionate positive effect on the Blac…

The Intersectional Swiftboat Waltz

This past week the Working Families Parties endorsed Elizabeth Warren in the democratic primary. It's a somewhat obscure thing, in terms of national politics. WFP is a nominally left party started in New York state. In New York rather than run their own candidates they endorse Democrats. The choice of the centrist Warren over Sanders isn't without precedent. They endorsed Joe Crowley over Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, and Andrew Cuomo over Zephyr Teachout. The entire affair is only relevant for what it suggests that we can expect from the rest of the primary.

When the endorsement was announced, members asked leadership to release the breakdown of votes, as they did in 2015 when the party endorsed Sanders. Leadership refused, saying something about preserving the integrity of the vote. What was obvious, where the 56 person leadership/advisory board had a vote equal to that of the 10,000+ membership, is that the leaders had heavily favored Warren while the members went to Sanders. I…

If You Love Your People, Set It Free (or How an Identitarian Came To Prefer Universal Policy Over Identity Politics)

This post is late because I was in LA last week, where I made a point of walking as much as possible to enjoy my audiobook. Although I still have 20/20 vision I have been slow to accept that aging has made it more difficult to read, making it feel increasingly like a chore. In fully embracing this I've finally started looking for audiobooks I might find engaging enough to not be constantly distracted. For my trip I chose Mehrsa Baradaran's The Color of Money, which looks at the persistence of the racial wealth gap in the US.  It was incredibly striking and depressing listening to The Color of Money while accidentally walking through encampments of the unhoused, watching new encampments sprout up in the short time that I was there. This is who we've always been. If you have any doubt, the history recounted in The Color of Money makes it clear that capitalism has always been about extracting wealth from Black people and keeping poor people poor. On checking into Twitter I wa…