...The Bush administration has fused Orwell with Kafka in the same way someone fused the cry of an infant with that of a cat from the Meow Mix television commercial. The upshot is Gonzales, ticketed maybe for the Supreme Court because he winked at torture and yessed the president. He's Kafka's man, Orwell's boy and Bush's pussycat. Know him for his roar...
I'm probably going to be stuck on all manner of Alberto Gonzales this week. In my previous thoughts on the topic, I opined that "the acceptance of torture and indefinite imprisonment without due process is not one of our (or America's) values". The posting kicked off a spirited discussion in the comments, some of it revolving around the concept of Gonzales' term as Attorney General (presupposing his confirmation) as being a stepping stone to a SCOTUS appointment in the future.
One point of view expressed is that progressives should lay off of Gonzales during the confirmation hearings, and let Cohen's scenario play out. The grounds for this argument is that Gonzales, by virtue of his ethnic / economic background, is potentially a liberal in conservative clothing. I respectfully decline to agree. Or, perhaps more pointedly, I've seen nothing in Gonzales' resume or actions while Whitehouse Counsel that would indicate any predisposition to protecting constitutionally guarenteed liberties, including the Bill of Rights.
When are people going to "get it" (progressives, neocons, and all viewpoints inbetween)? The crew that's in charge not only plans to continue a rewrite of history by staging their own realities, they are absolutely committed to a fundamental forced overhaul of the way America does business, both domestically and abroad. They're not content to let organic societal evolution occur as the world around us changes -- they want to be what's described in the business world as "change agents".
Change agents. Let this Michael Hammer / Harvard Business School terminology roll off of the back of your throat and migrate up to your cerebral cortex. Gonzales has already proven himself as a change agent in interpreting the rules of civilized treatment of detainees in the war on terra. He's totally changed the rules that were ratified in Geneva by the entire civilized planet in 1949. I don't need to be hit with a big stick to realize that this guy does not represent, and can not possibly represent, my viewpoints of government or the legal aspects of governance (two different animals).
Richard Cohen's editorial pretty much sums up my feeling on the Gonzales nomination. And as I noted in comments to my previous posting on the Senate confirmation hearings, I can not and will not recommend that anyone of the progressive persuasion sit by idly in the hope that Gonzales would have liberal leanings if his future is, indeed, on the Supreme Court.
I have no false illusions that any protestation of the Gonzales nomination is going to cause it to be derailed. But I'm not going to celebrate it or coat it with a veneer of hope. I'm going to speak out and recommend against it, both here and to the Senators from my state.
Because with "potential friends" like Al Gonzales, who needs enemies?
