Sue me. I think that his view on the Cheney Autonomy Doctrine almost sounds like work product from a law professor, and it adds another data point to the rightwing lunacy spectrum.
The rightwing lunacy spectrum, of course, objectively measures exactly how fucking insane this administration has to get before a supporter stops pretending not to notice the smell. Reynolds and Cap’n Ed apparently have no problem with torture, lying shamelessly to sell an unnecessary war, running said war into the ground through rank leadership failures, politicizing every corner of the DOJ or unrestricted surveillance of American citizens. But bogusly exempting themselves from document archiving procedures, that’s a bridge too far. Good to know.
Zifnab
Ah, God bless Renyolds. I almost wanted to take that article seriously, except he managed to write five short paragraphs and jam “Democrats did it too~!!!1!” into two of them.
It’s nice that he’s acknowledging the inherent irrationality in Cheney’s claim, but I suspect that stems more from a lack of GOP talking-points on the issue than from Renyolds’s inherent respect for seperation of powers and limited government.
I give him a month before he posts a retraction (assuming he doesn’t delete this post from his site and pretend he never wrote it).
“Four legs good, two legs ba– er… better!”
demimondian
I don’t think you get it, Tim. Reynolds compartmentalizes his life between advocacy and intellectualism. He takes a moment to look at the proposal as an intellectual curiosity, and, as such, finds it lacking. That’s because the advocacy issue has already been satisfied — he discards the objections to the VP’s claim of membership in the legislative branch first. (And incorrectly, btw — if there’s an interpretive issue, then the fact that the VP’s office is funded through the Executive branch already resolves it. Rahm Emmanuel’s threat to pull funding is effective precisely because it’s correct.)
Reynolds isn’t stupid, merely self-serving and functionally incompetent. In that regard, he’s the archetypical Bush Administration Professor — he won’t get a Medal of Freedom, but I hold our hope for him to be granted the “Hurricane Katrina Memorial (Beach) Chair in Law and Ethics.”
DonBoy
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/06/14/snow-bush-war/
Q: Are there any members of the Bush family or this administration in this war?
SNOW: Yeah, the President. The President is in the war every day.
Q: Come on, that isn’t my question –
SNOW: Well, no, if you ask any president who is a commander in chief –
Q: On the frontlines, where ever…
SNOW: The President.
[Admittedly, the question was not asked to gain information so much as to make a point, but still.]
DougJ
Well put.
ATS
yeah, one had to wonder when and where a boundary would be reached.
I see sofa cushion tag laws providing the next big battle. After all, we run up against sofa cushions very day as a constant reminder of threats to our freedoms.
ThymeZone
This would make a good logo for the Bush Administration in general. Clever, in a way, but not smart.
It explains so much about them. Resistance to science, for example, is appropriate when science is just seen as a kind of cleverness. In that context, one need only be a little more clever, and science goes away. Anything you don’t like just goes away. Oversight goes away. Opposition to the war in Iraq just goes away. Saddam Hussein just goes away. With the cleverness of torture, intelligence barriers just go away. With DOJ being employed as a squad of thugs to advance “voter fraud” as a way to keep away Dem voters, Dems go away! It’s all just a matter of being clever.
Leah
Yes, the spectrum of sanity is exceedingly narrow.
Please note, however, despite the attempt by both Reynolds and Capt. Ed to do something other than look the other way, their criticisms are purely about the mistaken PR approach of the administration in defending the notion that the President and his Vice can do just about anything.
Capt. Ed makes his carp specifically about Cheney’s argument being the wrong one because it sounds so crazy; why didn’t the President just amend the Presidential directive at will, to exempt anyone and any document? That the President could do that may be true, but any notion that there are ethical standards not spelled out in breakable laws, often because everyone assumes that failure to adhere to them will be politically impossible without being held to account, is absent from the arguments of even these “sane” rightwing commentators.
As for the Clinton did it too, argument, the entire Clinton administration was regularly pilloried for power over-reaches that usually turned out not to be real. Just try and imagine if Al Gore had ever made such a statement? And let’s not forget that one of the initial impeachment charges against Clinton was overuse of Presidential privilege, and many of those mentioned were ones in which Clinton went to court to get a ruling; his administration didn’t simply assume that the power was theirs for the taking. Amazing what a difference a unified theory makes in the minds of “conservatives.”
Leah
Yes, the spectrum of sanity is exceedingly narrow.
Please note, however, despite the attempt by both Reynolds and Capt. Ed to do something other than look the other way, their criticisms are purely about the mistaken PR approach of the administration in defending the notion that the President and his Vice can do just about anything.
Capt. Ed makes his carp specifically about Cheney’s argument being the wrong one because it will probably sound so crazy to your average American; why didn’t the President just amend the Presidential directive at will, to exempt anyone and any document? That the President could do that may be true, but any notion that there are ethical standards not spelled out in breakable laws, often because everyone assumes that failure to adhere to them will be politically impossible without being held to account, is absent from the arguments of even these “sane” rightwing commentators.
As for the “Clinton did it too argument,” the entire Clinton administration was regularly pilloried for power over-reaches that usually turned out not to be real. Just try and imagine if Al Gore had ever made such a statement? And let’s not forget that one of the initial impeachment charges against Clinton was overuse of Presidential privilege, and many of those mentioned were ones in which Clinton went to court to get a ruling; his administration didn’t simply assume that the power was theirs for the taking. Amazing what a difference a unified theory makes in the minds of “conservatives.” Let’s hope this “kerfluffle” will become an opportunity for more Americans to get the news that this administration is as imperial at home as it is abroad.
Leah
sorry about the double post, not sure what happened
DougJ
Here’s what happens now:
1. Conservatives like Bill Kristol start defending Cheney (this has already happened).
2. David Broder says the House should ignore the issue saying “legislate, not investigate”.
3. Rick Stengel goes on Meet the Press and says “this issue is really bad for Democrats.”
4. Right-wing blogosphere concludes “Clinton did it too”, reporters at the New York Times and Washington Post dutifully include in each of their pieces the fact that “Bush defenders point to the fact that Clinton once made a phone call from a pay phone, which some say was equally secretive.”
5. Michael Kinsley write that it’s no big deal, that it’s all justified by some obscure provision in the Articles of Confederation.
6. Ben Smith of the Politico discovers that Barack Obama once paid 13 bucks for a pastrami sandwich and charged it to his campaign.
7. Tim Russert interrupts his Nantucket vacation assembles a panel to answer the question: “Can we trust a man who paid 13 dollars for a pastrami sandwich to look out for working class people from South Buffalo?” Points out that Big Russ has never paid more than 8 dollars for a pastrami sandwich. David Brooks jokes that pretty soon Obama will be as fat as Al Gore. Are earth tones next? Much laughter ensues.
8. Paris Hilton tries to shoplift some shoes from Prada. Twenty four hours a day coverage on CNN for a week.
9. The story is completely forgotten save for the occasional Washington Post editorial about how pointless investigations have impeded Congress’s ability to get anything done.
ThymeZone
Several times a day, the site gets exceedingly slow to post, or osting crashes altogether. It’s one of the worst sites on the Tubes, in that regard.
When it goes into never-never land, and one has written a long and wonderful post, one begins to get worried and might hit the Submit button again, thinking that it didn’t work the first time.
It’s so bad that I often save my post into a notepad window before I post it, knowing that the odds aren’t that bad that the site will eat it.
Once or twice a day the thing will crash completely and BJ will just be offline for a few mins.
AFter a while you get used to this, and just drink more. That seems to fix the problem at my end.
ThymeZone
My favorite line in your fine post. This may be your best post ever. In fact, if I were you, I would stop posting at this point. Okay, just kidding.
Kinsey gets a pass, though … didn’t he have brain surgery last year?
ThymeZone
And, why would she be trying shoes at Pravda? Since when does Pravda sell shoes?
DougJ
Kinsey gets a pass, though … didn’t he have brain surgery last year?
He has Parkinson’s disease. I don’t think it affects his thinking.
DougJ
And, why would she be trying shoes at Pravda? Since when does Pravda sell shoes?
Is that a joke? Don’t they have a Prada store in Phoenix?
ThymeZone
Why would Pravda have a store in Phoenix?
Do they have one in your town which is named after Eddie Anderson?
Actually, Pravda has few stores. Mostly they sell through chains like Saks and Neiman-Marcus.
TAX ANALYST
“DougJ Says:
And, why would she be trying shoes at Pravda? Since when does Pravda sell shoes?
Is that a joke? Don’t they have a Prada store in Phoenix?”
2 Cent clarification: “Pravda” – I believe that was (or maybe still is) the Soviet news propaganda publication. “Prada” I believe this is a brand of rather expensive shoes. Maybe you guys already knew this and were just spoofing around, but just in case that’s NOT the case, well, I thought I’d try to clarify.
PS – DougJ, I agree with TZ about your 9-point post of 11:45am – superb.
ThymeZone
DougJ and I are always DEAD SERIOUS.
And yes, his earlier post was one for the archives.
mrmobi
Is it just me, or does David Broder look exactly like that blustery eagle from The Muppet Show?
I watched Press the Meat today. The panel of experts seemed to come to the conclusion that Bloomberg has an excellent chance because the country is so very, very tired of partisanship and wants a middle of the road candidate.
ThymeZone
I did too, and got the impression that the consenseus was that Bloomberg has his work cut out for him … except for Broder, who insisted that Bloomberg can win.
Broder definitely looked a little too much Teri Schiavo for me. He just seemed to be watching the balloon go back and forth … and he wasn’t even smiling.
DougJ
Thanks. Prada actually says more than shoes, by the way.
There’s actually a bar in New York called Pravda which is frequented by the same kind of people whose girlfriends shop at Prada, so it was the source of a lot of confusion when both were popular.
mrmobi
Drinking solves most problems.
Pb
DougJ FTW — his crystal ball is working today…
Chad N. Freude
With all due respect to the Michael Kinsley line, I think
is the winner. It captures perfectly the neutrality and balance of the newspapers of wreckord, specially the use of “some say” to avoid actually attributing the opinion to any actual person. A truly masterful line, some say.
Chad N. Freude
I forgot to mention that I had to go out and buy a hat so I could tip it to DougJ for that post.
Zifnab
Yes, they were having that discussion on “This Week” too, until someone pointed out how Bloomberg’s liberal, pro-choice, anti-war, environmentally friendly policies were frighteningly similar to the general Democratic platform. Then someone else remembered that Bloomberg was, in fact, formerly a Democrat and that he only switched parties to get on the mayoral ticket in New York.
And I’m sure Bloomberg’s ringing praise for Al Gore was bouncing around in someone’s head by that point. Honestly, I wouldn’t be surprised to find out Bloomberg is pressuring Gore to run just so he can go in as VP. What would you think of a Gore/Bloomberg ticket? Not too shabby. Certainly miles ahead of Gore/Lieberman.
Rome Again
Ah, we always knew those New Yorkers were just a bunch of commies.
mrmobi
I’d like to see Gore get in the race, and I’d certainly like to have the Democratic winner not be Hillary. That said, 3rd party candidacies are always a long shot in our politics. Were you thinking Gore/Bloomberg on the Dem ticket, Zif? And if so, how?
DougJ
It could also be the title of a New Order album, if they ever make a comeback.
dom
I’m going to give Captain Ed credit for even discussing the issue. I can’t believe there’s been total radio silence from the dozens of “conservative” posters over at the Corner.
Jay C
Which, given the hackish offhand hackitude of most of the InstaHack’s posts is unusual enough an occurence to rate a comment.
Krista
DougJ, that post you made at 11:45 is hilarious, yet depressing as hell, because that’s likely exactly what will happen.
Dulcie
No one from the administration has told them what to think yet.
Zifnab
I don’t think there’s a rule that says you have to pick your Veep from the existing pool of wanna-be Presidents. Gore wins the nomination, turns around, and selects Bloomberg for his running mate. That easy.
I mean, honestly, I don’t see Gore entering the race at all. I’m pretty sure he was serious when he said he wasn’t going to run. However, whoever does win will undoubtably keep a Cabinet position – or at least an open seat – for the G-man in order to garner his political endorsement on the campaign trail. I’ve still got my eye on an Edwards/Obama or Obama/Edwards (or even Somebody/Richardson) ticket. That’ll be enough to leave me happy.
Barry
thyme zone: “Kinsey gets a pass, though … didn’t he have brain surgery last year?”
Even if he did, he was a hack and a fraud who knew better. He deliberately cultivated that ‘contrarian’ attitude at TNR and Slate, where ‘contrarian’ meant ‘contrary to the truth, whenever we feel like it’.