Deep Underground with Raul Groom

Friday, January 07, 2005

The New York Times Goes Large

Yesterday, after listening to Alberto Gonzales' frankly sickening testimony on the subject of whether the president can violate the law if he doesn't think the law is constitutional (he can, but only after thinking about it for a while), whether the president can allow torture (maybe, but George W. never would, so don't worry), and what effect Gonzales' opining on behalf of the White House that any tactics short of causing organ failure and death were acceptable in interrogations of prisoners overseas had on the behavior of troops who used tactics short of causing organ failure and death in interrogations of prisoners overseas (none), I sank to an undiscovered low in my faith in this nation and its democratic process.

My worst fear was not that Gonzales would be confirmed - after all, the control of our government by far-right ideologues who believe that no tactic is too illegal or insane to be used in the pursuit of our righteous goals was recently affirmed by the voters, and therefore the installation of Gonzales is perfectly legitimate, from a purely democratic perspective.

No, my fear was that this morning, no major newspaper would be brave enough to call the Gonzales nomination what it is - a major mistake and a terrible direction in which to take the country. The Washington Post rode the fence, citing "grave concerns," but the New York Times' editorial page today is a massive broadside against Gonzales, the sort of thing I have assumed was dead in modern journalism.

Let the Times know you appreciate their ability to tell it like it is, and suggest they keep up the good work. Letters to the editor can be sent here.

On the Op/Ed side, Bob Herbert is his usual unrestrained self, and Krugman is witty and on target, if a bit unfocused in his outrage (who can blame him?) In all, one of the best single-day editorial pages I've seen in a major newspaper, ever. The editors of the Washington Post should take note.


  • Nice.
    I like Herbert's comment that "Mr. Gonzales shouldn't be allowed anywhere near that office."

    But all the op-eds focused on the torture stuff, not the "President is above the law" stuff. Why is that?


    By Anonymous Anonymous, at January 7, 2005 at 6:54 PM  

  • Sophia - FEAR. fear of the power of the right wing smear/propoganda machine that staunchly defends w.- to focus on the issue of the president being above the law or not would still be construed as an attack on w, who did authorize torturous interrogation techniques while trying to leave the fbi holding the gun. (see : )
    i must say, the ny times doesn't always step up to the plate as much as i'd like them too, so its pretty damn refreshing.

    By Blogger Le Synge Bleu, at January 7, 2005 at 7:39 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home