The Partisan Injustice at Justice
"What is it about George W. Bush that makes you want to serve him?"
I have gone forward and back for a while now trying to figure out where today's rant should begin, but I find that I cannot get past that question. It was posed by Monica Goodling, an aide to then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, to job seekers at the Department of Justice.
"What is it about George W. Bush that makes you want to serve him?"
Is it me, or doesn't she sound less like a job interviewer than like an adolescent girl splayed out on her bed, giggling with her girlfriend about some hottie actor they both adore? I mean, what, exactly, was an applicant expected to say?
"I adore his strong chin"?
"That crinkly smile really turns me on"?
"I can't resist the manly twinkle in his eyes when he mispronounces 'nuclear'"?
Presumably, Goodling is somewhere doodling the president's name and hers inside Valentine hearts while she awaits her fate. You see, she faces possible professional sanctions for violations of both civil service law and the DOJ's own policy. As detailed last week in a Justice Department report, she and other aides systematically schemed to fill non-political positions with Bush loyalists.
It wasn't just that she asked a question that would have been more at home on the cover of Tiger Beat. It was that she passed over a respected prosecutor with almost 20 years of experience for an important counterterrorism job because his wife was active in Democratic politics, hiring instead a Republican with three years' experience. And that she denied one applicant on the suspicion - the "suspicion," mind you - that she was a lesbian. And that she jettisoned yet another because he was a member of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. And that she ran Internet searches to determine applicants' political views. And that one of her interview questions was: "Why are you a Republican?"
It goes on. And on. Goodling's priority was not experience, talent or competence. Rather, she was looking for, as she put it in a note, applicants who were suitably conservative on "god, guns + gays."
Yes, every president is entitled to fill political positions with loyalists. But these were not, I repeat, political positions. Rather they were, or were supposed to have been, career, non-partisan jobs: immigration judges, assistant U.S. attorneys, trial attorneys.
The problem is, in this administration, there's no such thing as a non-partisan job. For them, the campaign never ends.
Just last month another report found applicants for DOJ internships and honors programs being turned away for political reasons. Then there's Rajiv Chandrasekaran's book, Imperial Life in the Emerald City, which recounts how people interviewing to work in the Green Zone in Iraq were asked their opinion of Roe v. Wade, among other conservative litmus tests.
What does abortion politics have to do with turning on the electricity in Baghdad? Hey, you got me.
This administration prizes ideological purity above ability. As a result, it has driven the presidency off a cliff, the country following close behind. These are not people who came to government to govern. No, these are true believers who came to government to institutionalize true belief, to make it permanent as a stain.
There is something Stepford, something robotic and chilling, in the glassy-eyed, ends-justifies-the-means faith of these young Bush aides in their own righteousness. Forget credibility. Forget competence. Just give us your answer, please: "What is it about George W. Bush that makes you want to serve him?"
It is a telling question. Apparently, these people have forgotten or never even knew: It wasn't George W. Bush they were supposed to serve.
--Leonard Pitts Jr.
(c) 2008 Miami Herald Media Company
We are at a crossroads
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. US voters have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. Our Fall Campaign is underway, and we need your help. To power our newsroom through the rest of the year, we need to raise $125,000 by midnight on October 31. So if you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |
"What is it about George W. Bush that makes you want to serve him?"
I have gone forward and back for a while now trying to figure out where today's rant should begin, but I find that I cannot get past that question. It was posed by Monica Goodling, an aide to then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, to job seekers at the Department of Justice.
"What is it about George W. Bush that makes you want to serve him?"
Is it me, or doesn't she sound less like a job interviewer than like an adolescent girl splayed out on her bed, giggling with her girlfriend about some hottie actor they both adore? I mean, what, exactly, was an applicant expected to say?
"I adore his strong chin"?
"That crinkly smile really turns me on"?
"I can't resist the manly twinkle in his eyes when he mispronounces 'nuclear'"?
Presumably, Goodling is somewhere doodling the president's name and hers inside Valentine hearts while she awaits her fate. You see, she faces possible professional sanctions for violations of both civil service law and the DOJ's own policy. As detailed last week in a Justice Department report, she and other aides systematically schemed to fill non-political positions with Bush loyalists.
It wasn't just that she asked a question that would have been more at home on the cover of Tiger Beat. It was that she passed over a respected prosecutor with almost 20 years of experience for an important counterterrorism job because his wife was active in Democratic politics, hiring instead a Republican with three years' experience. And that she denied one applicant on the suspicion - the "suspicion," mind you - that she was a lesbian. And that she jettisoned yet another because he was a member of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. And that she ran Internet searches to determine applicants' political views. And that one of her interview questions was: "Why are you a Republican?"
It goes on. And on. Goodling's priority was not experience, talent or competence. Rather, she was looking for, as she put it in a note, applicants who were suitably conservative on "god, guns + gays."
Yes, every president is entitled to fill political positions with loyalists. But these were not, I repeat, political positions. Rather they were, or were supposed to have been, career, non-partisan jobs: immigration judges, assistant U.S. attorneys, trial attorneys.
The problem is, in this administration, there's no such thing as a non-partisan job. For them, the campaign never ends.
Just last month another report found applicants for DOJ internships and honors programs being turned away for political reasons. Then there's Rajiv Chandrasekaran's book, Imperial Life in the Emerald City, which recounts how people interviewing to work in the Green Zone in Iraq were asked their opinion of Roe v. Wade, among other conservative litmus tests.
What does abortion politics have to do with turning on the electricity in Baghdad? Hey, you got me.
This administration prizes ideological purity above ability. As a result, it has driven the presidency off a cliff, the country following close behind. These are not people who came to government to govern. No, these are true believers who came to government to institutionalize true belief, to make it permanent as a stain.
There is something Stepford, something robotic and chilling, in the glassy-eyed, ends-justifies-the-means faith of these young Bush aides in their own righteousness. Forget credibility. Forget competence. Just give us your answer, please: "What is it about George W. Bush that makes you want to serve him?"
It is a telling question. Apparently, these people have forgotten or never even knew: It wasn't George W. Bush they were supposed to serve.
--Leonard Pitts Jr.
(c) 2008 Miami Herald Media Company
"What is it about George W. Bush that makes you want to serve him?"
I have gone forward and back for a while now trying to figure out where today's rant should begin, but I find that I cannot get past that question. It was posed by Monica Goodling, an aide to then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, to job seekers at the Department of Justice.
"What is it about George W. Bush that makes you want to serve him?"
Is it me, or doesn't she sound less like a job interviewer than like an adolescent girl splayed out on her bed, giggling with her girlfriend about some hottie actor they both adore? I mean, what, exactly, was an applicant expected to say?
"I adore his strong chin"?
"That crinkly smile really turns me on"?
"I can't resist the manly twinkle in his eyes when he mispronounces 'nuclear'"?
Presumably, Goodling is somewhere doodling the president's name and hers inside Valentine hearts while she awaits her fate. You see, she faces possible professional sanctions for violations of both civil service law and the DOJ's own policy. As detailed last week in a Justice Department report, she and other aides systematically schemed to fill non-political positions with Bush loyalists.
It wasn't just that she asked a question that would have been more at home on the cover of Tiger Beat. It was that she passed over a respected prosecutor with almost 20 years of experience for an important counterterrorism job because his wife was active in Democratic politics, hiring instead a Republican with three years' experience. And that she denied one applicant on the suspicion - the "suspicion," mind you - that she was a lesbian. And that she jettisoned yet another because he was a member of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. And that she ran Internet searches to determine applicants' political views. And that one of her interview questions was: "Why are you a Republican?"
It goes on. And on. Goodling's priority was not experience, talent or competence. Rather, she was looking for, as she put it in a note, applicants who were suitably conservative on "god, guns + gays."
Yes, every president is entitled to fill political positions with loyalists. But these were not, I repeat, political positions. Rather they were, or were supposed to have been, career, non-partisan jobs: immigration judges, assistant U.S. attorneys, trial attorneys.
The problem is, in this administration, there's no such thing as a non-partisan job. For them, the campaign never ends.
Just last month another report found applicants for DOJ internships and honors programs being turned away for political reasons. Then there's Rajiv Chandrasekaran's book, Imperial Life in the Emerald City, which recounts how people interviewing to work in the Green Zone in Iraq were asked their opinion of Roe v. Wade, among other conservative litmus tests.
What does abortion politics have to do with turning on the electricity in Baghdad? Hey, you got me.
This administration prizes ideological purity above ability. As a result, it has driven the presidency off a cliff, the country following close behind. These are not people who came to government to govern. No, these are true believers who came to government to institutionalize true belief, to make it permanent as a stain.
There is something Stepford, something robotic and chilling, in the glassy-eyed, ends-justifies-the-means faith of these young Bush aides in their own righteousness. Forget credibility. Forget competence. Just give us your answer, please: "What is it about George W. Bush that makes you want to serve him?"
It is a telling question. Apparently, these people have forgotten or never even knew: It wasn't George W. Bush they were supposed to serve.
--Leonard Pitts Jr.
(c) 2008 Miami Herald Media Company