Bush

It’s important for the sake of American democracy the new Congress conduct investigations and hearings into alleged constitutional violations and possible crimes committed by President George Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and the White House administration's cabinet and staff over the last eight years.

Here are some of the lingering questions: Was there an orchestrated White House campaign to deceive the American people about Iraq’s nonexistent weapons of mass destruction? Did the Bush administration violate laws by ordering the wiretapping of law-abiding American citizens? Did the Bush administration invade Americans’ privacy in other ways that might be illegal? Did the Bush administration sanction torture, a violation of American law? Did the Bush administration promote war profiteering as part of a massive scheme defrauding the American people?

If Bush’s and his operatives' deceptions go unnoted in the official record, then American democracy will undoubtedly suffer. This, in its starkest terms, will mean any future president, including President-elect Barack Obama, can lie about war justifications with impunity, pry into American people’s private lives and order torture.

The vast public record speaks for itself when it comes to Bush, but one can sense more controversial information about his administration will come out after he leaves office. This is because Bush will no longer be able to use his office to hide information. What do we NOT know about what Bush has done while president?

There will be a tendency among some conservative and centrist Democrats to leave Bush alone. This would be a huge, historical mistake. There is plenty of time and energy to tackle the country’s major financial and foreign policy issues as House and Senate committees investigate the Bush administration. The public has the right to know how Bush and the GOP have sidestepped and weakened democratic structures. But, most importantly, major investigations would send a message to future presidents there are limitations to their power.

Some pundits think Bush will pardon himself and Vice President Dick Cheney before he leaves office, but even if he does the investigations can and should go on.

What do you think? Answer a poll question about this issues by clicking here. Feel free to leave a comment.

When a former right-wing White House press secretary starts talking about the “deferential” corporate media abdicating its responsibility in the run-up to the Iraq occupation, then we know just how silly the liberal media myth has become even in conservative circles.

Locally, it makes your wonder where The Oklahoman fits into the new working rubric of the conservative, ultra-conservative and extreme, right-wing propagandistic corporate media. (Answer: It helps define the propagandistic category.)

Former Press Secretary Scott McClellan, who worked in the Bush administration, has published a book, What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington’s Culture of Deception. In the book, he criticizes the administration’s “propaganda campaign” in the months before the Iraq invasion. He also claims he was misled by Bush officials in the Valerie Plame controversy.

But as Salon.com blogger Glenn Greenwald and others have pointed out the most damaging part of the book is the criticism leveled at the corporate media, the “deferential, complicit enablers” of the Bush propaganda campaign to invade Iraq. This is really nothing new, of course, but the fact a famous Republican political operative has acknowledged the obvious is worth noting.

It should always be stressed that people throughout the country and world noted the White House lies and deceptions about the Iraq before the invasion and spoke out at great risk to their careers. Unfortunately, this did not include the country’s leading corporate media outlets, which include all the major television networks, The New York Times and The Washington Post.

McClellan’s views were so disturbing to the elite media bigwigs that all three major news anchors, Katie Couric, Charles Gibson and Brian Williams, appeared together on a recent Today show to discuss the issue. Couric, to her credit, admitted the media failed to do its job, but Gibson and Williams followed the corporate mantra. Bush loyalists, of course, launched a typical smear campaign against McCellan, but it didn’t stick.

All this follows recent revelations about how the Bush Pentagon had a program to encourage retired military generals to support the invasion and occupation on television news shows. This was first reported by The Times. Greenwald has led the way in showing how this propaganda deception was helped along by the networks.

At some point this country needs to conduct a painful but necessary investigation of all the Imperial Bush lies and how the corporate media not only disseminated these lies but also aided and abetted in some cases one of the biggest deceptions ever perpetuated on the American people. I think of the disgraced Judith Miller, who printed false accusations about Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction in the The Times. All this needs to be vetted and brought to light for the sake of the country’s democratic structures.

But I want to take the furor over McClellan and the Iraq occupation and look at it briefly from a local level. Most people today have lost trust in the corporate media for good reason. The Oklahoman, considered the most right-wing metropolitan newspaper in the country, is a publication that not only participated in disseminating Bush lies about Iraq but relentlessly supported these lies year after year on its ultra-conservative editorial page. It continues to do so. Here is a critique of one of its pro-occupation editorials. Here is a critique of its right-wing blogger Kevin Calvey.

This is important for several reasons. The Oklahoman is the largest newspaper in the state. Many state news outlets, including television stations, follow its lead in covering local and even national stories. The owners of the newspaper, the Gaylord family, are influential state power brokers who influence political decisions here on a regular basis. Even the football stadium at the University of Oklahoma—Gaylord Family Stadium—is named after the family who has printed and supported lie after lie of the Imperial Bush, even adding their own lies about the worth of the Iraq occupation.

Now, remember, McClellan is a right-winger exposing the so-called “liberal media” for how it helped the Imperial Bush deceive the American people. In essence, McClellan argues there is no such thing as a liberal corporate media, which is absolutely true. It has always been a silly myth promoted by right-wing radio hosts, think tanks and the Republican Party. So, then, how conservative does that make The Oklahoman? Can it even fit into a definition, given McClellan’s claims, of a “conservative newspaper”? I think not. The newspaper’s political coverage is truly and absolutely propaganda, not just in a name-calling sense, and Oklahomans have slogged through it for decades.

And, yes, there is an “art” to propaganda, and, in this sense, The Oklahoman is a great triumph. It has shifted the definition of political centrist so far to the right and has allowed its disingenuous Washington, D.C. “correspondents” to lie about the national political scene for so long that its deceptive rhetorical structure has become ingrained in the state’s psyche and history. The paper’s editorial page never allows full dissenting views to its constant stream of lies. McClellan’s book, on a local level, shows just how far out of the mainstream The Oklahoman remains despite its new look.

As I have mentioned before, The Oklahoman would make a great case study in the technique of contemporary American propaganda. Maybe some enterprising journalism scholars at the University of Oklahoman could write a book about it. The only problem is they work at the Gaylord College of Journalism and Mass Communication. The family, see, has even bought off those who might fully critique its media empire for the constant deceptions it tries to pass off as mainstream conservatism.

(You want to know why you have lousy health insurance or no health insurance? Watch this exclusive Okie Funk video. Turn up the speakers.)

The health care system in this country is broken, and it needs massive and sustained reform.

When Democrats and Republicans joined together recently to vote to expand the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) from $5 billion to $35 billion over five years, they did so out of this pressing and vital need. The bill’s underlying philosophy is that we, as Americans, should at least take care of our children in terms of health care so they can thrive and become our future.

Many working people these days cannot afford health insurance. Those who can afford it often pay exorbitant co-payments and deductibles. Most Americans, even those with health insurance, are one major medical crisis away from financial ruin. Many working Americans go without adequate health care because it is simply too expensive.

The American health care system is based on feeding the greed of many doctors, insurance companies and health management organizations. European models of health care have proven to be much more successful than our system. They are less expensive and provide better care to their patients. Doctors in European countries are also well compensated.

Yet Imperial President George Bush, with support from his warmongering cabal of right-wing extremists, vetoed the bill on purely ideological grounds despite wide majority support. The bill, according to the president, could lead to socialized medicine. Note the word “could.” There is nothing in the bill, which simply insures more children, that argues for socialized medicine or universal health care. There is no trick here, no gimmick. People need health care. SCHIP is a program that helps people ensure their children. The program’s expansion would mean more children qualify for help.

Consider this: Taxpayers spend more in three months for the Iraq occupation than they would spend over five years for this one program. (Look at this site for more comparisons.)

The Oklahoma Congressional delegation voted against SCHIP, of course, on the same ideological grounds as the president they so adore. The Daily Oklahoman has relentlessly editorialized their support for the veto. To his credit, U.S. Rep. Dan Boren, the only Democrat in the delegation, has said he will now reverse course and vote to override the veto in the House. The House will vote on the veto override tomorrow, but the effort is expected to fail. There are apparently enough votes in the Senate to override Bush’s callous disregard for basic humanity.

But should we blame just the politicians? Bush’s veto, if sustained, will go down in historical infamy, for sure, but it also will be remembered as the one event that clearly showed Americans lost their moral foundation at the turn of the twenty-first century. We deny our children adequate health care, test them relentlessly under No Child Left Behind, leave them massive financial deficits, and make them grow up under the philosophy of endless war. That is who we have become under the Imperial Presidency of George Bush.

(Update: The House fell 13 votes short Thursday of overriding Bush's veto)