I think that Eric Alterman really nails it here, especially at the end. That's right, you'd have to be outraged all of the time, and not only does nobody want to be like that, but, nobody cares. You get called "shrill", or "a hater" or the all popular "false outrager". Because all outrage must be false to those who feel none.
And take note that the status of american citizens is "unclear" at this time. Feel good?
Police-State Update:
"Yes, there's that shrillness again. I read in today's Times, ( http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/10/washington/10scotus.html?_r=1&oref=slogin ) that the Supreme Court will not "hear an appeal by a German citizen of Lebanese descent who claims he was abducted by United States agents and then tortured by them while imprisoned in Afghanistan. Without comment, the justices let stand an appeals court ruling that the state secrets privilege, a judicially created doctrine that the Bush administration has invoked to win dismissal of lawsuits that touch on issues of national security, protected the government's actions from court review."
What does this mean in practice? It means the U.S. government can kidnap at will and arrange for the torture of anyone in the world (though the status of U.S. citizens in these instances remains unclear). Even to write those words makes the idea sound outlandish, but the fact is, that's just what they do. They are accessories in kidnapping and torture and, while I suppose they think they have the best interests of the country at heart, they are so deluded, so incompetent, so-self-righteous, and so extremist in their beliefs that they really do constitute a danger to humankind. And now we learn there's nothing in our legal system to stop them. And they don't even have to face and there's no prospect of impeachment and hence, I'd say our political system has truly gone off its rails. Once again, the genius is you can't keep up with all the scandals. You'd have to be outraged, all the time, about almost everything. And who wants that?
http://mediamatters.org/altercation/?f=h_column
And take note that the status of american citizens is "unclear" at this time. Feel good?
Police-State Update:
"Yes, there's that shrillness again. I read in today's Times, ( http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/10/washington/10scotus.html?_r=1&oref=slogin ) that the Supreme Court will not "hear an appeal by a German citizen of Lebanese descent who claims he was abducted by United States agents and then tortured by them while imprisoned in Afghanistan. Without comment, the justices let stand an appeals court ruling that the state secrets privilege, a judicially created doctrine that the Bush administration has invoked to win dismissal of lawsuits that touch on issues of national security, protected the government's actions from court review."
What does this mean in practice? It means the U.S. government can kidnap at will and arrange for the torture of anyone in the world (though the status of U.S. citizens in these instances remains unclear). Even to write those words makes the idea sound outlandish, but the fact is, that's just what they do. They are accessories in kidnapping and torture and, while I suppose they think they have the best interests of the country at heart, they are so deluded, so incompetent, so-self-righteous, and so extremist in their beliefs that they really do constitute a danger to humankind. And now we learn there's nothing in our legal system to stop them. And they don't even have to face and there's no prospect of impeachment and hence, I'd say our political system has truly gone off its rails. Once again, the genius is you can't keep up with all the scandals. You'd have to be outraged, all the time, about almost everything. And who wants that?
http://mediamatters.org/altercation/?f=h_column
