'No mistakes, no regret, no comment'
Published January 20, 2005
This writes Washington Post reporter Dana Milbank, is the way Bush cabinet nominees have been avoiding accountability and explanation. In written answers to Sen. Ted Kennedy, Attorney General nominee Alberto Gonzales used the words "I am not at liberty to disclose" at least 10 times; "I do not recall" or "I have no recollection" six times; I did not "conduct a search" seven times; "I am not at liberty [to discuss certain matters]" 10 times; and "I have no present knowledge" 7 times.
During the confirmation hearing of Condoleezza Rice, Sen. Biden complained that "the questions we asked, I thought, gave you an opportunity to acknowledge some of the mistakes and misjudgments of the past four years...But instead of seizing the opportunity, it seems to me, Dr. Rice, you danced around it. You sort of stuck to the party line, which seems pretty consistent: You're always right. You all never made any mistakes."
Bruce Fein, a Reagan era administration official finds the silence "a little bit appalling," and notes that "a conservative should want greater congressional scrutiny — it limits government and it checks folly." Compassionate conservative George Bush disagrees. In a recent interview, Bush argued that "we had an accountability moment, and that's called the 2004 election," he said. "And the American people listened to different assessments made about what was taking place in Iraq, and they looked at the two candidates, and chose me, for which I'm grateful."
So much for open government, accountability and democracy. Bush can now do whatever he wants, whenever he wants. All is justified by the 118,457 vote lead he received in Ohio. But remember, the federal government spent $6.5 billion last year creating 14 million new classified documents. In order to classify one document, the government spends 459 of our tax dollars. American taxpayers are paying the Bush administration to keep information both from them and Congress, and the President is laughing all the way to the bank.
Please also read and comment on www.politicalthought.net
- 'No mistakes, no regret, no comment'
- Published: January 20, 2005
- Type:
- Section: Politics
- Writer: Igor Volsky
- Igor Volsky's BC Writer page
- Igor Volsky's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us





Well, what is interesting regarding this argument of "accountability" is that everyone wants to hold the Bush Administration accountable for everything bad in the world, whether it falls on their doorstep or not. Democrats wanted to pin failures which led to 9/11 squarely on the shoulders of the Bush Administration, but of course wanted to deny that the previous administrations' response to the growing terror threat in the 90's was both incosistent and insufficient. Our entire government is responsible for such failures, not just one branch.
Furthermore, Demcrats and the media want such admissions of failure because they want to use that soundbyte in a million different ads, speeches, and articles against Republicans in general and the Bush Administration in particular. What they are saying is, "please give us some rope so we can hang you."
Do you really think that Democrats would praise the President for saying, "we did this the wrong way." If you do, then you are incredibly naive. It's all about the need to find political leverage against the President, and everyone in Washington knows this.
Obviously this is not just a DNC practice. The GOP does the same thing, which is why Clinton himself was often accused by Republicans of never being willing to admit mistakes.
I think, ultimately, it would be better and more honest to simply say, "a pox on both your houses," than to try and make this seem an isolated problem. The problem is systemic so, while admonishing the President to "come clean" on issues related to 9/11 and Iraq, the DNC would never admit to their own failures.
Why do you think Sandy Berger was caught stealing terror-related files from the national archives and "losing" them just before Clinton was to testify before the 9/11 panel? Coincidence?
I think not.
David