Which Side Are You On?

Julie Dammann. She was Chief of Staff to Senator Christopher S. Bond (R-MO).

Drew Maloney. He was "Administrative Assistant and Legislative Director for the Republican House Majority Whip" (who goes unnamed but whose name is Tom Delay). "Drew Maloney," his bio brags, "helped conduct the interview of Monica Lewinsky and managed the impeachment proceedings."

Now, how many of the top officials now running our government were recommended for consideration by this gang of unelected power brokers, themselves raking in the bigger bucks? I don't know. Maybe none.

But it is at least interesting that a man who worked as their lawyer, Greg Craig, now serves as White House Counsel, and that -- as a very old friend of Karl Rove's, as are Wayne Berman and Stewart Hall -- Craig, although closer to Obama, could conceivably have served in a McCain White House as well. All of which makes it even more interesting that White House Counsel Craig earlier this year negotiated with the House Judiciary Committee to allow Rove to testify off-camera and out from under oath. Craig has advised President Obama on the closing of Guantanamo, and his law firm advised Vice President Cheney on the opening of it. Williams and Connolly, in which Craig served as a partner, defended President Clinton in his impeachment trial and Vice President Cheney in the Valerie Plame investigation that the White House is still fighting to keep secret. It also represented Karl Rove in his book deal.

Karl Rove and Howard Dean, both with close ties to Ogilvy, have been engaging in public debates for speaking fees, and the debates depict two warring camps. But are they really warring camps? Or are they only warring camps on some issues or outside some broad range of agreement?

The fact that lobbyists serve both teams and broker power does not suggest, as many believe, that our public elected officials are mere figure heads for the real powers behind the throne. Our public officials have real power and have a moral responsibility to use it legally and democratically regardless of what hidden pressures threaten them.

Nor does anything I've said suggest that the two parties are identical or that Americans shouldn't vote for the better of the two lousy candidates presented to them in any election.

Nor should the naming of personal relationships dramatically alter one's understanding of what our government is doing. But if it helps to open our eyes, that may not be a bad thing. Opinion polls on just about every political issue show a majority of Americans on one side, and our government on another. This suggests to me that in many instances, we would be better served by thinking of the two sides, not as Democrats and Republicans, but as those in power and the rest of us, those living above the law and making it versus those of us living under the law and not, in any major consistent way, making it. If those are the two teams, then it becomes fairly easy for almost all of us to answer the traditional demand: Which side are you on?

David Swanson is the author of the new book "Daybreak: Undoing the Imperial Presidency and Forming a More Perfect Union" by Seven Stories Press. You can order it and find out when tour will be in your town: http://davidswanson.org/book.

 1  |  2