Moving Along

March 21: Robert Parry here, on the passing of Lawrence Walsh.

There was also Charles Pierce, on how

... the utter lack of accountability in the wake of the Iran-Contra revelations was the seedbed for most of what has gone wrong with the balance of powers, American foreign policy, and the courtier media ever since.

...

Walsh, the Iran-Contra special prosecutor, died this week at the age of 102. He did the very best he could have done, considering the bungling of the Congress, the deception practiced by his targets under the color of the offices of the public trust that they did so much to dishonor, and the fact that the elite press showed the white feather every time the investigation got close to the Oval Office.

Comments included some interesting discussion about the unconstitutionality of Iran Contra vs. that of Watergate.

As it happens, the previous day Parry noted another significant passing, while reiterating the question he has asked for years—

Longtime Washington powerbroker Robert Strauss, who died Wednesday at the age of 95, took to the grave the answer to one of the most provocative Watergate mysteries, whether he was, in effect, a Republican mole serving in the highest ranks of the Democratic Party.

"solid poop this am!!!!!"

Subject line of message from Clever Sister. Which refers to her cat's recent medical episode and vet visits.

On the other hand, it really does apply to a variety of office situations I've experienced, beginning at 8:00 today.

No doubt, could also apply to pretty much any other workplace.

RIP: Tony Benn

He died a few days before another March 19 anniversary of the war he opposed.

A lot of remembrances are here, of course.

Gary Younge on Benn as someone who "knew the rules but would not play the game."

Michael Winship—

What I will always remember about Tony Benn is a sort of pop quiz he devised to put truth to power. He explained it in 2001, during his farewell speech to the House of Commons:

"In the course of my life I have developed five little democratic questions. If one meets a powerful person — Adolf Hitler, Joe Stalin or Bill Gates — ask them five questions: 'What power have you got? Where did you get it from? In whose interests do you exercise it? To whom are you accountable? And how can we get rid of you?' If you cannot get rid of the people who govern you, you do not live in a democratic system."

A Non-starter

Vendor message in work e-mail this morning.

Brain Awareness... Quite a contrast to the office mentality: go along to get along, don't see anything beyond one's desk, and the rest.

Morning Huddle theme of the week: yet another version of communication styles. Four more days to hear this droned by the boss, or, if he's away, by whomever he has designated to go through the motions.

Ex Post Facto

Facts being the usual (and Never About Race).

Some words spoken afterwards.

Because who in the Obama administration could have anticipated that people who want to destroy the institution would reject a strong appointment to head the Civil Rights Division?

And who could have predicted the GOP would cherry pick the Bill of Rights, jumping on the Sixth Amendment opportunity for a guilt by association smear?

Plenty of spinelessness to go around, with the help of the usual types of "Democrats" fleeing a "controversial" vote. In his grim wrap-up here, Adam Serwer adds—

Representing murderers hasn't proved disqualifying before – Republicans confirmed John Roberts as chief justice of the Supreme Court despite his pro-bono work on behalf of a man recently executed for mass murder. When they choose to, Republicans understand that an attorney shouldn't be identified with his client's cause. That would prevent top lawyers from defending unpopular clients, which would erode the quality of justice for those accused of terrible crimes.

None of the senators who cast votes against Adegbile, however, will ever have to worry about not being able to afford a fair shake in court.

For Crying Out Loud

My routine work e-mail arrives in automated cycles, typically in batches of 15-25 at a time. I need to watch out for problems in need of attention, so they don't get buried in the message volume (and I have to hope any emergencies won't take up too much time). Otherwise, the routine mail will need various bits of data extracted; many other items have to be re-formatted, saved to files, and uploaded to multiple places. This is all while I'm working on new stuff that generates more of this e-mail volume. Of course the less time I have to manage e-mail, the more those batches start piling into multiples of 15-25, sometimes for hours at a time.

In the midst of the pile-ups, I so enjoy seeing institutional messages touting programs and workshops— "Work-Life Balance!" "Relieve Your Stress!"—and the like. Topics are continually recycled, even as the same institution dreams up novel methods to Increase My Stress.

In e-mail today was a call for volunteers: to join "VOICES of the Staff."

This, says the e-mail, is "to continue the dialog between ... staff and leadership." Now there's a "dialog" I had no idea existed on this particular planet. But it may be that management is beaming VOICES into the heads of susceptible volunteers.

More of the goodness promised—

VOICES offers staff members an opportunity to:

• Serve as a "sounding board" to provide feedback to executive officers on major
initiatives
• Establish connections that open new channels of communication
• Provide creative suggestions on staff climate and satisfaction issues
• Recognize their own and each other's value and talents

While I hate to bring up the obvious, there is clearly a logo for this enterprise.