Annual Fundraising Appeal

Here’s an important message to CounterPunch readers from
BARBARA EHRENREICH…

BarbaraE

Here at CounterPunch we love Barbara Ehrenreich for many reasons: her courage, her intelligence and her untarnished optimism. Ehrenreich knows what’s important in life; she knows how hard most Americans have to work just to get by, and she knows what it’s going to take to forge radical change in this country. We’re proud to fight along side her in this long struggle.  We hope you agree with Barbara that CounterPunch plays a unique role on the Left. Our future is in your hands. Please donate.

Day9

Yes, these are dire political times. Many who optimistically hoped for real change have spent nearly five years under the cold downpour of political reality. Here at CounterPunch we’ve always aimed to tell it like it is, without illusions or despair. That’s why so many of you have found a refuge at CounterPunch and made us your homepage. You tell us that you love CounterPunch because the quality of the writing you find here in the original articles we offer every day and because we never flinch under fire. We appreciate the support and are prepared for the fierce battles to come.

Unlike other outfits, we don’t hit you up for money every month … or even every quarter. We ask only once a year. But when we ask, we mean it.

CounterPunch’s website is supported almost entirely by subscribers to the print edition of our magazine. We aren’t on the receiving end of six-figure grants from big foundations. George Soros doesn’t have us on retainer. We don’t sell tickets on cruise liners. We don’t clog our site with deceptive corporate ads.

The continued existence of CounterPunch depends solely on the support and dedication of our readers. We know there are a lot of you. We get thousands of emails from you every day. Our website receives millions of hits and nearly 100,000 readers each day. And we don’t charge you a dime.

Please, use our brand new secure shopping cart to make a tax-deductible donation to CounterPunch today or purchase a subscription our monthly magazine and a gift sub for someone or one of our explosive  books, including the ground-breaking Killing Trayvons. Show a little affection for subversion: consider an automated monthly donation. (We accept checks, credit cards, PayPal and cold-hard cash….)
button-store2_19

or use
pp1

To contribute by phone you can call Becky or Deva toll free at: 1-800-840-3683

Thank you for your support,

Jeffrey, Joshua, Becky, Deva, and Nathaniel

CounterPunch
 PO Box 228, Petrolia, CA 95558

Hard of Hearings

Straight to Hell

by CHRISTOPHER BRAUCHLI

It could probably be shown by facts and figures that there is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress.

– Mark Twain, Following the Equator

Now that members of Congress have returned to the playground at home to enjoy recess time (a considerably longer time than when the members were physically in grade school) it seems appropriate to contemplate what their absence from Washington means for the country. What it does not mean is that because its members are in the playground there will be no new laws passed.  No new laws were being passed before they went off to play.  What it does mean, however, is that fewer hearings will be conducted.

Congressional hearings are what members of Congress engage in when they have nothing else to do.  Ostensibly the purpose of hearings is to learn about problems that Congress can solve through legislation.  Since Congress no longer legislates,  hearings are principally designed to enable those conducting the hearings to make headlines.  If a hearing is especially successful it can be used to embarrass the person who is testifying.  This is especially useful if the hearing is conducted by a member of one party and the witness is a member of the other party.  If the embarrassment is really good, the person conducting the hearing may conduct lots of hearings on the same subject just for the sake of getting publicity.

The tragedy that took place in Benghazi has been treated by Republicans as a windfall.  They are, of course, sorry that Christopher Stevens, the ambassador to Libya in 2012, and three other Americans were killed in that attack but they have not permitted that to deter them from holding 13 hearings and 50 briefings as of this writing and producing 25,000 pages of documents that will never be read by anyone should members of Congress ever decide the hearings should draw to a close.  That will not happen for a while.  The House Select Committee plans to hold more hearings in September. Since an independent investigation has extensively examined the event and shown what lapses were responsible for the event,  the main purpose of the new hearings is to prove that Hillary Clinton is responsible for the death of the ambassador. Were she to announce that she does not plan to run for president, the committee would call off the hearings.  Of course the Benghazi hearing is one of only many hearings that the Republican members of the House have conducted.  Another was precipitated by the exchange of Taliban militants held for years without charges at Guantánamo for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl.

In exchange for Sgt. Bergdahl’s release, the president authorized the release of five  Taliban militants from Guantánamo without giving Congress 30 days’ notice as required by the National Defense Authorization Act.  The president saw a small window of opportunity to negotiate the sergeant’s release and decided to get the sergeant through that window lest it shut before he could act.  Commenting on the release Senator James Inhofe (R. -OK) said:  “Our joy at Sergeant Bergdahl’s release is tempered by the fact that President Obama chose to ignore the law, not to mention sound policy, to achieve it.”  Mr. Inhofe’s joy at the release of Sgt. Bergdahl is probably no less great than his joy at the opportunity to conduct yet another hearing to demonstrate that congress has a role to play in governing the country even without passing any laws.  In addition it afforded Republicans a different platform than the Affordable Care Act from which to attack President Obama.  There can never be enough platforms as they have repeatedly demonstrated.

Not all hearings are designed to attack the president.  Some are designed to permit congressmen to demonstrate their wisdom and their grasp of important affairs of which their constituents may have been unaware because of the dumb things they so often say. One such hearing took place in June at a House Judiciary Committee hearing on religious freedom, a hot topic if ever there was one and one that beggared a hearing.  Rev. Barry Lynn, executive director for Americans United for the Separation of Church and State was testifying before the Committee on the issue of the separation of church and state. The hearing gave Louie Gohmert, a congressman from Texas,  the opportunity to get some important information in the public record. Demonstrating the same tolerance for those who do not subscribe to his religious beliefs as ISIS  shows to those who do not subscribe to their beliefs, Mr. Gohmert asked Mr. Lynn:  “Do you believe in sharing the good news that will keep people from going to Hell, consistent with Christian beliefs.”  After Mr. Lynn expressed disagreement with Mr. Gohmert’s assertion the Congressman said:  “So, you do not believe somebody would go to Hell if they do not believe Jesus is the way, the truth, the life.”  His comments will come as a bit of a surprise to those who had not thought they were heading for Hell because they did not share Mr. Gohmert’s religious views.  Indeed, many people think the country is going to hell not because of its religious beliefs but because of the behavior of Mr. Gohmert and many of his colleagues in the United States Congress. Those who think that are right.  Mr. Gohmert is wrong.

Christopher Brauchli can be emailed at brauchli.56@post.harvard.edu.