Change we can believe in --- where it counts

Some odds and ends...

Glenn Greenwald approves of Obama's choice for Office of Legal Counsel. It appears that the president-elect is serious about restoring the rule of law for the Executive Branch.

I first read these posts of Johnsen's a few weeks ago when a reporter asked me about my reaction to the possibility that she might be appointed to head the OLC. Beyond these articles, I don't know all that much about her, but anyone who can write this, in this unapologetic, euphemism-free and even impolitic tone, warning that the problem isn't merely John Yoo but Bush himself, repeatedly demanding "outrage," criticizing the Democratic Congress for legalizing Bush's surveillance program, arguing that we cannot merely "move on" if we are to restore our national honor, stating the OLC's "core job description" is to "say 'no' to the President," all while emphasizing that the danger is unchecked power not just for the Bush administration but "for years and administrations to come" -- and to do so in the middle of an election year when she knows she has a good chance to be appointed to a high-level position if the Democratic candidate won and yet nonetheless eschewed standard, obfuscating Beltway politesse about these matters -- is someone whose appointment to such an important post is almost certainly a positive sign. No praise is due Obama until he actually does things that merit praise, but it's hard not to consider this encouraging.

And, speaking of appointments that make me optimistic that the "24" nightmare we've been living these past eight years may be coming to a close, we may have a new CIA Director who actually opposes treating such things as "simulated drowning" as "enhanced interrogation techniques.

As Joe notes below, multiple news outlets are reporting that Obama has found his next CIA director: Leon Panetta, who once quit the Nixon Administration in protest over his Civil Rights policy, and later became a chief of staff to President Bill Clinton.

On cue, Marc Ambinder finds the clip, which answers the most immediate question. What are Panetta's views on torture? This is what Panetta wrote in the Washington Monthly earlier this year:

Those who support torture may believe that we can abuse captives in certain select circumstances and still be true to our values. But that is a false compromise. We either believe in the dignity of the individual, the rule of law, and the prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment, or we don't. There is no middle ground. We cannot and we must not use torture under any circumstances. We are better than that.

And in today's edition of "What took them so long," Obama hasn't even been sworn in yet, and still we find John Yoo and John Bolten calling for restraints on the Executive Branch, and Mitch McConnell arguing that the Republican Party is all about fiscal discipline. I mean, we all knew that come the new administration, the GOP would forget about their talk of a "Wartime President," and "The Constitution isn't a suicide pact" and "Deficits don't matter." I just expected them to wait a bit, if only for appearances sake.

As Krugman says, "That's pretty rich."