Well, Then, I'll Sleep In A Bit Longer...
I'll just sleep in today - as Man of the Year, I think I'm entitled.
MORE: The Man of the Year was greeted by his wife with a cup of coffee, a plunger, and a request to unblock the toilet. How's your celebration going?
THANKS FOR ASKING: Of course I got the toilet unblocked - I'm the Man of the Year.
BUT SERIOUSLY: I endorse the prestigious TalkLeft Man of the Year:
Who would I have picked? The lawyers representing the Guantanamo detainees. In defending the rights of those most demonized and persecuted, they are defending the rights of all of us.
Let's put a name to that:
Guantanamo defense lawyer forced to retire by Navy
By Carol Rosenberg
McClatchy Newspapers
NEWARK, N.J. - The Navy lawyer who took the Guantanamo case of Osama bin Laden's driver to the U.S. Supreme Court - and won - has been passed over for promotion by the Pentagon and must soon leave the military.
Lt. Cmdr. Charles Swift, 44, said last week he received word that he had been denied a promotion to full-blown Navy commander this summer - "about two weeks after" the Supreme Court sided against the White House and with his client, a Yemeni captive at the U.S. Navy base in southeast Cuba.
Under the military's "up or out" promotion system, Swift will retire in March or April, closing out a 20-year career of military service.
A Pentagon appointee, Swift embraced the alleged al-Qaida's sympathizer's defense with a classic defense lawyer's zeal - casting his captive client as an innocent victim in the dungeon of King George, a startling analogy for the attorney whose commander-in-chief is President George Bush.
He wore Navy whites to his client's war-crimes tribunal at Guantanamo, dress blues to challenge the administration on the steps of the Supreme Court and turned up last week at a symposium at Seton Hall Law School in more sober, workaday khakis.
"It was a pleasure to serve," said Swift, who added that he would defend Salim Hamdan all over again, even if he knew he would have to leave the Navy earlier than he wanted.
"All I ever wanted was to make a difference - and in that sense I think my career and personal satisfaction has been beyond my dreams," he said.
Swift, a University of Seattle Law School graduate, also said he will continue to defend Hamdan as a civilian. The Seattle law firm of Perkins Coie, which provided pro bono legal work in Hamdan's habeas corpus petition, has agreed to support Swift's defense of Hamdan in civilian life, he said.
...
In June, the prestigious National Law Journal listed Swift among the nation's top 100 lawyers, with such legal luminaries as former Bush administration Solicitor General Theodore Olson, 66; Stanford Law constitutional law expert Kathleen Sullivan, 50, and former Bush campaign recount attorney Fred H. Bartlit, 73.
Navy Lt. Cmdr. Jeffrey D. Gordon, Pentagon spokesman on Guantanamo topics, did not respond to a query about the up-or-out system by which Navy lieutenant commanders are retired if they don't get promoted.
More at Wikipedia and the National Law Journal, which adds this:
Swift said that Katyal, Perkins Coie, the American Civil Liberties Union, Human Rights Watch, his judge advocate general colleagues and others have made "incredible contributions" to an effort that he described as "all-consuming in a way that I would never have guessed.
"My father says it was the case I was born to take," Swift recalled. "He said it has my two propensities: to both believe absolutely in country and military and, at the same time, to question everything."

Well, you did get your own plunger. I have to share mine.
Anyway, imagine what you would have had to do if you (we?) hadn't won that prestigious award.
SMG
Posted by: SteveMG | December 17, 2006 at 11:50 AM
P.S. Congrats on both accomplishments.
Perhaps handing power to the Democrats wasn't such a bad idea after all?
Posted by: SteveMG | December 17, 2006 at 12:04 PM
chicks dig me more since I was named Man of the Year
Posted by: windansea | December 17, 2006 at 12:16 PM
Do I still have to shower & brush teeth and all that?
Posted by: Buddy Larsen | December 17, 2006 at 01:01 PM
Tom, I even predicted it would be you as far back as early October.
Posted by: WWB | December 17, 2006 at 01:24 PM
To paraphrase Grouch Marx, I don't want to win an award from an organization that would honor someone like me.
Something like that.
And remember that we're sharing the award with the likes of these folks and these fine folks.
SMG
Posted by: SteveMG | December 17, 2006 at 01:26 PM
Is there a cash prize?
Posted by: SunnyDay | December 17, 2006 at 01:32 PM
I want to thank all the little people who made this possible.
Posted by: Patrick R. Sullivan | December 17, 2006 at 01:42 PM
lol
As one of little folks, I want to thank y'all for allowing me both to support all you winners and to have won as well...
I think...
Posted by: JJ | December 17, 2006 at 02:19 PM
We've been KEILLOR-ed!!! Wobegone America where "the women are strong, the men are good looking, and all the children are above average."
Posted by: Lesley | December 17, 2006 at 02:25 PM
It's from Time fer Chrissake. I wouldn't let it go to my head.
Posted by: clarice | December 17, 2006 at 02:32 PM
what's next--how pretty and strong and smart we are? Shucks, don't wanna miss that, better subscribe.
Posted by: Buddy Larsen | December 17, 2006 at 02:33 PM
Finally...
I have Achieved.
Posted by: Soylent Red | December 17, 2006 at 03:19 PM
I think it's really bloggers making a difference in the world.
Someone said that I should use my real name because I'm really smart and all and can get some money, but I stayed anonymous..........
Posted by: Bet | December 17, 2006 at 03:30 PM
Officers have more than one opportunity for promotion before they are forced out, So Swift has been passed over before.
Posted by: PaulV | December 17, 2006 at 05:05 PM
Has anyone been lending Time their beer goggles
'Scientists believe they have worked out a formula to calculate how "beer goggles" affect a drinker's vision.
'The drink-fuelled phenomenon is said to transform supposedly "ugly" people into beauties - until the morning after.'
Posted by: Patrick R. Sullivan | December 17, 2006 at 05:17 PM
I'd surely tip my hat - and give my portion of the award (ahem) - to Swift who must have been facing tremendous ostracism from his peers. Lot of guts; let's give him some glory.
Although, frankly, to argue as he does that only civilian courts can be used to try these detainees is a triumph of ideology over practicality. Not much of a modest proposal, it seems to me, from Mr. Swift.
Speaking of immodesty, I'd stop at that and most definitely not recognize the work from the folks at the Center for Constitutional Rights and/or the ACLU. What sacrifice really have they made? While Swift's motivations may be pure, I'd question the goals of those other groups in their desire to give these detainees access to civilian courts.
SMG
Posted by: SteveMG | December 17, 2006 at 05:58 PM
Well, I went over to Malkin and she has these dolls like that movie 'World Police.' Then I learned that Kim passed on the 'Time' man o da year. Then I saw this article how China is all mad that Kim launched the Chinese 'fireworks' on the 4th of July while the Chinese went on manouvers with our Navy and got all impressed. Then I did some research and the name of the Institute. It's The World Sercurity Institute, like in Bureau, like the movie. Last i checked the set up at the WSI http://www.cdi.org/pdfs/Press%20Guide%20to%20WSI%20Experts.pdf and it looks just like CIA and Plame's WMD.
So, it is TIME magazine after all and maybe that's what someone had, not that they went backwords....................ya, it was all those 'little people' that made this possible...........
Posted by: Sen | December 17, 2006 at 06:19 PM
Hmmm.
1. Next to the media the military's lawyers have done the 2nd greatest damage to our efforts in Iraq and the GWOT.
2. I have no idea what "Sen" is talking about.
Posted by: ed | December 17, 2006 at 08:03 PM
Time must be worrying about a future drop in Narcissist subscriptions.
Posted by: TP | December 17, 2006 at 08:09 PM
I will give Lt. Cmdr. Swift credit for standing up for principles. But, what did he think would happen? He is part of one of the largest government bureaucracies and they do not take kindly to those who make waves (no pun intended...well maybe).
With his notoriety, he will find work easily enough.
Posted by: Specter | December 17, 2006 at 08:13 PM
I'm not impressed by Swift. If he had studied hard and gotten good grades, he could have made something of himself. He didn't and got himself stuck in JAG.
Posted by: SmokeVanThorn | December 17, 2006 at 08:27 PM
For ignoring the entire history of military tribunals inherent in of ex parte Quirin,
Merryman, Milligan, Eisentrager, Yamashita
et al; Swift fails his course (thanagain so did the Supreme Court majority in Hamdan)
Time Magazine's latest pick, with all do
respect to you Tom. Glenn (Reynolds not Greenwald) Scott, John et al) is rather a lame attempt for relevance.In the following
year, we won't really be concerned and apprehensive about blogs, but Mahmoud, Kim
Ismail (Haniyeh) and Imad (Mugniyeh).
Posted by: narciso | December 17, 2006 at 08:57 PM
Yeah, I also can't get too excited about a tribute to lawyers interfering with our ability to conduct a war. That's not a principle to be proud of.
Further, the effort appears to've been futile, as the new Military Commissions Act answered SCOTUS's (faulty, IMHO) objections in Hamdan. (Assuming it holds up on appeal.)
Posted by: Cecil Turner | December 17, 2006 at 10:26 PM
Let's see, this guy is an O-4 being forced to retire with at least 20 years in service because he didn't make O-5 "this summer". So my guess is he has been passed over for promotion at least once, probably twice, in 05 and/or 04.
What was his excuse before?
Posted by: John Barr | December 17, 2006 at 10:27 PM
What little I know of the JAGs disgusts me and Swift disgusts me. He does deserve a prize for Self-Righteousness, though.
Posted by: PaulL | December 17, 2006 at 10:28 PM
You can't believe the reports I get almost daily about the JAGs..and they are worse when embedded in our troops who are ridiculously given police patrol work.Seems we have our own ACLU troops who are setting the ROE on the spot. PHEH (Not a job for Marines. Waste of resources.)
Posted by: clarice | December 17, 2006 at 10:40 PM
And the JAG gave Bush a hard time about getting the Detainee bill passed?
Posted by: lurker | December 17, 2006 at 10:49 PM
12/18/06 myfoxcolorado: Colorado Marine Killed by Iraq Sniper
A Marine from Leadville was killed by sniper fire in Iraq this weekend. Rachele and Brad Palmer say their son Nick Palmer, 19, was killed Saturday while in a Humvee.
12/18/06 khou: Marine from Kingwood killed in Iraq
Lance Corporal Luke Yepsen was conducting combat operations in the Al Anbar Province of Iraq when he was killed Thursday. Yepsen was a Marine Corps infantryman. Yepsen’s family said they are devastated by this loss. Yepsen, 20, was from Kingwood.
12/17/06 MNF: One Marine dies in Al Anbar
One Marine assigned to Regimental Combat Team 5 died Dec. 16 from wounds sustained due to enemy action while operating in Al Anbar Province.
12/17/06 DoD Identifies Army Casualty
Staff Sgt. Theodore A. Spatol, 59, of Thermopolis, Wyo., died of a non-combat related illness in Thermopolis on Dec. 14. Spatol was assigned to the 1041st Engineer Company, Rock Springs, Wyo.
12/17/06 Reuters: Gunmen kill Sheikh Ismail al-Khanfashi on Saturday
Sheikh Ismail al-Khanfashi, deputy head of an Iraqi NGO, was killed on Saturday by gunmen. Al-Khanfashi took part in a national reconciliation conference in Baghdad.
12/17/06 Reuters: Police find 2 bodies in Mussayab, 3 in Jurf al-Sakhar
Police found the bodies of two people shot dead on Saturday in Mussayab...Police found the bodies of two people, shot dead and tortured, in Jurf al-Sakhar
12/17/06 AP: 20 to 30 people kidnapped at Baghdad Red Crescent
Gunmen in Iraqi army uniforms staged a mass kidnapping on Sunday at the office of the Iraqi Red Crescent in downtown Baghdad, police said. An official of the Iraqi aid group said the assailants abducted 20 to 30 employees and visitors...
12/17/06 WaPo: Nation feels more like prison for some women
As Islamic fundamentalism seeps into society and sectarian warfare escalates, more and more women live in fear of being kidnapped or raped. They receive death threats because of their religious sects and careers. They are harassed...
12/16/06 AP: Ga.-based troops prepare for unprecedented third tour
With two combat tours under his belt and an unprecedented third fast approaching, Army Sgt. Steve Butcher gets a lot of questions about Iraq from his 6-year-old daughter, Molly.
12/16/06 tvnz: Kiwi killed in Iraq attack
A New Zealand man working for a private security firm in Iraq has been killed in a violent attack on the convoy he was guarding. Steve Gilchrist, 33...was killed instantly when his armoured vehicle was hit by an armour-piercing shell...
12/16/06 Reuters: Iraqi Army officer killed in Kirkuk
An Iraqi army officer was killed and three soldiers wounded when a roadside bomb exploded in the Rashad district, 40 km south of Kirkuk 250 (155 miles) north of Baghdad.
12/16/06 Reuters: 53 bodies found in Baghdad
Iraqi police said they had found around 53 bodies in Baghdad in the last 24 hours, 9 of them apparently killed execution-style.
12/16/06 DoD Identifies Army Casualty
Pfc. Paul Balint Jr., 22, of Willow Park, Texas, died Dec. 15 in Ar Ramadi, Iraq, of injuries suffered when his unit came in contact with the enemy using small arms fire during combat operations. He was assigned to the 1st Battalion...
12/16/06 MNF: IED kills 3 U.S. soldiers north of Baghdad
An improvised explosive device detonated near a Multi-National Division - Baghdad patrol, killing three Soldiers north of the Iraqi capital yesterday.
12/16/06 AP: Iraqi Army Recruiting Former Officers
Iraq's army has "opened its doors," the prime minister said Saturday, appealing to troops who served under Saddam Hussein for help in curbing the rampant violence.
12/16/06 Reuters: Civilian killed in Mosul
A man selling canisters of cooking gas was shot dead by gunmen in the northern city of Mosul, police said.
12/16/06 Reuters: Gunmen kill two policemen in Baquba
Gunmen killed two policemen when they attacked a checkpoint near a cemetery in Baquba late on Friday, police said.
12/16/06 Reuters: Ten bodies found in Baquba
Police in Baquba sent the bodies of 10 unidentified people, including a woman, to the city's morgue on Friday, hospital official Shakir Ahmed said.
12/16/06 Reuters: 2 civilians killed in crossfire in Baquba
Two civilians, including a woman, were killed and five wounded in clashes between Iraqi soldiers and insurgents in Baquba's Ameen neighbourhood, police said.
Posted by: sam | December 18, 2006 at 12:33 AM
The chaos resulting from BushCo's preemptive-war-that-preempted-nothing is the fault of JAGs? Man you guys were reaching before. Now. Now you're off the cliff and clawing at thin air. Splat!
Posted by: sam | December 18, 2006 at 12:40 AM
Hmmm.
@ sam
Well the problem is ... sam. That if you had actually done some homework rather than simply cutting and pasting this stuff then you'd actually look like someone who has kept up with the discussion rather than a monkey with a stick jammed up his ass.
Why the military's lawyers are causing problems:
1. ROE changes: Rules of Engagement are the rules that determine when it is permissible for a soldier to fire his weapon. The problems with the current ROE in Iraq are very well documented and can be summed up in a short phrase:
"Don't fire back or we'll prosecute your ass".
Which of course the terrorist already know.
2. Rules of detention: These are the rules that soldiers have to follow on dealing with terrorist prisoners. Because the military lawyers have gotten involved now the soldiers must turn over all prisoners, with very few exceptions, to the Iraqi courts. Who then, due to influence, bribery or fear, simply let the bastards go.
...
There's more ... sam. But since you *are* a monkey with a stick jammed up your ass, I won't waste my time.
Posted by: ed | December 18, 2006 at 12:46 AM
Does this mean that if we don't get this same award next year we're unworthy? I don't know about you guy's but I don't think I'll be able to handle that rejection.
Posted by: Daddy | December 18, 2006 at 03:00 AM
sam:
Saddam's trial is still going on. Why don't you do a day by day of that for awhile? Oh yeah, can't balme Bush for Saddam so what's point? Human rights shuman rights .....
Posted by: Terrye | December 18, 2006 at 06:32 AM
Sam is a pidgeon - he does a flyover and craps on the thread.
Posted by: SunnyDay | December 18, 2006 at 06:42 AM
And you know what sam? I am 55 years old. I spent years listening to the lefties yammer on because the US government did not DO something about people like Saddam. Or because they actually supported people like Pinochet. Power to the people and all that crap. They complained when the government did not take those people out and now they complain when they do.
It is like watching George Clooney prance around whining about Darfur, demanding the US do something. yeah right, if the US did do something Clooney would whine about that too. Why doesn't he get on that private plane of his and go to Sudan and demand that the Islamists running the government over there ease up on those folks rather than demanding Bush do something? They would tell him to buzz off, that is why. Much better to play for the adoring crowds here.
Clinton gets the WH for 8 years and in the course of that time he makes the removal of Saddam Hussein from power a national policy. He gives slam dunk Tenet a job. He gives speeches about the need to confront rogue regimes who have wmd and gives Saddam as an example. He bombs Iraq. The UN declares Saddam is not complying with force resolutions while they screw up the food for oil program and the inspection regime...and then years later it is all Bush's fault.
The thing I dislike about the left the most is their complete inability to deal with reality. If it does not fit their little world, their mindset where Bush and Co are responsible for everything bad whereas they themselves walk on water..well it just does not compute.
Say we had not gone into Iraq. What then? Do you think that country would have stayed together without Saddam continuing to kill people? Do you think he would not have gotten all those dormant weapons programs up and running? And where are the weapons the UN swore was there? Did they vanish, were they flushed down some industrial toilet in Baghdad or what?
And what about the UN? Would the American people ever have known what a den of thieves it really is?
The thing about people like you sam is that you only care about people when it suits you. Those soldiers died in the service of their country. You might not like that service, but don't use their deaths. That sucks.
Posted by: Terrye | December 18, 2006 at 06:48 AM
You go Terry!
Posted by: Jane | December 18, 2006 at 06:57 AM
The not too swift Swift states:
Yeah well I would say the same thing, however I would also have added, that if you that you "question everything", it most likely proves you know nothing!
Posted by: Bob | December 18, 2006 at 08:40 AM
So this Swift guy "believes absolutely" in his country but "questions everything", presumably including the military and his country? It's logic like that that put him where he is, a passed-over ex-military lawyer. And how did that case against his client go? He "won"? Does that mean he's out now? So maybe the terrorist can go live with this doofus in his cardboard box.
Posted by: Robert Speirs | December 18, 2006 at 08:45 AM
"interfering in our ability to conduct a war"
Good Grief.
Posted by: Semanticleo | December 18, 2006 at 10:27 AM
News out of Iran:
Ahmadinejad opponents leading elections
By ALI AKBAR DAREINI, Associated Press Writer
TEHRAN, Iran - Opponents of hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad took an early lead in key races in Iran's local elections, according to partial results announced Monday, with moderate conservatives winning control of councils across Iran.
If the final results hold — especially in the bellwether capital, Tehran — it will be an embarrassment to Ahmadinejad, whose anti-Israeli rhetoric and unyielding position on Iran's nuclear program have provoked condemnation in the West and moves toward sanctions at the U.N. Security Council.
A freelance Iranian journalist of reformist sympathies, Iraj Jamshidi, described the vote as "a blow to Ahmadinejad," who was elected in June 2005.
"After a year, Iranians have seen the consequences of the extremist policies employed by Ahmadinejad. Now, they have said a big 'no' to him," said Jamshidi
Posted by: hit and run | December 18, 2006 at 10:37 AM
I'd be shocked if accurate results are reported. That's just not the Iranian way.
Posted by: Jane | December 18, 2006 at 11:28 AM
"interfering in our ability to conduct a war"
Good Grief.
Might want to browse some of the cases we're discussing here. One of the common themes is (Thomas, in Hamdan, quoting Hamdi, itself quoting Quirin):
He goes on:I'd also note he was the lone dissenter in Hamdi, and part of a three-justice dissent in Hamdan (with Roberts abstaining), so the trend . . .Posted by: Cecil Turner | December 18, 2006 at 11:42 AM
I'm certain those who agree with you are Legion.
"Mene, mene, Tekel and Parsin."
Posted by: Semanticleo | December 18, 2006 at 12:08 PM
Looks like cleo got into the rum cake early!
Maybe JF'n K can finally help us...
Are We Doing Enough to Earn Iran's Love?
Have you called for the downfall of Western Civilization and the destruction of the illegitimate Zionist regime today? Have you denied the Holocaust or blamed your problems on those rascally Jews? Have you burned a U.S. flag in protest of the Great Satan's imperialist occupation of the Muslim holy land? If you answered “Yes” to any of these questions, then you and your fellow Berkeley Professors have done much to lay the Foundation of Friendship upon which John Kerry will build his Luxury Penthouse of Appeasement."
Posted by: Bob | December 18, 2006 at 01:28 PM
BlameBush;
Starring Bob, Larry, Moe and Curley.
Posted by: Semanticleo | December 18, 2006 at 01:35 PM
I'm certain those who agree with you are Legion.
The moralistic preening of the left on this subject never ceases to amaze. As if fighting a war in a half-hearted fashion (or rewarding war crimes) was somehow laudable, and helping those who hold those positions puts one on the side of the angels. As if.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | December 18, 2006 at 01:36 PM
Yet another year in which Time continues in its never ending quest to ignore the one man who dominates the public scene - like him or not - President George W. Bush.
So, it's "Everyman".
Pathetic!
Posted by: arrowhead | December 18, 2006 at 01:47 PM
The nihilistic dreaming of the right on this subject never ceases to amaze. As if fighting a war in a half-hearted fashion (or rewarding war criminals) was somehow laudable, and helping those who debauch those positions puts one on the side of the fallen angels. As if.
Posted by: Semanticleo | December 18, 2006 at 01:49 PM
Something tells me SAM (Saddam's chief blog water carrier) missed this:
via USAID:
Posted by: topsecretk9 | December 18, 2006 at 04:58 PM
If you're thinking of sending a gift, Leo wants more hand lotion.
Posted by: SmokeVanThorn | December 18, 2006 at 05:19 PM