I have used the analogy of us living on a playground being harassed by a bully to talk about our experience with Obama, for example, and how he said one thing before the election, and does another afterwards, how the health insurance and pharmaceutical companies have been rolling over ‘single payer,’ and how the ‘military-industrial complex’ is always taking its inordinate cut.

When I read Glenn’s stuff I take him to be arguing that not all of government is bad, but there’s too much of it that is deeply corrupt. He's interested in civil liberties and criminal justice issues and so talks about how our government tortures, assassinates, and disappears.

His solution is to argue that corporations, government leaders, media stars, and elites in general have to follow the rules, the 'rule of law,' that we’ve set down in this country to prevent everybody from getting at each others throats.

I have tried to focus on whether Glenn’s argument is going to save us and our lunch money.

bystander, You brought up one of my unstated alternatives to Glenn’s strategy. When I mention the bully, you want to go right up to him and punch him in the nose. In your experience, this is what it takes to bring them into line. I did not mention this alternative because for bullies, in general, and this bully, in particular, force is unreliable.

He might not back down after you tap his nose, no matter how painful initially. He’ll follow you home and beat you with a club, or perhaps, get his gang to harass you for the rest of your time there.

It also doesn’t set that good of an example if you choose to use his tactics against him. You may stop the bully from picking on you, but, there’s some question whether he then takes out his anger about you on the weaker, sicker, less fist-endowed kids on the playground.

I imagine that some bullies can be taught a lesson about how their behavior won’t get them anywhere. But the bully in the playground I’m talking is not likely to be so cowed. Marx thought that the way to stop the bully is to get everyone else on the playground to organize and act together to eliminate the bully. Are you saying that your punch to the face is going to be any different or more effective than whatever Marx could have organized amongst the working people of the world to do the same thing to the bully?

When Michael Moore filmed “Roger and Me” did he think that getting a shot of him punching Roger in the nose would have stopped General Motors from fucking over Detroit or Flint? No. He would have thought that there was no real nose to punch. And, he’d just get arrested anyway.

You think it’s kind a obvious that we just punch the bully in the nose and stop his stealing lunch money. It’s not how the analogy works.

The bully has no nose, and stands behind the law so that if you do punch him somehow, you are the criminal. This is what we should learn from Chomsky if anything.

You then go on saying, “…if we investigate and prosecute, where warranted, Bush-Cheney war crimes and…” and too, allow that even if this task would be difficult, we should not be surprised.

Essentially, you restate Glenn’s strategy as what we should accept and support along with whatever Glenn argues. You do this without considering any argument I raised in criticism. Maybe none of my concerns seem very important to you. I am here to just mention that there may be some reason to be concerned that Glenn’s strategy won’t work to do what he would like it to do.

I don’t think punching the bully in the nose or making him obeying the rules will work.

You don't have to be impressed by the core Constitutional principles. They are just rules that we insist people play by when they’re here doing business. I imagine if you are one of those internationalists who want to make big money you could ignore what's sacred to Americans like you ignore whats sacred to anyone else.

If the movers and shakers can buy enough politicians, judges, and media stars, along with the regulators and companies, then all questions could be up for sale.

Right-wingers are concerned about the existence and influence of “one world government.” They think that our politicians are treasonously handing over our sovereignty to such an un-American political power. I can have some sympathy for their concerns if what they mean is the possibility that people with a global perspective don’t care what our core Constitutional principles might be. For them, it’s all about costly politicians, and how much profit might be squeezed out under these better business conditions unfettered by core principles.

I am not satisfied to let the situation be left at this. I’ve tried to see what Glenn is up against, and I don’t see that the ‘rule of law” is enough to save us and our lunch money. I would like him to tell me, well, even in cases where the government and the courts are bought and paid for, the corporations are all against us, and we are facing a world-wide Leviathan, “investigations and prosecutions” are the way to go, and I have these x, y, z reasons why this is the best we can do.

He may say, too, that he's not pushing the ‘rule of law” as the only thing we can do. Maybe he would recommend some additional strategy. Yes, when Obama sells out we can do a, b, and c.

I want Glenn to justify our confidence in his strategy given what seems to be the problem confronting us.