Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
This is the current tone of thought in America. An entire country that is afraid of the boogey-man. And they are not looking for terrorism.They want to eliminate,embarrass,threaten all opponents to them. This is the legacy of the Bush-Cheney administration. Its the legacy of America now. WATCH WHAT YOU, WHAT WHAT YOU DO. Orwell's 1984 has arrived in America.
Here's something I sent in as a comment to a recent New York Times editorial (July 25, 2008 EDITORIAL, Wounded Warriors, Empty Promises http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/25/opinion/25fri1.html) which I thought might give you a chuckle or two:
Well, I guess the wounded warriors can always settle for the great consolation of GW Bush flying his warplane, all dressed up in his itsy-bitsy yellow pilot suit, all the way to Baghdad to get photographed sharing some phony plastic Thanksgiving turkey with their comrades.
What's that you said? He had worn that pilot suit to fly to the carrier USS Abraham Lincoln to announce "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!", NOT for the photo-op with Thanksgiving turkey? Wow! That IS a consolation!
-- GSC
It's pretty clear that the leaders of the Bush administration have committed violations of law and the Constitution that may well be criminal. They must be held accountable so in my opinion one of the most important questions that should be asked of the presidential candidates is where they stand on granting pardons to members of the Bush administration who may be facing trials following their terms.
The Bush adminsitration's obsession with spying on Americans is consistent with the paranoia of leaders, like Richard Nixon, who have committed illegal and treasonous acts and fear exposure. The Bush administration's spying could be intended (in part) to monitor those individuals who suspect or have become aware of the administration's possible involvement in the attacks of September 11, 2001. Spying in innocent individuals is a form of intimidation to stifle dissent.
September 11, 2001 was a boon for the Bush administration and the defense industry who supports them. The government's insistence upon spying on as many as 8 million Americans is consistent with the motivation of a group of thugs who fear being caught. Members of the Bush administration can "plausibly deny" nefarious motives by claimingthat the reason for their spying is to protect Americans from another September 11th attack, but in light of the very real probability that the Bush administration itself was responsible for the attacks, their claim that it is now necessary to be more vigilant against terroriss becomes a nauseating form of circular argument. Doubtless, it would become necessary to be more vigilant against those intelligent enough to realize that the administration's explanations for the September 11th attacks, and the claims of the 9/11 Commission Report, which they oversaw, make no sense under scrutiny.
"the goal would be to implement reforms"? We don't need reforms. We need law enforcement. The Constitution is pretty clear about things like treason, abuse of power, lying to the country to get us into war. The evidence is there for all to see. When the rule of law has been abandoned, what will a reform mean?
The Real Reason for the Bush Administration's Spying (amended)
The Bush administration's obsession with spying on Americans is consistent with the paranoia of leaders in the past who, like Richard Nixon, have feared exposure for committing illegal and treasonous acts and attempted a coverup. The White House’s spying could be intended (in part) to monitor countless individuals who suspect or have become aware of the administration's possible involvement in the attacks of September 11, 2001. Spying on innocent people because of what they know is a form of intimidation to stifle dissent.
September 11, 2001 was a boon for the Bush administration and the defense industry that they support and who supports them. The government's insistence upon spying on as many as 8 million Americans is consistent with the motivation of a group of thugs who fears serious retribution. Members of the Bush administration can "plausibly deny" nefarious motives by claiming that the reason for their spying is to protect Americans from another September 11th attack, but in light of much credible evidence that the Bush administration itself was responsible for the attacks, their claim that it is now necessary to be more vigilant against terrorists becomes a nauseating form of circular argument. Doubtless, it would become necessary to be more vigilant against those intelligent enough to realize that the administration's explanations for the September 11th attacks, and the claims of the 9/11 Commission Report, which they oversaw, make no sense under scrutiny. We are one national dialogue away from exposing the treacherous and treasonous acts of the Bush administration, and they know it.
I happen to be reading Liberty's Blueprint by Michael Meyerson about how James Madison and Alexander Hamilton (and John Jay) wrote the Federalist Papers. It makes you realize that the continuation of our government is far from certain. The Founding Fathers (and mothers) tried hard to ensure that a balance of powers would mitigate the inevitable human urge towards dictatorship.
Yet here we are, in 2008, wondering what happens to our government when the Executive branch refuses to balance its powers with Congress, Congress refuses to exercise its powers in a meaningful way, the courts are heavily packed with judges who agree with the Executive view on issues (since 1981), and the major media outlets are owned by giant corporations who view news as entertainment (as narrative based more than fact based).
And don't forget the continuity of government issue, which reflects the Reagan/Bush view of Executive power, not the Founding Fathers view of balanced power. Remember, Washington DC was sacked and burned by the British in 1812. I don't recall the US government response was to arrest citizens, ignore Congress, and all the rest. During the Civil War, Lincoln made a point of seizing extraordinary powers then giving them back to Congress. There should be, in other words, alternate views of how the government should function in emergencies. The Bush/Cheney view is simply one very dark, very authoritarian and anti-democratic option.
I don't see Obama changing any of this, especially if he takes counsel from Cass Sunstein (sp?) and the like. And what can citizens do if, as noted above, the balance of power fails in our constitutional system? Not much. We have to rely on the tender mercies of Reid, Pelosi, Hoyer, Rockefeller, and the rest. You know how that has turned out so far.
I don't hold much hope citizens will get their government back. Far more likely is continued dictatorship with the sheen of democracy. We'll get to vote. But we won't get to stop the spying, stop the corporate giveaways, stop the endless wars, and all the rest. And there'll be two tiers of justice, a punitive one for citizens and lax Scooter justice for those in power and the corporations and individuals who support them.
We're already there, today, thanks to Bush, the Congress, the courts, the media, and corporations. The question is whether tomorrow will be any different. Unlike the Revolutionary War, most citizens in this country are not riled up, not protective of their legitimate interests. So the federal government will continue to get what it wants.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
