Glenn,

I think pragmatism is key here. Obama cannot be looked upon as someone out with a political vendetta. That would ruin any chance he has of making good decisions, which would benefit the USA and its citizens.

However, that does not mean the investigations will not happen. What that does mean, is the Obama administration cannot be seen as the one pushing it forward. I think the wiretapping issue is a great example, because I definitely feel that one might be prosecuted. I expect a ton of anonymous accounts of what was happening in the previous presidency surface in newspapers on January 21. If these accounts are egregious enough, and anger the public enough (you will have to play a role in making this happen) a sufficient contingent of the US public will hopefully demand some sort of investigation, essentially forcing Obama's hand.

While I don't expect high-level officials to be convicted, I do hope enough dirty laundry will be aired that they will have a hard time showing their faces in public. While their punishment might not be equivalent to that faced by an ordinary citizen, hopefully, it will be demeaning enough that any future officials willl be discouraged from engaging in illegal activities.

I enjoyed your entire post, but this was particularly amusing: President Unitard's moribund maladministration ....

Very nice.

as much as i admire your writing, so often you get too caught up in the righteous vision of idealism and miss the reality that pragmatism can accomplish.

-- metropolitannyc

_______________________________

OK, upon consideration I decided that "wbrooksjr" was satire; I'm hoping this is too. It's either an impeccable parody of totally wrongheaded Supercilious Received Wisdom or actual totally wrongheaded Supercilious Received Wisdom.

If it is the latter, I will only counter that it's absurd to claim that Glenn has missed "the reality that pragmatism can accomplish"-- on the contrary, that's what he's on about. President Unitard's moribund maladministration is nothing but "the reality that pragmatism can accomplish".

Now that the initial ecstasy and frenzy of Happy Horseshit over Obama's election has temporarily subsided, I feel able to pry up the rock I've been hiding under and cautiously see if my fever of alienation has broken.

Oscar is still a bit shaky on the old pins, but I cannot forbear to decry the pernicious technocratic piety, invariably presented in a pseudo-thoughtful, "savvy" tone, that a "reform" president has a "mandate" to rescue the nation from pressing economic and foreign policy crises and debacles, and dismisses, trivializes, or outright rejects the necessity of rigorous investigation and prosecution to restore the rule of law.

Lip service and purple prose brimming with vague generalities about Man and God and Law are all the anti-rage these days, but only the idiotically credulous or enthralled mistake soaring oratory for appropriate action.

I'm pleased to find that Glenn hasn't budged from his clear and correct belief that the rule of law needs to be spit out of the belly of the leviathan of political pragmatism that has already ravaged the nation.

Sigh.

And if loose talk about Truth Commissions and other dodges keeps up, you're going to force me to go into my comments archives and dredge up all of my past fulminations on such foolishness.

See, now you're thinking, people. What we need is turn the investigation and prosecution into an economic stimulus package. Not only TV and advertisers would benefit, but small businesses, as well. Perhaps the prosecution can take place in a football stadium. Cities could bid for the rights. Bush would hire is own "dream team." The possibilities are endless!

@Tim - no problem with the pads, only I needed to pay for the goods. No worries, however, clearly from my last couple of posts, the meds are kicking in and things are looking up!

Yes, the 1776 anomaly was different. I could go on about how that was different (the rebellion was against a foreign, occupying power, for one thing, not against the established government of a nation), but even if you ignore that, that's...

One.

Out of... how many rebellions in the past 200+ years?

I'm not so sure I want to play those odds...

Um...let's see

how many times can you show that an armed rebellion has done anything other than lead to an even more repressive junta

There was that little thing starting in 1776 in the New World...

"Senate Dems To White House: Preserve Records (Especially You, Cheney)"

Good news?

http://tinyurl.com/6b4p4y

It's a safe bet that many on the right who oppose prosecuting Bush administration personnel for possible criminal activities enthusiastically support the concept of capital punishment on the grounds that it is a deterrent against criminal behavior. Though this viewpoint is certainly arguable, what is striking is the seeming indifference of those who hold it towards deterring criminal behavior by future Presidents. What possible rationale can there be for not wanting to deter willful lawbreaking and trashing of the Constitution by our chief executives? Are the consequences of such actions considered trivial and not worth avoiding? Our experience of the past eight years provides a clear and emphatic answer: Absolutely not!

But, unless I'm misreading it, Article 5 requires a 2/3 majority of the legislature to ask for a Convention. If the legislature is agreed to be corrupt beyond reconcile, how do you propose we get the foxes to be better overseers of the henhouse?

I believe that our nation is on an inevitable road to violence. For the record: I do not want this, and if it happens, I will take no part. If widespread civil unrest breaks out, I will do my best to leave the country. The reason isn't simple physical cowardice (although that plays a role :) but also because I believe that violence almost never solves a problem; how many times can you show that an armed rebellion has done anything other than lead to an even more repressive junta (where the victors "purge" the previous rulers, and anyone even suspected of being "sympathetic" to them)?

That being said, I believe that Paine's words hit home in the "distant from the scene of sorrow" phrase; Americans today are mostly insulated, still, from the misdeeds of their elected officials. Yes, we know that Iraq is bad, but it's still happening... somewhere... and only people that we mostly don't know are dying. That, and the "bad guys." Sure, the economy is tanking, but so far only the hedge fund managers are looking for work, and who liked those pricks anyway? In every sense, the common man is "distant from the scene" of the sorrow befalling America.

But that will change. If the economy continues to deteriorate, pretty soon it won't just be the bankers looking for work, it'll be the plumbers and teachers and programmers. It'll be you and I, or our friends and family. And if there is a major fuel shortage (perhaps due to an invasion of Iran, or something similar), soon we won't be ABLE to drive -- it won't just be a "green thing." And so on. As Paine, again, nailed it, our situation is precarious.

And by the time a "tipping point" is reached -- unemployment hits 10%, or a draft is required to support our lust for war -- we may well be too far mired in our current system to disengage WITHOUT violence.

That's why I say I see an inevitable progression towards civil strife in this country; a complacent populace and a collusive media are keeping us numb and ignorant while our political class keeps steering a more and more direct course towards the abyss. I don't seek or want violence; I fear it terribly. But if you plot our current course forwards, I don't see that we'll be able to avoid it.

That's part of why I asked the "thought experiment" in my other post. I wanted to hear alternatives to my doomsday scenario. If you accept that both parties have become corrupted and our source of information and discourse (the media) has been neutered and turned into a bully pulpit for the political class, I am at a loss for suggestions as to how to avoid my nightmare civil unrest scenario (which will likely only make things worse for the average citizen). But I am just one citizen shooting his mouth off; hopefully someone cleverer than me has a real, workable alternative.