Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
But I'm going to be laughing my ass off when Lieberman knifes Obama in the back, and you KNOW he will sooner or later.
And in 2001, the Republicans of 2000 hadn't gone anywhere, either. In 2000, they passed the Torture Act. In 2001, they passed the PATRIOT Act.
Yes, indeedy. I don't know about it being reasonable to demand change from people who haven't gone anywhere. Old dog - new tricks, tiger changing its stripes, and all that. The best we may get out of Obama is his ability to veto the worst our bipartisan seeking, comity loving, Congress dreams up. If that were to forestall worse abuses than have already been visited on the public, it would still be worth something. I hate to think in these terms but, Obama may be little more than a benign place-holder until the public can effect significant changes in the composition of Congress (Accountability Now, anyone?). Not that he isn't capable of more, only that the constraints of Congress may limit what he can accomplish. I warn myself Obama is also capable of much worse.
Reuters is spinning the Lieberman story as a story of the Senate Dems "yielding" to Obama.
But this spin is ridiculous, when there's there's no evidence whatsoever that Obama had to twist any arms.
The evidence is that Obama asked the Senate Dems to do . . . what the Senate Dems were inevitably gonna do anyway.
The Senate Dems didn't "yield" - - but this story certainly makes them sound like wimps:
Reuters:
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE4AG7MC20081118
Lieberman keeps Senate chairmanship
Tue Nov 18, 2008 11:55am ESTWASHINGTON (Reuters) - Senate Democrats on Tuesday yielded to the wishes of President-elect Barack Obama and allowed Joe Lieberman to keep his committee chairmanship [...]
- - Reuters
And from purely the realm of political theatre and bs, concerning the idea of spinning this as an Obama led idea. What could make Obama look more diplomatic, mature and magnanimous than forgiving Lieberman? I am reminded of Frodo and Golem, and so will the viewers. In short, bad governance, good political action theatre.
I was under the impression that political observers were telling us that the two parties, Democrat and Republican, were more or less one party with two wings. The basis for this argument involved the fact that the large donors for both parties were pretty much the same corporations and business groups. The fact that there were small individual donors might give one party or the other a distinctive flavor, but the fact is, it's all one animal at the moment.
Now, when the politicians tell us they are going to become less partisan, they are saying that the policies of each party are becoming more and more similar because of the increasing influence of their big donors and the decreasing influence of the small "spicey" donations.
I suppose this is why there was very little disagreement about the wars. Both parties support them. This is why there is so little disagreement about torture, surveillance of the population, and the general gutting of the Constitutional framework of our democracy. All of these "reforms" are pushed by both parties because they are in the interest of their donor base.
If there have been any recent squabbles in Congress or between Congress and the President, mostly they have been generated by disagreements within the corporations. The disagreements have been about how to divide up the spoils of the country so that each group is able to rip off as much as possible.
These facts seem incontrovertible and not surprising.
In 2004, it was the Libertarians & Greens who went to court in Ohio insisting that the GOP had rigged the election. Somehow, this escaped Salon's attention.
Coalitions are both moral and useful when they are transparent. The problem with our form is that they are opaque and unaccountable.
As a Green who argued in 2000 that Nader should not have been on the ballot in Florida, Ohio or Pennsylvania AND should've made half our campaign efforts along the Rio Grande campaigning that all those Latinos in Texas planning to vote for Gore were wasting their vote, I wonder how long it's gonna take Democrats to realize that Nader doesn't speak for me or the party.
Since we agree that depending on the Democrats always leaves democracy itself vulnerable, how about a discussion centering on strategy and tactics both inside and outside the two-party system?
FDs...
via Kos
http://greenmountaindaily.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3642
Interesting spin. Perhaps goes to show what Glenn has been saying all along: problem isn't so much Democrats acquiescing to Republicans, as Congress acquiescing to Executive power.
Glenn: "Both parties are in virtually unanimous agreement that our highest political leaders should be exempt from accountability under the rule of law even for the grave crimes that have been committed."
Well, yes - would we ALL like to be exempt from accountability for our actions or inaction? The thing is that our political leaders have figured out how to do that! But they've gone one better: even our laws no longer apply to them. If they break the law while in office, there doesn't seem to be any rush by their fellow politicians to hold them accountable (Ted Stevens seems to be the rare exception). The only judgment ever rendered is by the voters, which happens every 2, 4 or 6 years. Given the incredible return-to-office rate for incumbents, even voters don't seem especially eager to demand accountability. How can the rest of us get a deal like that?
Watch this slimey prick and then Boxer, in total ignorance, defending him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kDKl3oRU0g
I asked him to resign. I can't take a day more of his bipartisanship. I don't want the Congress run as a private fiefdom of the senior senator from Kentucky.
Back in the old days that Harry Reid and others so often cite, before all the fierce and ugly partisanship reared its offal head, Lyndon Johnson used to grab his Republican colleagues' lapels and yell at them, while he kicked their shins. Now Harry Reid grabs their ankles and sucks on their toes. I'm shocked by Harry's partisan rancor and how ugly it's all become with all that partisan bickering.
Bickering! My god, bickering! If there's one thing worse than war, torture, police state tactics, or a climate change policy that is certain doom to billions of people, it's BICKERING!
With sobs and tears, he sorted out, those of largest size.
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
