Paul Krugman and Steve Benen are experiencing the same brain-lock, to wit, the potentially extra-legal adventures of the Bush Administration have brought forth neither truth nor consequences. Krugman first:
I’m sorry, but if we don’t have an inquest into what happened during the Bush years — and nearly everyone has taken Mr. Obama’s remarks to mean that we won’t — this means that those who hold power are indeed above the law because they don’t face any consequences if they abuse their power.
And over to Benen:
If all future presidents are led to believe their criminal wrongdoing won't matter, what incentive will they have to honor the law?
Let's see - Republicans have lost control of the Senate, the House and the Presidency. Inconsequential?
As to the wisdom of some sort of National Truth Commission, well, I am not afraid of the truth but I suspect Dems with a bit of wisdom will prefer to move on. But if men must be charged with criminality, maybe we can start with Michael Hayden, who even now defends the CIA enhanced interrogation techniques as having uncovered Al Qaeda plots and saved lives:
Hayden noted that the agency had stopped the use of waterboarding more than five years ago, but he argued that the CIA should not be bound by the same restrictive interrogation rules as the U.S. Army.
Responding to critics who contend that harsh interrogation methods produce faulty intelligence, Hayden said that interrogations of key Al Qaeda figures accounted for the bulk of the United States' understanding of the terrorist network and led to a series of successful operations around the globe.
"Do not allow others to say it didn't work," Hayden said. "It worked."
But if Democrats want to ask the American public to choose between a career American military officer and a lawyerly mindset oriented to preserving the rights of terrorists, by all means they should proceed apace. Keeping the world safe for terrorists - I'm sure there is an audience for it.
MORE: Getting past the fact that the Office of Legal Counsel and the DoJ blessed a lot of these activities will be tricky. Maybe future Administrations should require that every major official retain private counsel and demand a court order accompanying each Presidential directive. Just thinking out loud...
Krugman's and Benen's knowledge of the POTUS's powers is equivalent to Plaxico Burress's knowledge of prudent firearms handling techniques.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | January 16, 2009 at 10:55 AM
Hmmm... Maybe a smart person could set up an Obama Crime Watch site that would total the number of man days of crimial activity under the Obama regime?
It now looks like GITMO will be open for pretty much all of http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZDNkMzM4YTBlNmY1OTJhNjZiZmViZTM4YzI0YWE0Yjk=>Obama's first term:
the Washington Post reports that President-elect Obama “will consider it a failure if he has not closed the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, by the end of his first term in office.”
So, that's what... one day of criminal activity under Obama per GITMO inmate according to Paul Krugman and Steve Benen?
Posted by: Ranger | January 16, 2009 at 11:01 AM
Sorry about that.
Posted by: Ranger | January 16, 2009 at 11:01 AM
Waterboarding should be safe, legal, and rare. If it is not highly regulated, it will be abused. It is effective.
================================
Posted by: kim | January 16, 2009 at 11:01 AM
I’m sorry
That's all I need to read from Krugman.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 16, 2009 at 11:14 AM
Let's see - Republicans have lost control of the Senate, the House and the Presidency. Inconsequential?
And how is this related? Surely you are not seriously suggesting cause and effect?
Posted by: PaulL | January 16, 2009 at 11:24 AM
For those who are interested, John Kass will be interviewed tonight on WTTW (LUN).
I'll post the video, when it's up, which'll probably be Saturday or Sunday.
Posted by: Mel | January 16, 2009 at 11:31 AM
At Steve Benan's site, I asked for a list of what Bush and Company should be charged with. Should be interesting...
Posted by: PDinDetroit | January 16, 2009 at 11:32 AM
Will military personnel who undergo SERE training make a move to sue the government for torturing them?
That would be interesting.
Posted by: MayBee | January 16, 2009 at 11:38 AM
The beginning of totalitarian purges.Two solutions,don't get caught or make sure nobody is in a position to do anything about it.
Posted by: PeterUK | January 16, 2009 at 11:50 AM
SERE training? Hell, anyone who went through basic training would qualify under the new rules.
Posted by: Soylent Red | January 16, 2009 at 11:55 AM
those who hold power are indeed above the law because they don’t face any consequences if they abuse their power.
What's his position on the tax cheat who's up for Treasury?
Posted by: bgates | January 16, 2009 at 11:59 AM
The Left cannot separate politics and the law. Public Opinion should not wait to rely on a legal standard like "beyond reasonable doubt". Politicians should not suggest that they wait though they often do.
Donations from Chinese MIlitary Intelligence and transfer of missle guidance sytems to the Chinese. But there was no "quid pro quo".
Public Opinion should have been outraged by this in the same manner they were outraged by the prison in Iraq, the prison in Cuba, use of torture, bungled military strategy.
We need to remove this "legal standard" we have developed and respond to things politically lie what happened in 2006 and 2008. Craig and Libby are the only ones with legal consequences and Craig plead guilty. All the others Bush, Cheney et al were punished severly at the polls.
Posted by: Will Wills | January 16, 2009 at 12:00 PM
Here's the thing: in the late Nineties, the really smart Republicans, the one's around Governor Bush for example and the ones around Fred Thompson and Bob Dole in the Senate, understood in their bones that Impeachment was a complete graveyard for Republican ambitions in the country. Yet, there was a relentless legal logic to the pursuit of the impeachment cases against a sitting President by an angry Republican base that had been beaten like a rented mule, twice, by a clever, sitting Democratic President and his harridan wife.
This is what drove impeachment above all things. In more normal times, say, when Ike was president, these matters would have been swept under the rug for the larger good of the country. But these were the Nineties. These were not normal times. The nation was being run by narcissistic baby boomers who thought only of what was good for them. On both sides of the aisle, I might add.
There is a relentlessness to the pursuit of Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, David Addington, John Yoo, and the CIA guys, that possesses the Left with the zeal of the Children's Crusade. They believe that Bush is evil and has traduced the Constitution and should go before the Hague for war crimes. They do not understand that this Guevarist impulse eventually leads to Banana Republic Land and the transformation of our politics into a revanchiste bloodletting. Think of a Paraguayan State of Siege and you get the idea. The thought that Bush, Cheney, Rummy, Condi, and the feckless, clueless, CIA were actually trying to protect the country doesn't actually cross the minds of people like Paul Krugman, Jane Hamsher and Glenn Greenwald. They do not get the vast implications implicit in one epigram of Sun Tzu: That " War is the Most Serious Business of the State". They have been out of power for too long.
They simply will not forgive Bush for the Florida Recount Case in 2000 and his reelection victory in 2004. That's what this is about.
It is important to understand that this has nothing really to do with torture and waterboarding. The waterboarding happened to three people. This is about partisan revenge and counting coup. Period.
The same revanchiste impulse drove the Republicans right into the ground in 1998 and 1999. It was like watching lemmings drive themselves over the cliff. These people will force Obama to establish some sort of Truth Commission (the very name is Orwellian in it's nature), and the Republican Party will have to go to a scorched earth response to protect its very existence as an institution.
That's what the Clintons did because they were smart enough to understand that the Republicans were trying to destroy them (which we were, let's be frank: the Impeachment Case was not highminded in the least-it was crass, unproductive politics-the people got that, and backed Clinton). Fortunately, we lost, as we should have. Otherwise, Al Gore would have presided over the last eight years. I don't want to go into Harry Turtledove Land and speculate about the losses we would have taken, on the courts, on the right to keep and bear arms, and on the right to free speech and assembly. People who are quick to praise the House Managers don't get this.
There will be some sort of persecution of George Bush and his war cabinet. This will happen. There are things that not even the Messiah can not prevent. There is a destructive, angry conviction on the Left that insists that their enemies are evil and must be persecuted and destroyed even unto prosecution and imprisonment. They think, as we did in 1998, that if only Bush's crimes are laid out before the world before some Moscow Show Trial that a little light will go on in our little Republican heads and we will all have a Damascene conversion and start thinking like Kos Diarists. The Left believes that If Only We Knew As They Did, We Would Believe.
Eric Hoffer wrote of this, and warned of this terrible convergence of Faith and Conviction. There is a relentlessness to it that will not be stopped. It will be Obama's undoing. You heard it here first. All fanatics undo themselves. Obama had drunk from their cup and taken the bargain of Dr. Faustus. He will be the last to pay, and he will not know why.
Obama actually gets the folly of this, despite what some here think, I suspect. He knows what Republicans can do to him when forced to act like the Wehrmacht in retreat, in, say, Russia, in 1943, only our condition is not nearly as bad as the Wehrmacht's or, I might add, the Tory Party's in 1998. But this is sort of like a Democratic Party's version of August, 1914. The troops can't be stopped because the railroad schedules must be followed, etc...A triumphant Obama, undone by the fanaticism of his acolytes.
All this was actually foreseen by none other than Marx, when he famously remarked that history repeats itself, the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce.
Posted by: section9 | January 16, 2009 at 12:02 PM
s9, I think you've got it.
=============
Posted by: kim | January 16, 2009 at 12:10 PM
And I suspect, too, that Obama has some inkling of his predicament. It might explain some of his repudiation of the extreme left.
========================================
Posted by: kim | January 16, 2009 at 12:12 PM
Waterboarding should be safe, legal, and rare.
It should be a decision made between an interrogator and his President.
Posted by: MayBee | January 16, 2009 at 12:12 PM
Krugman is a fool.
Obama is smart to sidestep this "investigate!" stupidity from the lefties, because he doesn't want to have it paid back when he leaves office...Capice?
(Not to mention, it would be a complete waste of time, energy, and dollars. You cannot prosecute people for incompetence.)
Posted by: Lipshitz | January 16, 2009 at 12:14 PM
Hell, anyone who went through basic training would qualify under the new rules.
LOL, so true. In basic they fired live rounds over my head as I humiliatingly "low-crawled" through the mud; if I'd stood up I would've been killed! Now that I think of it, I've probably been traumatized by this since the day it happened in the 1970s! One day, they made us recruits wade for hours through a Georgia swamp - there were snakes in that water, probably poisonous ones, we saw them! Oh the humanity! Another time we had to tie our own "Swiss seat" and rappel high over a creek, from one hillside to another; if we'd done a poor job tying the seat we might've fallen to our deaths! A fate worse than water in our noses potentially awaited us! As I recall, some of us were a little anxious about most of these things - yes, the anxiety was downright palpable! It's all coming back to me now, in flashes and glimpses, and I'm suddenly unable to even move from my chair as a result of the shock. Somebody call an attorney for me!
Posted by: hrtshpdbox | January 16, 2009 at 12:16 PM
Sadly I agree with you for the most part section 9.
Maybe we should ask the left to tell us what price they demand to stop trying to destroy this country.
At least then we would know.
Posted by: Jane | January 16, 2009 at 12:17 PM
good post, sec9.
I think they should replace waterboarding with 30 minute recordings of fingernails scratching across blackboards...which is really worse?
Posted by: matt | January 16, 2009 at 12:17 PM
There's a point at which it won't matter what Obama will say. There are enough powerful liberals in Congress who think as the Left thinks to move this thing, and will resent any interference by the WH to slow them down.
Posted by: section9 | January 16, 2009 at 12:18 PM
MayBee, 12:12, I agree. There are situations that demand it.
=====================================
Posted by: kim | January 16, 2009 at 12:19 PM
Sadly I agree with you for the most part section 9.
Maybe we should ask the left to tell us what price they demand to stop trying to destroy this country.
At least then we would know.
No. They want permanent power. This isn't rocket science. It is important to stand up and fight. We have good leaders, Palin and Jindal among them. Maybe some spine can be grafted to our Congressional Party.
Posted by: section9 | January 16, 2009 at 12:20 PM
Off to lunch. Laters.
Posted by: section9 | January 16, 2009 at 12:21 PM
Krugman has a point, however circuitous. Bush and Cheney's success in keeping us safe has led to a president willing to install a tax-cheat as the head of Treasury and the IRS.
I blame Bush and Cheney and question the timing.
Posted by: bad | January 16, 2009 at 12:29 PM
And how is this related? Surely you are not seriously suggesting cause and effect?
So, Paul, are you suggesting that eight years of perpetual whining and moaning about the Bush Administration had no electoral effect?
Honestly, do you think, with practice, you could manage a stupider comment?
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | January 16, 2009 at 12:44 PM
I have to say that the push off of the actual closing of GITMO is perfect politics for Obama. It will allow him to hold closing GITMO hostage to re-electing him in 4 years (which will of course start a new 4 year GITMO closing clock).
Posted by: Ranger | January 16, 2009 at 12:47 PM
It's interesting that Bush HAS to be prosecuted for keeping us safe but Geithner HAS to be installed at Treasury because we have a financial crisis.
Posted by: bad | January 16, 2009 at 12:53 PM
Via Jonah at the corner, a list from Bonnie Erbe on why Bush should be prosecuted:
Even including her hyperbole, does anyone see an actual crime in there?
Posted by: MayBee | January 16, 2009 at 12:55 PM
but Geithner HAS to be installed at Treasury because we have a financial crisis.
Who else but Geithner is fit to oversee the $6 billion needed to provide internet in "underserved" areas, or the $6 billion to go toward "higher education modernization"?
Posted by: MayBee | January 16, 2009 at 12:58 PM
Krugman's is the perfect prescription for turning this country into a banana republic. The man's an abject fool, and at this point I think we should all just sit back and relish his discontent.
Obama sure as hell better come up with something on Gitmo in a hurry. As the months slide by with that place still operating, there will emerge a "Gitmo Watch" on both left and right, reminiscent of Carter's hostage nightmare )"America held hostage--Day 226"). Perhaps JOM can begin the drumbeat some time around late March.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 16, 2009 at 01:04 PM
I know I sound like a broken clock wearing a tinfoil hat, but how much would it have cost for George Soros to have bought Krugman a Nobel this year?
Posted by: MayBee | January 16, 2009 at 01:06 PM
Funny how the estimable Ms. Erbe left illegal wiretaps off her list.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 16, 2009 at 01:07 PM
A draft, headlined "Merry Christmas!":
The Democratic-controlled House Appropriations Committee has released a summary of their proposal for the $825 billion dollar stimulus package. The committee summary is titled, “ AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT: Action and Action Now!” How regrettable to see such lofty words used to cover plunder.
“Action Now!” Represents a Christmas tree of pork and entitlements to be paid for at a future date by you and your children. Most are labeled “energy efficient” which makes them, by definition unassailable and “a good idea.” Since the goals of the proposals are laudable, the proposals themselves are supposed to be laudable.
Many of the “investments” have multipliers — which means, we are led to believe, that they cost less than they cost. For instance, if you install broadband internet at a cost of $6 billion, you — whoever “you” happens to be — get ten times, or $60 billion back. We are not sure who guarantees that 10x return on investment or who gets paid.
-- A billion dollars will be spent to buy cars and trucks — “Alternative fuel”, of course. The summary does not say if they mandate General Motors vehicles.
-- $30 billion will be spent on building highways even though we can’t afford to maintain what we have today.
-- $39 billion will be funneled to education through the same broken educational formulas in place today.
-- $6 billion will go to higher education “modernization” — whatever that means.
-- $2.4 billion will go for carbon capture program research which will be useful if the world is not beginning a mini-ice age of the sort suffered 350 years ago.
-- $10 billion will go to reduce traffic congestion and gas consumption for transit and rail that doesn’t pay its own way now.
-- $20 billion will be spent for health information technology to prevent medical mistakes, making us very worried about why they weren’t worried about these mistakes before now.
-- $20 billion will be spent to defray the increasing cost of food even though the cost of food per capita hasn’t increased in at least three years and what increases there have been are directly attributable to government promoting corn/ethanol subsidies and other such food as fuel.
-- $4.1 billion will be spent for preventive care and to evaluate the most effective healthcare treatments. We hope this isn’t a euphemism for a program to help the jobless to sell apples on street corners.
Tax relief is promised to 95 percent of American workers. Since 95 percent of American workers don’t pay payroll income taxes to spur investment and job growth, those workers should hope that the 5 percent of Americans who will be saddled with paying the tab aren’t business owners who decide to move their companies outside the reach of good-hearted federal legislators.
The House committee touts the unprecedented accountability of the program. We certainly know who is accountable. Furthermore, the stimulus program wasn’t designed to stimulate business as much as it was supposed to make Americans feel stimulated. Boy, are we stimulated!
Congratulations, America. You bought it. You pay for it. You live under it until you decide to change it.
Posted by: sbw | January 16, 2009 at 01:08 PM
Sec9, are you saying that the Repubs should've never gone after the Clintons for anything, including Whitewater? Slick had run against the elder Bush, in part, by railing about the S&L crisis while the MSM completely took a pass on investigating the Whitewater mess. In fact there were convictions from that investigations and might've included either Clinton if Susan McDougal wasn't such a lying slut. I viewed the MSM's lack of vetting of the Clintons to be a preview of their fawning lapdog treatment of Obarry. Your point of the failure of the Senate to remove Slick from the White House keeping us away from having Weird Al as President, and all that would've involved, is well taken.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 16, 2009 at 01:16 PM
Waterboarding should be safe, legal, and rare.
It should be a decision made between an interrogator and his President.
Awesome formulation, kim and MayBee.
Posted by: Porchlight | January 16, 2009 at 01:17 PM
Paul Krugman is example #1 of the Educated Fool. That's in polite terms. In more literal terms, he's simply a silly schmuck.
Posted by: Michael J. Myers | January 16, 2009 at 01:21 PM
Sec9, are you saying that the Repubs should've never gone after the Clintons for anything, including Whitewater? Slick had run against the elder Bush, in part, by railing about the S&L crisis while the MSM completely took a pass on investigating the Whitewater mess.
The real question is: how do you level the playing field? The right seems thoroughly unwilling to play the game, and we suck at it anyway. The reason it works so well of course is the liberal-in-the-tank press.
So how do we level the playing field?
Posted by: Jane | January 16, 2009 at 01:24 PM
SBW,
At least we have the consolation of knowing that at least part of the funds will be under the control of a man of unquestionable probity, integrity and honesty. Treasury Secretary-designate Geithner's mastery of high finance, as evidenced by his exemplary constructive interpretations of even simple sections of the tax code, should put Americans of all political stripes at ease. The appointment of Treasury Secretary-designate Geithner is, I believe, evidence of the moral and ethical standards by which the Obama Administration will be known forever.
PS - At first I thought the "Jailtime" in the title of this post referred to the penalty for willingly and knowingly signing and filing a false tax return with the intent to illegally evade payments of taxes due. I wonder how Krugman feels about those sort of transgressions?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 16, 2009 at 01:33 PM
Rick, one of the items the audit found wrong on Geithner was failure to pay the penalty for a 401K withdrawl.
Financial types categorize early 401K withdrawl as poor financial management except as a last resort to avert a catastrophe.
Geithner's supposed to be the genius to save the entire financial system. His 401K withdrawl in combination with obvious tax cheating is significant.
Posted by: bad | January 16, 2009 at 01:38 PM
"-- $6 billion will go to higher education “modernization” — whatever that means."
It means payback for all those donations to the Obozo campaign from institutions of higher education.
Posted by: PeterUK | January 16, 2009 at 01:39 PM
Obama sued over loan criteria and created the sub prime problem like foreign aid 'grant loans.' The banks tried to do things to save them selves, but weren't allowed - like separate business units for sub prime and CHA or separate stock, etc. Obama wouldn't allow it 'cause he's the ONE and knows what is right.
The CIA torture thing is back 'cause there's legislation to find out how we got broke. They're going to check Merrill, Asian banks, Citi Asian debt, etc. and find out Obama was right there guaranteeing the loans federally. He knows BOA and Merrill and probably talked to them about the bailout because that's what has to be done when it's CHA and loan criteria.........
So, we get to impeach him.
Posted by: Obama's S&L | January 16, 2009 at 01:41 PM
S9 -
If Marx said that history repeats itself first as tragedy, then as farce; shouldn't he have said that history threepeats itself?
Just askin'.
Posted by: Rich | January 16, 2009 at 01:51 PM
Those who demand, yea, demand a Truth Commission really need to consider:
1. How such a commission would play out in our over-partisan age;
2. The level of support for waterboarding the Al Qaeda higher ups; and
3. Whether what Bush and Cheney did was all that unusual in the context of our history,
I doubt they would like the answers, for the most part. Nor would they like the fact that whoever led the commission would emerge, at the end of it, with a reputation much like Kenneth Starr.
Obama strikes me as a relatively cautious guy who is not in the business of stirring up partisan strife. What krugman wants would stir that up, in the worst way, and the good Doctor would likely be surprised that reputations that die in the scuffle would not necessarily e the ones he sxpects.
Folks are worried abouttheir 401ks. About the tender treatment of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed? Not so much.
Posted by: Appalled | January 16, 2009 at 01:52 PM
bad:
Who are the other geniuses that Obama would appoint? I'm sure Chris Dodd and Barney Frank have a handy list -- but is that what you want to stir up?
My guess is geithner is the least Liberal choice Obama would make for the Treas position. Be real careful of what you guys are wishing for.
Posted by: Appalled | January 16, 2009 at 01:55 PM
The Clinton impeachment was okay, but holding people accountable for violating federal law and treaty obligations regarding torture is wrong?
Interesting set of values you people have.
Posted by: Nick | January 16, 2009 at 02:03 PM
It never ceases to amaze me.
A demand for a Truth Commission from the very same folks (liberals) who always spout "moral relativism" and deny that there is anything such as real, objective "truth".
Posted by: fdcol63 | January 16, 2009 at 02:03 PM
Charlie writes: Honestly, do you think, with practice, you could manage a stupider comment?
I suggest you check your meds before posting.
Posted by: PaulL | January 16, 2009 at 02:08 PM
The Clinton impeachment was okay, but holding people accountable for violating federal law and treaty obligations regarding torture is wrong?
I have been calling for this investigation into Bush and Cheney's violation of federal law since dems took over in 06. So far, they have kicked the can down the road. Ask yourself why.
Posted by: Sue | January 16, 2009 at 02:12 PM
The becareful he is the most conservative you will get is a bit overused.I don't think it makes that much differenc.Congress is going to allocate unbelievable amounts of money for pet projects no matter who is the Sec.Mr.Geither watch on as Citi was destroyed.What make you believe he isn't capable of more of the same
Posted by: jean | January 16, 2009 at 02:13 PM
sorry didn't check my spelling.I just got fed up with being told Mr. Geithner is so talanted
Posted by: jean | January 16, 2009 at 02:18 PM
A Truth Commission would be an absolute gift to al Qaeda. For them it would be the Libby Trial on crack,tie your government down for years.
Posted by: PeterUK | January 16, 2009 at 02:20 PM
Stop the presses! DARPA is weaponizing space with microsatellites. Did DARPA ask Paul Krugman for permission to do this? I demand that the UN and Code Pink conduct a joint investigation of this heinous activity!
Posted by: Thomas Collins | January 16, 2009 at 02:20 PM
Appalled, this is less a matter of ideology than of integrity.
=====================================
Posted by: kim | January 16, 2009 at 02:23 PM
Also to whoever is whinning about torture.someone said 'Waterboarding is called Baptisim in some churches".I still love that line.
Posted by: jean | January 16, 2009 at 02:24 PM
sbw-
Well Done.
Posted by: RichatUF | January 16, 2009 at 02:28 PM
I'd love to have an inquiry.. Let's start with Fannie and Freddie..!!
Posted by: jorod | January 16, 2009 at 02:30 PM
Hear hear jorod
Posted by: bad | January 16, 2009 at 02:35 PM
In some aspects, tying the congress down with anything that keeps them from spending money would be a good thing...although I prefer rope, duct tape...
Seriously though, if a show trial was attempted, I would think we would get a preview of Cheney's "scores to settle" best seller. And to my mind, enough folks on the left side of the aisle have had enough dealings with Cheney up close and personal to make this move unpallatable to say the least. You don't poke a grizzly. I would guess that both he and Bush have copies of some relevant documents and recordings of conversations in a jar at Funk and Wagnals and such that would make for interesting exhibits in a show trial or the alt press...
The dems are in the same predicament as the folks in Chicago are re Blago... but in that Star Trek mirror world evil Kirk up is down sort of way...
Posted by: Stephanie | January 16, 2009 at 02:36 PM
The real question is: how do you level the playing field? The right seems thoroughly unwilling to play the game, and we suck at it anyway. The reason it works so well of course is the liberal-in-the-tank press.
So how do we level the playing field?
How do we level the whole culture?
The thing that keeps me optimistic is knowing that one out of three young voters were not swayed by the tremendous forces all about them to vote for Obama. If we knew why that was, maybe we could build on it.
Posted by: PaulL | January 16, 2009 at 02:37 PM
Appalled, this is less a matter of ideology than of integrity.
Precisely. Under Appalled's logic, let's nominate Madoff to the job. He surely understands markets and return on investigation, not to mention how to play the game.
Posted by: Jane | January 16, 2009 at 02:42 PM
Also to whoever is whinning about torture.someone said 'Waterboarding is called Baptisim in some churches".I still love that line.
Jesus was a WaterBoarder? Who knew?
Now, I really feel for those MoneyChangers in the Temple. We never did hear from them again...
Posted by: PDinDetroit | January 16, 2009 at 02:43 PM
I suspect Jesus was a little to soft-hearted to be an effective waterboarder......now John the Baptist, that's a horse of another color.
===============================
Posted by: kim | January 16, 2009 at 02:52 PM
These were conversions he was after.
======================
Posted by: kim | January 16, 2009 at 02:53 PM
spot on Kim
Posted by: bad | January 16, 2009 at 02:53 PM
So how do we level the playing field?
By starting more conservative clubs in high schools. And on college campuses. The dems knew you had to get em young and keep em. The republicans are seen as the party of old people. Needs to change. The high schools all have lots of liberal clubs... environmental clubs, GLBT clubs... what have the republicans got? A few schols have Young republican clubs. Most have FBLA... Boring...
And republicans need to get off their asses and out into the streets... being a part of a movement makes people feel like they are doing something and part OF something. The silent majority is boring.
In short, republicans need to stop being boring. For young people, the worst appellation you can apply is boring. You have to conquer that first.
Young people are action oriented and like being in crowds. We aren't providing those services, so they go elsewhere.
These are the warriors that will carry on the fight, but you have to make the fight their fight with their input; otherwise, you are not gonna change the demographics.
Posted by: Stephanie | January 16, 2009 at 02:55 PM
Captain Hate said, in part:
Sec9, are you saying that the Repubs should've never gone after the Clintons for anything, including Whitewater?
No. That and the Chinese Money scam were fair game. The Monica thing screwed up the Pubbies because they didn't understand that Registered Voters saw it as a personal sex scandal.
I knew how much trouble we were in when Bill McCollum, as a House Manager, had to utter the word "fellatio" during the Senate trial. Several times.
Dumb. Just Dumb. Clinton left office with the backing of the MSM and a 60% approval rating.
The lesson? Pick your fights. When you fight, stand your ground, and have a plan to win.
Posted by: section9 | January 16, 2009 at 02:57 PM
Section 9--I agree with you on everything except the Clinton impeachment. It was not "crass," it wasn't about "sex", and it wasn't something that the House managers were all that thrilled about pursuing (Clinton was a very popular president at that point in time). The clear evidence was that the President of the United States had lied under oath to a court of law--and there was very strong evidence indicating that he had suborned perjury. It wasn't somthing that involved a political question as to what authority a president has or had, or how the president should go about trying to carry out his constitutional obligation to protect the country. He was just trying to save his purely political ass from purely political embarrassment.
The Supreme Court actually let the genie out of the bottle when they let the Paula Jones case proceed against a sitting president. i disaagreed with that decision then, and still do--but once Congress was confronted with the clear evidence that the president lied under oath to a court of law, what were they supposed to do--ignore it?
Posted by: Boatbuilder | January 16, 2009 at 02:58 PM
one out of three young voters were not swayed by the tremendous forces all about them to vote for Obama. If we knew why that was, maybe we could build on it.
Those one out of three were either deeply religious, home schooled or in very conservative homes. Same 1/3 of the demographic that is always pro conservative in polling numbers.
Polling usually runs 1/3 right 1/3 left 1/3 up for grabs on most any issue. It's a matter of getting the middle. And you don't go to the left to get it. You have to have ideas that excite them. We don't.
Posted by: Stephanie | January 16, 2009 at 03:00 PM
And now for something completely different...
A kinder, gentler approach to protesting brought to you by S&L - LUN.
Posted by: PDinDetroit | January 16, 2009 at 03:04 PM
fdcol63-
I've found that "Truth Commissions" the world over have gone out of their way to whitewash and minimize the crimes of communist terrorists and to maximize blame against US (if involved) and anti-communist forces. In a US version, it would "take a winning suspension of disbelief" to see the left and their media allies rehabilitate the Hussein regime, the Taliban, and various Islamist terrorists including OBL, while at the same time, putting midlevel government bureaucrats and uniformed personnel in the dock. The other problem (and I'm not sure where Obama would come down on the question) is how would any sort of extra-judicial commission be formed, who would it report to, and how long would the constitutional challanges be dragged out? It clearly would be a gross encroachment of the President's powers and an attack on the Executive Office of the President and Obama's legal council should fight the attempts and side with the living Presidents during the challenges if it were to go forward.
South Korea has decided that picking at the scabs is somehow a winning strategy. They finish sometime in 2010, will probably see the US out of Korea by 2011 (but North Korea might collapse anyway so it might not be such a bad idea-leaving, not the "truth commission").
Posted by: RichatUF | January 16, 2009 at 03:04 PM
The Monica thing screwed up the Pubbies because they didn't understand that Registered Voters saw it as a personal sex scandal.
In addition to what Boatbuilder said, maybe Starr made a strategic error by asking for the Monica case to be included in his Whitewater investigation, but what was surprising to me was that Reno ok'd it. Of all of Slick's cabinet members she was probably the most politically tone-deaf (Waco, Elian Gonzalez & some of the child care sex-abuse scams she pursued in Florida), so she's the last person I would expect to anticipate how this could play out to any ultimate advantage to Slick. Although did it really? We can't go back and redo history but sans Monica, who knows if Weird Al would've been elected.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 16, 2009 at 03:10 PM
In that case thank you Monica
Posted by: jean | January 16, 2009 at 03:12 PM
It's a matter of getting the middle. And you don't go to the left to get it. You have to have ideas that excite them. We don't.
Do you really think that the Muddle went for Obama because of his ideas?
I'm not saying I'm not concerned about the future, I am. But given the circumstances of 2008 - unpopular two term Pres, unpopular war, nominee unloved by the base, major economic crisis right before the election, media in the tank for the opponent and out to destroy our VP nominee - I think we made out pretty well.
Posted by: Porchlight | January 16, 2009 at 03:13 PM
I would just like to know why, after STEALING 2 elections, the GOP couldn't do it again! LOL
Posted by: fdcol63 | January 16, 2009 at 03:16 PM
In the 2 elections post November 5th that Obama's name wasn't on the ticket, the republican won. This was a freak year. Ask Hillary, who fully expected this to be her year.
Posted by: Sue | January 16, 2009 at 03:18 PM
The country hasn't gone left. I think that is what Obama understands and why he is playing the Middle Man so well.
Posted by: Sue | January 16, 2009 at 03:19 PM
section9-
Not Machiavellian enough. Did you ever consider that allowing the Lewinski investigations to proceed, Reno et al were then able to cock up any other investigations? She was the one who declined referring the Clinton/Gore 96 matters to an Independent Counsel after Justice decided that the IC bar was much, much higher than the "potential conflict" standard she applied about 4 years earlier.
Posted by: RichatUF | January 16, 2009 at 03:19 PM
Clinton was impeached and should have been convicted and removed from office, but I THANK GOD everyday that he wasn't.
Had he been, an incumbent Al Gore would probably have won in 2000 .... with disastrous consequences for the US in a post-9/11 world.
Things happen for a reason.
Posted by: fdcol63 | January 16, 2009 at 03:22 PM
This is a bit dry but worth the read. LUN
Posted by: bad | January 16, 2009 at 03:23 PM
Thomas...Space was weaponized when we launched the first ICBM.
Posted by: matt | January 16, 2009 at 03:28 PM
Bad;
this is a totally political issue between the cable companies and over the air broadcasters. The networks now consider themselves content providers.More insiders helping insiders.
Posted by: matt | January 16, 2009 at 03:29 PM
Do you really think that the Muddle went for Obama because of his ideas?
They went for a very simple idea but yes...Hope and change for the nonpolitical is an idea... and a movement that they were afraid of being left out of. Young people are very much pack animals... newest fads, newest shows, newest music...
And O was just another fad. Too bad the bills gonna come due, but there it is.
In the 60s, smoking was a right of passage for teenagers. Everyone tried it. Not because smoking was anything ideological, but because everyone did it. Smoking = cool...
This year Obama = cool = fad = hordes of youth. Till we figure a way to get that turned, we are in trouble.
And since, in reality, he stood for nothing - double bonus... you could sell him to your friends under the guise of your own delusions of him... and there was an insufficient track record to prove one way or another...
Smoking peaked among young people while the jury was still out on it... you could convince your friends to smoke and there was no countervailing argument against it of substance. Now not smoking in high school is the herd preference - opposite of what it used to be... why is that?
Posted by: Stephanie | January 16, 2009 at 03:33 PM
Delaying TV's swith to digital from anolog clearly is a boon to Sprint.
Posted by: bad | January 16, 2009 at 03:35 PM
Republican leadership imploded after 2000. Their standard bearer, Bush, simply didn't want to carry the banner and there was no clear message while buffoons such as Cunningham, Stevens, Lott, McConnell, etc. proceeded to look after their own personal interests and earmark their way out of favor.
In the meantime, the media have given a hall pass to the Left every step of the way.
Until the republicans start reading McLuhan and capturing the message, and get back to the principles espoused by Reagan, they will be in the wilderness. The rot started with Bush I.
Posted by: matt | January 16, 2009 at 03:35 PM
Polling usually runs 1/3 right 1/3 left 1/3 up for grabs on most any issue.
If that's the case, we didn't get any up for grabs youth.
Posted by: PaulL | January 16, 2009 at 03:36 PM
Obama = Zelig
Posted by: matt | January 16, 2009 at 03:36 PM
Now not smoking in high school is the herd preference - opposite of what it used to be... why is that?
Kids rebel against their parents; what was cool for one generation becomes uncool for the next.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 16, 2009 at 03:41 PM
Captain Hate-
maybe Starr made a strategic error by asking for the Monica case to be included in his Whitewater investigation
It wasn't Starr's choice. Linda Tripp brought the allegations and the evidence to Starr's office, Starr's office called (believe it) Eric Holder at Justice with the allegations. Since the matters were "related" through Vernon Jordan and it was ongoing criminality on the part of the President, the Justice department expanded Starr's authority to investigate the Lewinsky affair. They had to.
Anyway, this is all a bit revisionist, the GOP went on to win the White House twice, and have majorities in the House and Senate. The blow up has been an incompetent GOP in both messaging (in the 80's the GOP had answers for welfare reform and crime, where are their answers for education, healthcare, and energy today) and recruitment. Add to that, sloth at the national party (someone got arrested for embezzelment) and you are where we are.
Posted by: RichatUF | January 16, 2009 at 03:42 PM
Bush didn't fight them, and in that sense, he didn't lead. He and we are now paying for that lapse, but it's that simple.
McCain didn't fight them, either.
I doubt whether a bigger bunch of buffoons has ever prevailed, or that a less qualified a person has ever won the presidency, but the fight just wasn't joined. Even grass-roots armies needs generals, and as slimy as their leaders are, they fight.
When the Truth Commission is formed, it would be best if a new Colonel North was able to take the stand, but they aren't likely to make that mistake twice.
Posted by: Extraneus | January 16, 2009 at 03:46 PM
"...holding people accountable for violating federal law and treaty obligations regarding torture is wrong?"
If we're going to hold anyone accountable for such actions, then we ought to hold everyone who has done such things accountable. How far back do you want to rewind the film? Certainly we'll want to inquire into the transgressions of the Clinton administration, right? How about LBJ?
Our values here are pretty solid. But we apply them to people of both political parties.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 16, 2009 at 03:46 PM
Porchlight,
That's an excellent assessment. The Muddle has never exhibited anything which could properly be characterized as thought. They 'feel' and "my friends" did not generate the type of feelings necessary to move their emotional state from neutral to positive. It really won't take much to make them feel that having a commie in the WH isn't a good idea.
That's why people should watch the tax cheat's confirmation carefully. Grassley has done a very good job of elevating it to the appropriate level of attention. Reps now have cover to make a gesture by voting 'Nay' on the basis of principle while bootlickers like Lindsey and Turncoat demonstrate that not all Reps are so burdened by principles that they refuse to knuckle under for the sake of comity.
The Chicago Dirt Ball takes office with 'questions of impropriety' (which will grow like Topsy) hanging in the stinking air which will come to make up the atmosphere in which the Obama Administration operates. It's not a bad start for what will become an epic fail.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | January 16, 2009 at 03:46 PM
Thanks Rich; I appreciate the correction
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 16, 2009 at 03:52 PM
Okay guys, be gentle. LUN is the podcast of last week's radio show.
Posted by: Jane | January 16, 2009 at 03:55 PM
Why do we have the "previous" and "next" thing again?
Posted by: Jane | January 16, 2009 at 03:57 PM
Ugh, these pages were awful last time.
=======================
Posted by: kim | January 16, 2009 at 03:57 PM
Kids rebel against their parents; what was cool for one generation becomes uncool for the next.
Mostly true.. but take it farther. I'm talking about the "cool" factor in this race. In this race, we were the "parents."
messaging
This is all about marketing and our marketing is the suxxor...
Posted by: Stephanie | January 16, 2009 at 03:57 PM
'threepeats itself?' We call those dems now. A Jane would call 'em luciferians like in the movies where history repeats itself.............
'Sec.Mr.Geither watch on as Citi was destroyed.What make you believe he isn't capable of more of the same...' Obama is this. The ONE HOBO(that is all he is).
Obama is worried about being labeled mentally ill and having his kids taken away from him like he was from his dad so they(CIA) could blackmail his dad into committing treason as a government employee in Kenya. He was a tortured baby, so the torture thing is just too much. He doesn't imprison male escorts anymore, okay now.
Posted by: ONE HOBO's S&L | January 16, 2009 at 03:58 PM
"my friends" did not generate the type of feelings necessary to move their emotional state from neutral to positive.
Is there anybody that didn't wince when he said that?
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 16, 2009 at 03:59 PM