Obama Fails Citizen Power Test

  • Bob Fertik's picture
    Bob Fertik
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!
Final Results   4.7M!
Bush Special Prosecutor Ad 22,779
Bank Bailout accountability Ec 19,271
Bank Bailout accountability Ec 12,854
Universal Health Care HC 11,909

An hour ago I wrote that the "Special Prosecutor Question is the First Test of Obama's Commitment to Citizen Power."

Throughout the 2008 campaign, candidate Barack Obama insisted he was running not to empower himself, but instead to empower ordinary citizens like you and me.

Now he has to prove it.

Sadly, he failed his first test. Once again, he refused to answer my question, even though it was far and away the top vote-getter on Change.gov. Why did he refuse? Because it was a "previously addressed question."

Gimmea&#!^break.

As a progressive, I love all forms of recycling - except non-answers. This is Vice President-elect Biden's recycled non-answer from 12/21/08:

"[T]he questions of whether or not a criminal act has been committed or a very, very, very bad judgment has been engaged in is-is something the Justice Department decides.  Barack Obama and I are-President-elect Obama and I are not sitting thinking about the past. We're focusing on the future... I'm not ruling [prosecution] in and not ruling it out. I just think we should look forward. I think we should be looking forward, not backwards."

This answer insults everyone's intelligence in too many ways to count.

First, there is no question "whether or not a criminal act has been committed." Waterboarding is torture, and torture is always a criminal act - not something that can be dismissed as "bad judgment." It is a war crime under the Geneva Conventions, which makes it a Federal crime by incorporation. It is also a federal crime under the War Crimes Act (18 U.S.C. 2441) enacted by Newt Gingrich's "Republican Revolutionary" Congress in 1996.

There are no legal exceptions for torture. The "just following orders" defense was explicitly rejected at Nuremberg. So was the "lawyers said it was legal" defense. "Our national security was at risk?" Ix-nay. "We got crucial information?" Fuggedaboutit.

Dick Cheney has said repeatedly that he knowingly authorized waterboarding and firmly believes he did the right thing. That is a full and free confession and is therefore admissible evidence in a criminal trial.

Do the legal math: a crime was committed (prisoners were waterboarded). At least one person who authorized the crime has confessed (Cheney). Biden was the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee so he's no legal dummy - what else does he need to know before he agrees to the need for a Special Prosecutor?

Second, the Justice Department is not going to decide whether to appoint a Special Prosecutor for a previous President's crimes without consulting the current President. Not in this political universe. Probably not in any parallel universe either.

Third, of course Biden and Obama are "thinking about the past." Every single statement they make includes references to the past, whether the topic is the economy, foreign policy, or any other issue. Just read Obama's statement today about topics including - yes - torture. There's hardly a sentence without some form of the past tense.

There's a word for thinking about the future without thinking about the past - it's called "dreaming." Neither Biden nor Obama are dreamers.

Of course there's no point in getting stuck in the past. And that's exactly why I want Obama to appoint a Special Prosecutor - so neither the President nor the Attorney General has to waste a single second on the prosecution. Once a Special Prosecutor is appointed, the President and AG will never have to answer a question about the matter under investigation. But until that happens, the President and AG will constantly have to waste time answering the question, because it will never go away. Why?

First, because it is the legal obligation of the United States under the Geneva Conventions to prosecute war crimes committed by its citizens. As Gen. Antonio Taguba said,

"There is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes. The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account."

Second, because it is the moral obligation of every American citizen to demand prosecution of those who authorized it, no matter what their excuse. As Jonathan Turley said,

"The most successful democracy in history is just about to see war crimes, do nothing about it -- and that's an indictment not just of George Bush and his administration. It's an indictment of all of us if we walk away from a clear war crime and say it's time for another commission."

Vice President-elect Biden is a great guy, but his non-answer is not acceptable. And it's equally unacceptable for President-elect Obama to hide behind Biden's non-answer.

President-elect Obama, you asked us for questions, and this is the most important question we want you to answer. Do you truly believe in citizen power as you insisted during the campaign - or were you just lying to us to get our votes?

Comments

Impeach Bush/Cheney

  • Teedee's picture
    Teedee
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

That Biden mumbo-jumbo is really ridiculous. How could charging somebody with a crime, to be put on trial, be "looking backward"??? If so, why try ANY criminal for any crime at all? It's over and done with -- can't undo it now. Preposterous.

We have a job ahead of us to convince Mr. Obama (and his advisors) that investigating and trying BushCo for crimes committed is nothing less than essential, if this country is ever to claim any moral authority again, under any circumstances. This would not be "divisive" nor "looking backward" -- it would be looking forward to the day when our constitution was restored and justice was done. It is the least that should be done if the average citizen is to have any respect whatsoever for the laws of the land.

Teedee, Biden, quite frankly, hasn't been worth...

a damn for years, just like many of his House and Senate buddies. Biden is not alone when he suggests that to support the Constitution by calling down the wrath of the US on the lawbreakers(BushCo)is 'living' in the past and that we must look forward.

You do know that Obama has now said that he will not be looking into torture or any of the other Bushco crimes...Old Joe is just following his boss's lead in this matter.

A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.

Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623

 

The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.

Or maybe just ducking a bullet

  • KimJones's picture
    KimJones
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

Or maybe just avoiding a accidental train crash, until they "actually have it signed on the dotted line.

Hey Bob, I got the invite, but now my family's living on a day to day dinner policy and I can't afford to spend the utility dollars, or my family goes in the dark.

Well, it will look great in a frame on the wall next to his Obama Plate.

mommapanther

Obama/Biden Non-Answer

  • Solace's picture
    Solace
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

Bob, don't you think if Mr. Obama or Mr. Biden would come right out and say what their potential plans for holding the Bush/Cheney administration accountable were, that it would make Mr. Holder's chances of confirmation an even tougher thing? My guess is that the Republicans fears of a Holder Department of Justice is exactly what you are campaigning for (which I support whole-heartedly by the way). Let Obama get his Justice Department players in place first and then start hammering them for what we want them to do with Bush/Cheney. I want to see the key players of this criminal regime behind bars as badly as you do, but like the successful Mafia credo goes "never let your enemies know what you are thinking". I'm going to give the Obama team a little time to prove themselves once they're in place. Then they can go after them.

it's certainly possible

  • Bob Fertik's picture
    Bob Fertik
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

but Republicans are already gunning for Holder over the pardons of Marc Rich and the FALN and a few other issues, so I don't think it would make a difference if they had one more disagreement with him.

As progressives, we are always advised to "wait" for the perfect moment to promote our causes. And then something else happens, the perfect moment never comes, and the imperfect moments are gone forever.

There is never a perfect moment for change. All we have is the present, and we must use it or lose it.

Hope for Justice

  • Solace's picture
    Solace
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

Don't get me wrong. I'm all for what you do and I'm not for waiting either. I want the Obama administration to start going after Bush/Cheney et al. on day one. I guess I just like the lay low and strike when the enemy's guard might be down. But I guess that's hard to imagine with these experienced criminals. Keep up the good work on letting the Obama team know what this country needs to move forward progressively.

yes these experienced criminals

  • Bob Fertik's picture
    Bob Fertik
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

know they are in danger of prosecution. that's why they will try to pardon themselves. but we'll make sure that's not the end of the game.

Avoiding Answer to Question 1.

  • PaulFS's picture
    PaulFS
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

If President Obama were to come out and say that he is going to prosecute Bush will surely issue pardons to everyone before he leaves office. It is better he should wait until he is sworn in.

And the law is?

  • jones's picture
    jones
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

"something the Justice Department decides"

Well, is it or is it not then? Sure there are moral obliations. But what is the law? What can the President/Vice President-Elect legally do? Sure they are citizens but no one expects them to dis a sitting POTUS. Not in this fucked world we are in now.

Then there is the Supreme Court. Do you think they will side with "war crimes" in any way?

We are so screwed. Only some by unforeseen avenue such a some kind of lawsuit will any of this reac a court and that only years from now. IMO

Nobody is under any illusions.

  • Jim's picture
    Jim
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

It took years of speaking to tens of thousands of folks...

Untold hours...

But a guy got Obama's ear...

A question was asked...

A few news agencies are now talking about it...

It's been nice to have the question of Bush/Cheney's guilt finally breach the airwaves, and I only point out the above because there have been a lot of folks who have only thrown up their hands at the organizational work required to make something happen.

It takes a concerted effort, every day of our lives, to hold back the night.

Inquiry into Bush/Cheny war crimes

  • mstocker's picture
    mstocker
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

I don't believe that this issue is un-ambiguous; these folks are criminals. Unfortunately like other criminals in their league, "busting" them, or even prosicuting them will only satify some public need for retribution, it will not mitigate their crimes. What is perhaps more likely to happen if Bush and Cheny "get sent up river" is that some very hideous act may occur as retribution for the justice excercised on them.

The best - and safest way to address this issue is to make sure that in moving forward we NEVER AGAIN mistake fear for security, or brute force for justice.

Not mere retribution

  • realdemocracy's picture
    realdemocracy
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

Actually, in addition to satisfying the public's desire for retribution, it might serve as some form of deterrent on future presidential administrations from overstepping their authority. However, more important, or at least more effective, than that would be to alter our political structures to prevent anyone from having the ability to abuse power in such ways again.

Granted, the types of changes I am suggesting would entail constitutional amendment, so I fully support the more immediate prosecution, and even post-term impeachment, of the Bush administration for their crimes. But we should not stop there.

We should ask ourselves: Why were they able to commit such heinous acts? and
How can we prevent (not simply discourage) such behavior in the future?

The answers are complex, but in short, Bush and Cheney were able to commit these crimes because:
1. There is too much power concentrated in the office of the president;
2. The higher offices of the entire executive branch are appointed by the president and serve "at the pleasure of the president" (which reinforces the idea that the president has too much power);
3. The impeachment process is flawed: by vesting that power in Congress, which is intensely political, our constitution ensures that not only must crimes be committed, but it must be politically advantageous to support impeachment, or it will not happen.

To remedy this flawed system, we should amend our constitution to:

a. provide a method that will generate an executive branch that is representative of the people (at least as representative as the House, but preferably more so). This might be done through a closed-list proportional representation election method, or through a random selection of candidates pre-screened to meet a set of generally agreed upon requirements. Furthermore, the various executive departments (the cabinet level positions) should be divided into seven-seat Secretariats; the Cabinet would then be the Secretaries-General of the various Secretariats. Since no small part of the undue authority of the presidency currently stems from the ideas that the president has a mandate from the people, and that he/she is the commander-in-chief of the military, we should change both of these. The President would no longer be elected by a popular election, but would be simply the presiding officer of the Cabinet and the coordinator of interdepartmental activities. Most of the current duties of the president would be transferred to the Cabinet. There would be no commander-in-chief until/unless the Cabinet should appoint one, and the President would be excluded from serving in that capacity.

b. remove and/or redistribute many of the president's powers to more appropriate offices, creating new offices or panels as needed; for instance, negotiating treaties would be the purview of the State Department, and would require approval by the Cabinet and both houses of Congress; a veto would require 2/3 of the Cabinet;

c. The power of appointment and removal from office of executive and judicial officials should be transferred to an independent Citizens' Commission, the members of which should be selected by a process that ensures that it will be a representative cross-section of the general population. From the candidates put forth by random selection or by the parties to serve in the executive branch, this Commission would nominate each of them to their specific offices (to be confirmed by the Senate). It would also nominate federal judges, and have the ability to impeach any executive or judicial officer. Impeachments should not require that a crime be committed (as the current language suggests) but should also allow impeachments based on breach of duties or poor performance. If an impeachment trial is necessary, another panel (100 citizens?) should be randomly selected to serve as the jury, rather than allowing that to fall on the potentially politically conflicted senate, and a presiding judge should be randomly selected from a pool of American citizens who are serving or have served as a judge or justice-of-the-peace.

You can't correct faulty blueprints by hiring new construction workers.

Don't be naive, it's not going to happen.

  • stk's picture
    stk
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

Don't be naive guys. No matter how many times you request, nobody will be prosecuted. Same as Nansy Pelosi kept the issue "off the table". Further pressure on Obama will only result in more evasive answers, nothing more. This is so obvious that as you can see Dick Cheney feels perfectly safe to make public announcement that he has committed that. Mind you, he wouldn't if there was 1% risk in it. Same as no matter how many millions of people in the whole world are outraged by what's happening in Gaza, all governments and all politicians will still support Israel. The reason is that doing otherwise is political suicide for them. Look at what happened to Eliot Spitzer when he confronted Bush - and it happened in 3 days.

And another thing: the crimes committed by Bush and Co. are way too obvious and way too serious to be investigated this way. If Obama had real desire to prosecute, this would be possible only by simultaneous arresting the perpetrators. Discussing this in advance is simply ridiculous, as would be his announcement that he is indeed going to prosecute them.

Again...

  • Jim's picture
    Jim
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

...nobody is being "naive".

Grass root Democrats are simply proactive...forever.

"First, there is no question

  • rivalarrival's picture
    rivalarrival
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

"First, there is no question "whether or not a criminal act has been committed.""

Unless you intend for Obama/Biden to suspend the 5th amendment (right to due process), along with Bush's suspension of the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 8th (Search and seizure, due process, public trial (et al), cruel and unusual punishment) neither of them can say "Bush committed a crime" until after he has been convicted in a court of law. To do so would also violate the separation of powers.

"There are no legal exceptions for torture."
Unfortunately, as long as the President has the power to pardon, there is a legal exception to any crime. The power to pardon extends to all "Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment." The maximum punishment for impeachment is removal from office and disqualification to hold any public position.

While we may consider Bush's activities morally indefensible, if he executes his power to pardon himself and the rest of his administration, he cannot lawfully be tried for those crimes, at least not in the United States.

Trials

  • rdavid8623's picture
    rdavid8623
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

They should be tried in The Hague , where that low life" Miloslavich" was tried for his crimes against humanity. It's a world's view on about how our leaders have behaved. Then and only then, that the world may see the United States as a leader in the free world. The Germans where tried for their crimes during war and so should our criminals for this one.

Prosecution of Bush/Cheney

  • pamrose's picture
    pamrose
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

Yes they should be held accountable. However, let the man get into office, for heaven's sake. He may not want to show this hand until he actually has the power. Not to sound paranoid, but remember that Bush, Sr. was CIA chief. I don't put anything above these thugs if cornered. Better to appoint a Special Prosecutor after he takes the oath of office.

Bush/Cheney

  • JayInDallas's picture
    JayInDallas
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

I used to take issue when I read about how Dems are so accustomed to losing elections that they don't know how to behave when they actually win one. I'm beginning to understand. After reading all the frothing-at-mouth dems during the primaries, I've come to understand that there is a tremendous amount of knee-jerking going in in our country. What is happening is an unfolding, so taking what someone says today and getting your undies in a knot over it is a waste of time.

Obama hasn't even been sworn in yet, but he has already accomplished more than 80% of his predecessors in his preparation. He made Clinton implode. He made McCain implode. Go ahead and doubt yourselves and your decisions, but I trust that Obama will serve the will of the people and that includes prosecuting the worst administration in recent memory.

Obama / Special Prosecutor

  • spat's picture
    spat
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

It's important for us to keep up the pressure for the special prosecutor but we also need to remember that Obama isn't in office yet, has to take a measured/cautious approach for now, and is seemingly responsive to public interest. Now that our question is at the top of the chart - hallelujah - we can generate even more public interest to make it a priority after Obama's in office. Only 7 more days!!

prosecution of Bush and Cheney

  • cagate's picture
    cagate
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

Hey! Let up on the guy. We managed to elect a brilliant liberal and if you don't agree with everything he does, you're ready to attack him. He is choosing reconciliation rather than tearing the country apart. It worked for Nelson Mandela. If Obama chooses to let sleeping dogs lie, I am prepared to accept his judgment. It's pathetic to see Democrats criticizing everything he does instead of accepting that no one can possibly agree with everything. Let him do his job with our support and gratitude.

Obama *wants* us

  • Bob Fertik's picture
    Bob Fertik
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

to pressure him for the policies we want. He said so repeatedly during his campaign.

We're not trashing him or asking him to do anything unreasonable. We're just asking him to enforce the law and the Constitution.

After all, he will swear on a Bible to do exactly that as his very first official act.

Obama NEEDS us...

  • Jim's picture
    Jim
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

...to "pressure" him.

It provides political armor.

Well Jim...

define 'pressure.'

A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.

Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623

 

The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.

the need to wait

  • realdemocracy's picture
    realdemocracy
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

I certainly cannot read Obama's mind, but it is not beyond the realm of possibility that he is withholding any comment on this until Bush has surrendered the office to him. If he raises the red flag now, that will just give Bush the reason he needs to pardon himself and his cronies. He may do this anyway. Certainly, there will be some pardons issued in the last days. However, if he steps down without pardoning himself, Cheney, et. al., then and only then can Obama or the AG meaningfully proceed with an investigation, or assign a special prosecutor to that task. As a few others here have stated, let's wait until after the inauguration to apply this pressure.

You can't correct faulty blueprints by hiring new construction workers.

Indicting Bush and Cheney

  • shallowcal's picture
    shallowcal
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

Don't forget that Vincent Bugliosi, the famous Los Angeles former prosecutor, has been trying to get the State's Atty. General in Maine to indict Bush and Cheney for Murder. If that would happen, in ANY State, Mr. Bugliosi believes that both Bush and Cheney could be brought into a trial situation that he could win as a prosecutor, Presidential Pardons or not.
What helps my anger management toward these arrogant Traitors, is knowing World History, and understanding that ALL FREE REPUBLICS are vulnerable to a decline into a Dictatorial form of Government when the People become uneducated, dependant, apathetic about voting etc, and ALLOW the corrupt leaders to do whatever they want, unopposed.
The actions during the last eight years of the Bush Administration, under the influence of who knows what Anti-Amerian Criminal International Ideology, or Secret Force, has shown us the writing on the wall. Even though the facts are clearly in the Public's eye concerning the criminal acts the Bush/Cheney Administration has committed, most of the Congress has turned a blind eye to those acts in the name of "Look forward, not backward", ie "Re-Election Survival Tactics". The media, as if suddenly shocked, has only recently been fully exposing to the American People the true characters and intents of Bush and Cheney, and their arrogance and assumed air of "invulnerability to any Justice at all".
Obama barely carried a majority of the Popular Vote. Therefore it appears that the American people in general are unable to recognize the reality of the dangers to our Constitution and to our Freedoms that Bush and Cheney have conspired, directed and brought to bear.
Those who have endeavored to find the Truth, and who DO see the Cheney-Bush M.I.C. evil endeavoring to create a Dictatorial and Fascist American Government, must work even harder to restore the Integrity of our fragile and Historically 'new-born' Republic.
Outside Constitution Hall Benjamin Franklin was asked by a passerby after having signed our Constitution with it's guarantees of Freedoms and its Checks and Balances concerning Presidential Powers, as well as other safeguards against those who are power-hungry, corrupt, and insensitive to the Freedoms granted to Man by God, "what sort of Government have you given us Mr. Franklin?".
He replied,
"A Republic, if you can keep it".

Can we KEEP our Republic, and our Constitution INTACT? I believe that we can only do that if we are willing to indict and bring to Justice in Public Courts those who conspire and attempt to intentionally eradicate our Republic and our Constitution.
Vincent Bugliosi has created viable Courtroom Tactics, outlined in his latest book, "The Prosecution of George W. Bush For Murder", which can bring Bush and Cheney to Justice on MURDER charges. All that is required is for an Attorney General from ANY State to bring an indictment against Bush.
Our duty as Living, Breathing, Modern-Day Patriots, is to bring pressure to the Atty. General Offices in EVERY State, wherever we reside, and demand that they get the ball rolling so that these Traitors are brought to Justice NOW, in an AMERICAN Courtroom, NOT LATER, in an International Court at The Hague or some other European War-Crimes Court.
WE, the American People, should carry the responsibility ourselves of bringing them to Justice and seeing Justice done, for the hundreds of thousands of deaths that Bush, Cheney, and their cohorts are responsible for.

actually Obama won

  • Bob Fertik's picture
    Bob Fertik
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

the popular vote by 10 million votes - 70M to 60M

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2008#P...

that's one of the largest margins in history.

so don't despair about American voters!

The Popular Vote margin

  • shallowcal's picture
    shallowcal
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

You are correct in the numbers Mr. Fertik, but the margin of percentage is still too close, considering the abominations of the Bush Administration and the probable continuation of that Presidential mind-set if McCain and the Republicans-In-Charge had won the White House for another term.

I appreciate the strength and integrity of the ten million 'more' voters you point out. I believe however that many of them may have switched parties in order to vote for what they may have considered a "better" choice, if not the "best" choice.

Clearly, Ron Paul was the BEST choice. It has been investigated and proven in many voting Precincts such as Stoney Point, New York, that during the PRIMARY ELECTIONS, VOTER FRAUD AND CORRUPTION ON THE PRECINCT LEVEL squelched the votes of Ron Paul supporters to the extent that he was blocked from going forward in his Candidacy for President.
UNFORTUNATELY, UNPUNISHED VOTER FRAUD IS A REALITY.

Ron Paul was the Candidate of Choice for those who are looking at the facts concerning long and enduring Congressional experience, a wealth of good ideas to help turn the Nation around economically, and a deep respect for The Constitution.

I believe that not only Ron Paul, but MOST of the Independent Candidates for President, if they had been elected to the office, would no doubt immediately proceed quickly to fulfill their responsibility to the American People, of bringing Bush and Chaney to Justice through Indictments.

Once sworn in, if President Obama fails to initiate a thorough Criminal Investigation against Bush, brought forth through an "apolitical" Special Prosecutor, the Independent Candidates will garner even MORE votes in the next Presidential Election, and even MORE important, they will be watching for the slightest HINT of voter fraud.
Congressional leader Conyers from Ohio, a State where MASS voter Fraud and general disenfranchisement took place in 2004, has also spoken out for Bush's Indictment and Prosecution. He is convinced that there needs to be Justice for his constituents as well as for the Citizens in every State, because millions of Amerians are now suffering after eight years under the Bush "Regime".

I believe that the American People are slowly awakening and realizing that they have been manipulated and lied to for many years.
I believe that THE PEOPLE expect Swift and Meaningful Justice for Bush and his co-conspirators.

It would be interesting to know what Penalties your readers would like to see exacted on Bush and Cheney if they were to be found guilty.

Would it be too much to sentence them to Loss of Citizenship and Banishment from America forever, if they were found guilty of,
1. Murder, and Conspiracy to Commit Murder,
2. of Torture and other Crimes Against Humanity,
3. of Traitorious Actions against the Peace and
Dignity of the Citizens of EACH of the
United States, as well as OTHER sovereign
Nations.
4. of INTENTIONAL and PREMEDITATED actions to
undermine and void our AMERICAN CONSTITUTION
ITSELF, through their arrogant declaration
of "SPECIAL WAR POWERS", "PRESIDENTIAL
POWERS", their political abuse of
"SIGNING STATEMENTS", their arrogant contempt
of, and non-compliance with, the use of the FISA
Courts.
5. of Illegal Political interference with the Jusice
Department,
6. of Illegal Political Interference with the C.I.A.
7. of Falsification of evidence:
"The White Paper" conspiracy that mis-led
the American People and The Congress
concerning facts that led up to the invasion
of Iraq and the current War situation we are
embroiled in.
8. of a general behavior of Presidential
Malfeasance in Office, shown by the actual
number of days that President Bush was even
IN the Oval Office compared to the number
of days he was 'away' on vacations and
'personally directed' political fund raising
events.

I believe that the Bush Administration WILL eventually be held accountable in a Court of Law for MANY crimes, if not through the efforts of our new President, then by THE PEOPLE and Legal actions in the Courts of the individual States. Our Amerian Republic is by Constitutional definition made up of an assemblage of Individual States.
Over time, the Federal Government has been given, and has assumed and usurped, too much power over our business and personal activities.
The Constitutional formulation of a FREE AMERICAN REPUBLIC revolved around de-centralization of Powers, where States have the POWER, and the Federal Government was basically restricted to activities suxh as creating and enforcing Import Duties
on foreign goods coming into the United States.
Look at the situation we're in now and how much the Federal Government continually challenges the Rights and Priveleges of The Individual States.

"Centralization" of our Government processes has now led to the influence of powerful Lobbying efforts and subsequently to the "De-Regulation" of our Economic engines, and recently to the attempted grab for our National Wealth. This activity was ALL overseen and obviously endorsed by the Bush/Cheney Administration. If fact, if they had had their way, all of the Social Security retirement money would have been tied up in the recent melt-down of our National Banking and Real Estate Structures. If they had been successful in that, what would it have done to 90% of the Citizens?
We must ask ourselves,
IS THERE AN EQUITABLE BALANCE OF TRADE THAT IS GOOD
FOR AMERICAN INDUSTRY AND THE AMERICAN ECONOMY?
IS AMERICAN LABOR BEING PROTECTED FROM CORPORATE
'INTERNATIONALIST' GREED, THROUGH THE PRACTICE
OF OUT-SOURCING OUR JOBS TO OTHER
'CONSUMER' NATIONS?
ARE OUR RIGHTS AS FREE MEN BEING UPHELD?

ARE WE A PEOPLE WHO SIT BY AND DO NOTHING WHEN OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS ATTEMPT TO CONFISCATE AND MANIPULATE OUR RIGHTS AND OUR BASIC FREEDOMS, AND MAKE MOVES TO ATTEMPT TO IMPOUND AND THEN ABSCOND WITH THE WEALTH OF OUR OLD, AND OUR SICK, AND OUR DESTITUTE?
I DON'T THINK SO.

How many people have heard the rumor that not too many months ago Dick Cheney moved all of his investment currencies into Euros?
I heard that rumor and unfortunately at this point I believe it. He may not want anything to do with an economic instrument (our dollar) that he knows he and President Bush, by manipulating the Powers and the Influence of the White House, are intent on eventually wrecking.

"For what cause?" you may ask yourself.

I would answer...
"Who knows...but it's happening, and they HAD to
know it was happening, and they did nothing about
it except wait for the moment when they could
send Paulson up to the Hill to ask for a TRILLION
DOLLAR BAILOUT".
What I'm saying is this; If both Bush and Cheney lost their Citizenship and were deported to Europe for instance, maybe it wouldn't matter to them at all, since that may be where all the United States Taxpayer money that they just manipulated and 'stolen', will end up anyway.
- absolute 30 -

Ron Paul would bankrupt the Nation.

  • Jim's picture
    Jim
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

He believes in wealth over work.

He takes a truism, and extends it infinitely far beyond its range of applicability.

He may agree with many about Iraq, but Iraq was no big duh from the beginning.

Ron Paul would gleefully take the nation backwards at a...

rapid clip. He stands for what one could expect from a staunch fundy Libertarian. He is rabidly anti-choice, pro-birth, charter schools(and we all know--or should--how badly charter schools have been for the students of Texas), and really pushes the insanity of homeschooling. There is so much more against the consideration of Ron Paul for any position at the Federal level.

People who gnash their teeth and wail that the election process was not fair to Ron...and some of the other tiny-constituancy candidates, are literally barking at the moon. Ron is a freak Libertarian and had a very small group pushing him.

People who desperately want multi-parties should work for change in our party system. This change would have us adopt a parlimentary system, like the UK, which assigns power to parties based on their support in elections. We don't have that system here.

This site, and many other sites, examined Ron Paul at great lengths to see if he might be what the country needed. Overwhelmingly, Ron Paul lost to the more reasonable, more reasoned, less crackpot candidates.

We clearly saw that Ron would take this country and it's people backwards in time.

A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.

Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623

 

The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.

Disappointed...

  • Tritium's picture
    Tritium
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

I have to say, I am disappointed in this evaluation. You choose to believe what you want to, but the logical process of thought mixed in with a little bit of historical data would lead you to realize that the Economic policies in place are no different than the Slavery existing in the South. Well, that's not true, at least the slaves had homes.

Keep in mind, when the 1909 Global Economic Condition was bad, the United States didn't become affected. In 1913, the Federal reserve was established. And guess what follows shortly after. Ron Paul opposes both parties, and believes in the Principles that were framed by the Constitution. People have no clue how far back we've come since the turn of the 20th Century.

The two faces of O'Bama

  • Jodi Harrison's picture
    Jodi Harrison
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

Yes, I believe O'Bama lied to us to get our vote. He's already conveniently changed his view/votes on: public financing for campaigns (it served him well), and more importantly at this moment in our history; Telecom immunity.

And now he is looking the other way with the Bush Administration, he wants to play nice nice with the Repubs, he's not looking after Americans best interests. How can we 'move forward' when so much 'behind us' needs to be investigated? If we let O'Bama sweep the atrocities and destruction of this administration under the carpet, he is no better then they are, and not only will there be no healing as a nation, he's leaving double wide doors open for the next offending adminstration to swoop in and attempt far worse (if that's possible).

It is not up to O'Bama, as equally as it wasn't up to Pelosi to take impeachment off the table. That was only for 'We the People' to decide. We cannot let O'Bama get away with what we let Pelosi get away with. We hired him... we can fire him!

calling him O'Bama

  • Bob Fertik's picture
    Bob Fertik
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

doesn't show him the kind of respect we have for him here at Democrats.com. we will occasionally disagree with his policy decisions, but we will always show him respect.

check huffpo sometimes it has already

  • KimJones's picture
    KimJones
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

check huffingtonpost.com sometimes, once something is in print there, unlike the NYT, it is usually factual. Nancy Pelosi is asking AG to investigate Boosh for the firings, opening the door to the other heinous crimes. So chill people, countdown is only one day away.

Protect him and keep your eyes open fore "ReichtwingKnutz.

You know how long it took to get someone who listens to US. It's time to do something for Obama also.
So when the trials come and
when he asks you to roll up your sleeves and help the people of this country, I'd better not hear "jack"
Pessimism and suspicions, don't fit this site. Just the facts jack!

We the People have survived Boosh, remember the ones who didn't.

Hey c'mon people, it's time to celebrate what We the People do have, and that my dear fellow citizens is US.

mommapanther

we're celebrating!

  • Bob Fertik's picture
    Bob Fertik
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

and we'll be there for President Obama when he needs us to advance progressive causes :)

Does he have a choice?

  • Tritium's picture
    Tritium
    Want to meet our members? Click 'Join' above!

The Preamble of the Constitution establishes the Responsibilites of the Federal Government.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

In order for him to fulfill his oath of office, he swore to protect and defend the constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic. An enemy is anyone who opposes it, people and groups, or obstructs the reason it was established. Can a Constitution change? Not without creating a new one. But you can add through amendment anything not contrary to the Constitution.

And no pardoning can be done, the crime in question is committed against humanity, and anyone who violates the constitution cannot be protected by it. Accountablity is not a burden for only the poor to experience.

Tritium, hard to figure out why anyone would back...

the supernut Ron Paul for anything.

For anyone interested in checking his crazy litany on almost any topic:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Ron_Paul.htm

A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.

Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623

 

The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.