By Manila Ryce
Published Wednesday, July 23rd, 2008, 6:29 am
Filed under: Society/Culture: Civil Unrest, Videos: Political, Society/Culture: Law/Order, Society/Culture, Videos, US Politics

11 Responses to “Obama Won’t Hold Bush Accountable for Past 8 Years of Criminality”

1. Some people feel like Obama needs to move right to win the election and thus the reason for doing it. However, the B’Man feels like this is total bullshit and the reason is truly that Obama is another owned asswipe of Big Business and the Military Industrial Complex. There is no safety in allowing Bush’s illegal activities to go unpunished. You only cover for those you are in ultimate agreement with.

   Obama would get a huge push from the center IF he’d just push for impeachment, but he won’t, mush less push for prosecution. You don’t fuck the ones that are laying the groundwork for you when your turn to screw America comes around.

   Unfortunately, the mass of Americans are too ignorant to realize anything except what the TV is telling them.

   BuelahMan
   07/23/08 at 7:56 am
   

2. the link is broke

   orionsan
   07/23/08 at 10:17 am
   

3. As a question only - I don’t know constitutional law, a by product for being British, not as well read as some and a slow reader, and probably another million excuses, bad excuses at that, also - for those who know constitutional law, examining the presidents over the past century, or further if you wish, how many have actually violated the laws held against them.

   I think it is important to point out that a general law against conspiracy to commit murder should be exempted from this question, unfortunately, as I think this is something every US President and world leader is guilty of. Therefore it shoud exlude those crimes committed by engaging in a legal war, nationally speaking - since even Truman would have comiitted unnecessary crimes in the carpet boming of Germany to end WW2 (unnecessary in the sense that historians claim a more strategic bombing of supply routes and transportation infrastructure would have defeated the Germans sooner, and also in the sense of Kurt Vonnegut’s described experiences and commentary on the Dresden bombing - may Kurt rest in peace)…..

   Vay Nadarajah
   07/23/08 at 12:57 pm
   

4. I don’t have an answer, MR.

   But to be honest with you, I’ll say what has become my motto. One never knows exactly HOW a politician will respond to any issue until he/she goes into office.

   Comrade Kevin
   07/23/08 at 3:40 pm
   
5. 

   That’s where I disagree with you Kevin. One can know if one cares to know. Just look at who’s funding that corporate spokesperson (aka politician) and you’ll know exactly where their priorities are.

   Manila Ryce
   07/23/08 at 3:52 pm
   
6. 

   All Obama has to do is represent the people, not the corporate cabal to which he’s recently succumbed. He’s become another bobblehead for ’special interests.’ Same ole same ole shite, different day.

   camelien
   07/24/08 at 7:33 am
   

7. > What’s your breaking point? At what point do you finally drop your support?

   These questions, it seems to me, imply that Obama has been moving to the right or at least that Obama’s supporters should perceive him as moving to the right. Obama has always been a pro-corporate candidate who was going to continue the imperialism and predatory capitalism that have characterized the U.S. since the late nineteenth century (if not earlier). Sunstein’s dismissal of criminal prosecution is in keeping with things Obama has said in the past and shouldn’t be too surprising to anyone who’s been paying attention.

   That said, the question becomes, why would anyone support Obama at all? Voting for blatantly unconstitutional laws (the recent FISA vote isn’t the only time Obama has done so) and casually dismissing some of the most criminal abuses of presidential power in U.S. history should disqualify anyone from being considered for the presidency. In a sane world they would, but we don’t live in a sane world.

   I’m planning to vote for Obama primarily to prevent a McCain presidency–the “‘anyone but a Republican’ syndrome” that you mentioned and that does indeed have a strong hold on at least some of us. Obama still seems to be marginally to the left of McCain. Those marginal differences can translate into matters of life and death for some people. (For example, if Kerry had been in office, I don’t think the federal response to Katrina would have been nearly as horrendous as it actually was.) For that reason, I’d like to think that a vote for Obama is not completely irrational (even though I recognize that the arguments for voting third party are very compelling).

   [Incidentally, I have only six blogs bookmarked. Yours is one of them. I don’t know if that counts as evidence of my rationality and good sense, but, in any case, thanks for the interesting questions.]

   M Moulins
   07/24/08 at 12:14 pm
   

8. I was planning on voting for Obama until recently on the pragmatic point of anyone but a Republican, with the hope that a new democratic administration could clear the air enough to mitigate some of this current disaster, but Obama’s removal of his “liberal” coat through the primaries means that I personally cannot in good conscience go through with the symbolic exercise of voting for him.

   I don’t think most observers appreciate the gravity of Obama’s betrayal with the FISA vote. The FISA law is unconstitutional. Repeat unconstitutional. Obama has officially sanctioned criminal activity, repeat criminal. Obama is well aware of all of the criminality of what he voted for being a legal scholar.

   If you are unfamiliar with the underlining legal and theoretical grounding of the US government and the Constitution (as they don’t teach it in high school civics anymore), the government only carries legitimacy so long as it rules with the consent of the governed. That fundamental consent constituted within the language of the text is conditional on adherence to the roles and limits of government, the Bill of Rights being the most essential. I for one cannot knowingly consent to criminal government and neither should you.

   These are not wonky or partisan policy squabbles we’re talking about but the most basics planks of our Republic. Equivocation is not acceptable.

   Duder
   07/24/08 at 12:57 pm
   

9. It was FISA. I was skeptical but i had hope until then. Its been a while but I gave you a hard time for not giving Obama a chance… there’s nothing like a little crow for dinner.

   One of Michael Moore’s rationals for supporting Obama is that the movement, which really is about progressive ideals (or more succinctly its the progressive ideas that Obama espouses that have motivated people to support him), might become bigger than the candidate. So even if Obama dissapoints, the people brought together in supporting his campaign having found they have a voice, will move on without him. Thats about all the hope I have left now. We’re living the 20’s and 30’s all over again. We really needed a FDR.

   Theres a coallition started by Glen Greenwald and others, Strange Bedfellows I think its called. Its a collaboration from people on the right and left to target the worst congress critters. Those that have actively subverted the Constitution and the Rule of Law. I suggest you check it out. The money I was considering sending to a 9% congress I’ve decided instead to send to it.

   I’m not sure how I will vote personally. I was thinking of voting for McCain since i think a constitutional showdown between the Prez and Congress is about the best we could hope for now, but he will win my state easily so I’ll probably write in DK.

   Ricky
   07/25/08 at 5:11 pm
   

10. restoring habeas corpus….validating queer unions….increasing immigrant power….advocating for cultural competency in youth…

    do you really think he’s the worst person to run for office? come on! let’s get someone in office that we can all agree upon. i don’t think we should get so caught up in ideology that we forget that, at the end of the day, we need to get someone progressive in office.

    i voted for nader twice. i’m very proud of that fact. this year, i’m going centrist. hopefully, in 2012, I’ll be able to vote more appropriately.

    Go Obama! for now at least.

    from: a pragmatist/sell-out

    Paul
    07/25/08 at 10:35 pm
    

11. Paul,

    I would agree with you on all of that, except let’s not forget that Obama explicitly stated he would filibuster telecom immunity- instead voting for it. Why should I trust he will restore habeas corpus and advocate for any other progressive cause when he can’t even uphold his own word or the constitution in the middle of a partisan campaign?

    Duder
    07/26/08 at 10:17 am
    

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

Tired of filing this information out everytime you leave a comment at the Largest Minority? Why not register as a user? You also get full access to our forum!

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>