Disappearing into an American gulag? The outcome of governments we let come and go-- from Nixon through Reagan, Bush I and Clinton? Look what we have now and understand, we did this to ourselves!
Whose Legacy Is It, Anyway?
|
Posted By: CLB Posted on: Aug. 8, 2007 at 1:19 PM |
2.5 / 5
Based on 3 ratings.
|
Disappearing into an American gulag? The outcome of governments we let come and go-- from Nixon through Reagan, Bush I and Clinton? Look what we have now and understand, we did this to ourselves!
Comments:
|
Aug. 8, 2007 at 03:31:32 PM
|
||
| CLB, if we do not impeach this illegal Bush regime in its entirety, we will have set a president and flushed our Constitution down the toilet. Is that what you are saying? |
||
|
Aug. 8, 2007 at 04:22:21 PM
|
Rating for this article
|
|
| HW, yes, as long as you and I agree on this understanding about impeachment: it is a judicial review process Congress undertakes to examine charges brought against an impeachable elected official. IF the “entire administration” is tried, and found guilty, then yes they would all be removed. Impeachment is not a form of punishment—it is a constitutional “cure” for bringing to heel a president or cabinet member that abuses his or her power. One can be impeached without being found “guilty” and then removed by the Senate. Right now, given the executive branch's simple declaration that its executive power allows it to ignore Congressional subpoenas into its activities, there is no way to investigate its activities WITHOUT beginning Impeachment proceedings! Every presidency since Nixon has given itself more power. Cheney supported Nixon and abhorred the Watergate hearings--he then was just a Montana senator. A hawk convinced Vietnam was "lost" by peaceniks he and other neocons (who believe in perpetual war as a means to secure peace) are now essentially running the White House which believe it or not, is an impeachable offense! |
||
|
Aug. 8, 2007 at 04:40:16 PM
|
Rating for this article
|
|
| Correction: Impeachable persons include all civil officers, including the Cabinet.
|
||
|
Aug. 8, 2007 at 06:41:27 PM
|
||
| Cynthia, I often say that we have nobody else to blame but ourselves for the sad state of our national leadership. We fool ourselves when we grant ourselves absolution with the excuse: "I didn't vote for him." It was our very complacency, so deadly to the health of a representative democratic republic, that got us in this mess in the first place. But when I say that we all share the blame, that doesn't mean that some parties aren't more culpable than others. Our elected officials definitely deserve the lion's share of the blame for their lazy, uninformed decisions, assuming that we weren't lazy and uninformed when we chose them. Just how much can we blame them though, if we decide to value flash more than substance when making the pick? I also lay heavy blame on the mass media. There used to be a public service obligation to fulfill an educational function and an entertainment function second. That function was mandated, but we removed the requirement under Reagan. When the public service commitment became optional, the corporate media not surprisingly chose profit over integrity, and the Forth Estate became powerless to protect the Constitution. The media has failed us miserably; unfortunately, we are to blame for allowing it fail in the first place. Finally I blame the two parties; with all the inherent corruption, ineptitude, egomania, and polarization built into the system. It is a simple observation to bluntly state that the Republican party has been far worse in this regard than the Democratic party, but they both have serious flaws. My modest aspirations are to boot the more serious offender out of power in 2008, and set about repairing the flaws in earnest, rather than chucking the whole thing out the window. It may be productive to make a new "wish list" of things we want changed ASAP. Such a list could serve as the grass-roots platform for repairs we want the Democrats to be serious about once they acquire a true working majority in both houses of Congress, and a cooperative man/woman in the White House. I've made similar lists in the past, but I think some new brainstorming is in order. I would start with:
That's just for starts. |
||
|
Aug. 8, 2007 at 08:49:34 PM
|
||
| MiC. I think that impeachment of Bush and Cheney is alot of time and effort waisted. Why not just cut them at the knees and get (impeach to make this very clear) Alberto Gonzalez. He is the weak link to all of this. I belive that just the mention of targeting him for impeachment will shake things up in my opinion. I think that all of your ideas are fine, but the major pillar of this society has been damaged, and all of those things you suggested are no longer more important than getting the perception of justice being fair and unbiased. When people began to wake up and notice that justice is meaded out depending on who you are, or how much money you have, all hell will break loose. There have already been signs (the victims of Hurricane Katrina come to mind) that the government does not care about most of the people who live here. That is the problem with the Democrats in my opinion. They can bargin for good things, such as SCHIP, raising of the minimum wage, and government ethincal standards, hold hearings and meetings to tell us what is wrong and who is doing it, but if they bargin away our liberties and privacies all of those things are passed away to those they give power to. We have to pressure our representitives to preserve this democracy as the founders intended. Never mind all of this other stuff. I am sorry, but all of this stuff seems pretty little right now, kinda like talking about a drop of water in the ocean of turmoil. |
||
|
Aug. 8, 2007 at 10:38:57 PM
|
||
| Zan, Your comment: "I think that impeachment of Bush and Cheney is alot of time and effort waisted" reminds me of something I read about an exchange between a blogger and Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi told the blogger that she was against impeaching Bush because "he's not worth it." The Blogger (I believe it was Mike Stark) replied, "is the Constitution worth it?" |
||
|
Cancelled Account
Aug. 8, 2007 at 11:00:43 PM
|
| This user has cancelled their account with Voice of North America. | |
|
Aug. 9, 2007 at 06:54:56 AM
|
Rating for this article
|
|
| Here's a link to an excellent article by Bruce Fein enumerating the reasons for impeaching Cheney. Read this and much more about who should be impeached becomes clear. [link:slate.com] |
||
|
Aug. 9, 2007 at 08:33:57 AM
|
||
| MIC, Interesting list! I agree with most of it, but would like to see some ideas that you have to rectify these points. In points one and two, you address election reform. You know as well as I do that these people that get into Washington get intoxicated by the money. How do you propose that we ween them off that money pipeline? Greed is an underlying factor in this problem! You have seen time and time again that once these people come out of Washington that they are set for life! How do we change a system that attracts this type of person? On the other hand, if we did get that changed, we may get better "representative" candidates who were forced to listen to their constituents. Lobby reform is a tremendous idea, but don't forget where the money comes from to support these candidates for their elections. Who is going to want to vote out the very reason that they got in? Massive Tax Reform is long over due! I just can not understand why we have not had that taken care of with a flat tax that would save the government millions though the abolition of the IRS. The one point that you make is the demonopolization of industries. Unfortunately, this is a very complex issue. Many industries are to heavily entrenched and the possible ramifications to financial structures could be massive. You know as well as I do that the legal community would have a field day with this one. You also want to break up big media. I have no problem with that, but with consolidation, media has taken on a new set of financial values. Long gone are the days of an independent operator being able to have one or two radio stations in a given market. Unfortunately, one of the benefits of consolidation was that it got some of these operators who were hanging on by the skin of their teeth out and made them rich. With the current valuations that are in place are you going to convince someone to go buy a media property when they can never cover the costs of operations and debt retirement? It would almost have to be people who are so rich that they don't care about making a profit. Advertising revenues have remained relatively flat against inflation, but valuations have going up greatly. It would be a very unattractive proposition to venture into. I agree with you that the content that the media is not what it should be, but that again, consolidation has created that monster. Unfortunately, the consumer is liking it. This is not good! If people really want to understand what is going on now, they are forced to go to books and the Internet. That is where the "real" journalists have migrated to. TV is now just entertainment. Newspapers are just places to display ads. No real journalistic content. I am afraid, that like everything else, evolution has put true journalists in another place! Like I said earlier, I am not disagreeing with your points. They are all great! I can not see how some of them will be able to happen as quick as this country deserves. |
||







del.icio.us
Digg It!


Excellent point! This transcends all parties, not just the current one that has so much out in the open.
Your point about the voting public needing to take responsibility for the actions of who we elect is exactly on target! I have seen more an more people stepping back from their support of the current administration, yet they seem to forget that it is their fault that it happened. I wish they would just admit their mistakes and allow themselves to help come up with a solution to the problem.
Report Abuse