See other Editorial Articles
Title: Beltway Democrats are seriously flawed, but the election is still critically important
Source:
Unclaimed Territory
URL Source: http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/ ... rats-are-seriously-flawed.html
Published: Sep 30, 2006
Author: Unclaimed Territory
Post Date: 2006-09-30 02:52:00 by Morgana le Fay
Keywords: None
Views: 236
Comments: 32
Now that the torture and detention bill will become law, it is necessary to focus on the political implications of what happened yesterday and, more broadly, what has been done to our country by the Bush administration and the blindly loyal Congress for the last five years. It goes without saying that the conduct of Democrats generally (meaning their collective behavior) was far, far short of anything noble, courageous or principled. And one could, if one were so inclined, spend every day from now until November 7 criticizing the strategic mistakes and lack of principle of Beltway Democrats and still not exhaust the list. But that's all besides the point at the moment, because -- right now -- everyone has to answer for themselves these questions: (1) do you believe that the incalculable damage imposed on this country by the Bush administration and its followers (including in Congress) can be impeded and then reversed and, if so, (2) how can that be accomplished? For those who have given up and believe the answer to question (1) is "no," then, by definition, there is nothing to discuss. You' ve decided that there is no hope, that you're done fighting and trying to defend any of your beliefs and principles, and you're ready to cede the country to those who are in the process of destroying it. But for those who believe that the answer to question (1) is "yes" (and I believe that emphatically), then the answer to question (2) seems self-evidently clear. The most important and overriding mandate is to end the one-party rule to which our country has been subjected for the last four years. Achieving that is necessary -- it is an absolute pre-requisite -- to begin to impose some actual limits on the authoritarian behavior and unchecked powers of this administration -- because, right now, there are no such limits. And, independently, killing off unchallenged Republican rule is the only possible way to invade the wall of secrecy behind which this administration has operated and to find out what our government has actually been doing for the last five years. Shining light on the shadows and dark crevices in which they have been operating is vitally important for repairing the damage that has been done. If nothing else, a Chairman Conyers or a Chairman Leahy, armed with subpoena powers, will accomplish that. There is no point in trying to glorify the conduct of Democrats. I think the larger-than-expected Senate Democratic opposition to the torture/detention bill is illusory, almost a by-product of sheer luck more than anything else. The large number of votes against the bill seems to have been driven more by Democrats' objections to the significant changes made to the bill in the last several days (ones made even after the Glorious Compromise was announced) than objections to the core provisions of the bill themselves -- and even then, the Democrats' anger was more about the fact that they were excluded from the negotiating process rather than anger towards the substance of the changes themselves. It seems that this is what accounts for the fact that most of the Democrats did not even unveil their opposition to this bill until the very last day. Many of them were likely prepared to vote for the "compromise" and only decided not to due to the substantive worsening of the bill in the last few days. After all, if they are so gravely offended by the core provisions of torture and indefinite detention, why did Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, etc. all refuse even to say how they were going to vote on this bill until yesterday (I suspect many of their votes against the bill were sealed only once the habeas corpus amendment failed yesterday). And until yesterday, most prominent Democrats made themselves invisible in the debate over torture and detention powers. All of those criticisms are accurate and fair enough. But a desire to see the Democrats take over Congress -- even a strong desire for that outcome and willingness to work for it -- does not have to be, and at least for me is not, driven by a belief that Washington Democrats are commendable or praiseworthy and deserve to be put into power. Instead, a Democratic victory is an instrument -- an indispensable weapon -- in battling the growing excesses and profound abuses and indescribably destructive behavior of the Bush administration and their increasingly authoritarian followers. A Democratic victory does not have to be seen as being anything more than that in order to realize how critically important it is. A desire for a Democratic victory is, at least for me, about the fact that this country simply cannot endure two more years of a Bush administration which is free to operate with even fewer constraints than before, including the fact that George Bush and Dick Cheney will never face even another midterm election ever again. They will be free to run wild for the next two years with a Congress that is so submissive and blindly loyal that it is genuinely creepy to behold. A desire for a Democratic victory is also about the need to have the systematic lawbreaking and outright criminality in which Bush officials have repeatedly engaged have actual consequences, something that simply will not happen if Republicans continue their stranglehold on all facets of the Government for the next two years. If a desire to put Democrats in office doesn't inspire you into action - and, honestly, at this point, how could it? -- a desire to block Republicans from exercising more untrammeled power, and to find ways to hold them accountable, ought to do so. Disgust and even hatred are difficult emotions to avoid when reading things like this: Republicans, especially in the House, plan to use the military commission and wiretapping legislation as a one-two punch against Democrats this fall. The legislative action prompted extraordinarily blunt language from House GOP leaders, foreshadowing a major theme for the campaign. Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) issued a written statement on Wednesday declaring [emphasis in original]: "Democrat Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and 159 of her Democrat colleagues voted today in favor of MORE rights for terrorists." GOP leaders continued such attacks after the wiretapping vote. "For the second time in just two days, House Democrats have voted to protect the rights of terrorists," Hastert said last night, while Boehner lashed out at what he called "the Democrats' irrational opposition to strong national security policies." My personal list of disagreements with most Democrats on a variety of issues is quite long. But the need to restore the rule of law to our country and to put an immediate end to the unlimited reign of the increasingly sociopathic Bush movement is of unparalleled and urgent importance, and it so vastly outweighs every other consideration that little else is worth even discussing until those objectives are accomplished. We are a country ruled by a President who has seized the power to break the law in multiple ways while virtually nothing is done about it. Yesterday, we formally vested the power in the President to abduct people and put them in prisons for life without so much as charging them with any crime and by expressly proclaiming that they have no right to access any court or tribunal to prove their innocence. We have started one war against a country that did not attack us and, in doing so, created havoc and danger -- both to ourselves and the world -- that is truly difficult to quantify. And we are almost certainly going to start one more war just like it (at least), that is far more dangerous still, if the President's Congressional servants maintain their control. For all their imperfections, cowardly acts, strategically stupid decisions, and inexcusable acquiescence -- and that list is depressingly long -- it is still the case that Democrats voted overwhelmingly against this torture and detention atrocity. The vote total on yesterday's House vote on Heather Wilson's bill to legalize warrantless eavesdropping reflects the same dynamic: "On the final wiretapping vote, 18 Democrats joined 214 Republicans to win passage. Thirteen Republicans, 177 Democrats and one independent voted nay." And, if nothing else, Democrats are resentful and angry at how they have been treated and that alone will fuel some serious and much-needed retribution if they gain control over one or both houses. By reprehensible contrast, the Republican Party is one that marches in virtually absolute lockstep in support of the President's wishes, particularly in the areas of terrorism and national security. It was a truly nauseating spectacle to watch each and every one of them (other than Chafee) not only vest these extraordinary powers in the President by voting in unison for this bill, but beyond that, blindly oppose every single amendment offered by Democrats -- including ones designed to do nothing other than ensure some minimal Congressional oversight over these extraordinary new presidential powers. It was like watching mindless zombies obediently marching wherever they were told to march. That has been how our country has been ruled for the last five years and, unless there is a Democratic victory, we will have more of that, and worse, over the next two years. There is one other consideration which, by itself, ought to be determinative. The only branch of government that has shown any residual willingness to defend the Constitution and the rule of law is the judicial branch. But critical Supreme Court decisions such as Hamdan -- which at least affirmed the most minimal and basic constitutional protections -- depend upon the most precarious 5-4 split among the Justices. One of the five pro-Constitution Justices, John Paul Stevens, is 86 years old. If George Bush has free reign to replace Stevens, it will mean that the Supreme Court will be composed of a very young five-Justice majority of absolute worshippers of Executive Power -- Thomas, Scalia, Roberts, Alito and New Justice -- which will control the Court and endorse unlimited executive abuses for decades to come. In a GOP-controlled Senate, Democrats cannot stop a Supreme Court nominee by filibuster anymore because Republicans will break the rules by declaring the filibuster invalid. The only hope for stopping a full-fledged takeover of the Supreme Court is a Democratic-controlled Senate. Continued unchallenged Republican control of our government for two more years will wreak untold damage on our country, perhaps debilitating it past the point of no return. There is only one viable, realistic alternative to that scenario: a Democratic takeover in six weeks of one or both houses of Congress. Even that would be far from a magic bullet; the limits imposed by Democrats even when they are in the majority would be incremental and painfully modest. But the reality is that this is the only way available for there to be any limits and checks at all. In the real world, one has to either choose between two more years of uncontrolled Republican rule, or imposing some balance -- even just logjam -- on our Government with a Democratic victory. Or one can decide that it just doesn't matter either way because one has given up on defending the principles and values of our country. But, for better or worse, those are the only real options available, and wishing there were other options doesn't mean that there are any. And there are only six weeks left to choose the option you think is best and to do what you can to bring it to fruition. UPDATE: Please see this comment for some clarification about what I mean here and what I do not mean. And I think there is one other point that needs to be recognized about yesterday's vote: In 2002, virtually all of the Democratic Presidential hopefuls in Congress (Kerry, Edwards, Gephardt, Graham) voted for the Iraq war resolution, because they thought they had to be accommodationist in order to have a chance to win. But this time, all of the Democratic Presidential hopefuls in Congress (Biden, Clinton, Feingold, Kerry) voted against this bill, because now they know that they can't be accommodationist if they want to win the nomination. Call that the Joe Lieberman Lesson. That is genuine progress, no matter how you slice it. Is it glorious, tearing-down-the-gate-with-fists-in-the-air Immediate Revolution? No. But it's undeniable incremental progress nonetheless. UPDATE II: Barbara O'Brien agrees with the views in this post and adds some additional arguments with which I agree (and which address many of the comments here), as does The Editors.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Morgana le Fay (#0)
No, it's not progress. If the "D"s manage to gain power, they'll do the same thing Dubya and the "R"s did in 2000 which was to abandon all principles and talk about how we must move forward together and forget the wrongs of the past. If the "D"s get in power there will be no impeachement, no withdrawl from Iraq or Afghanistan, and no decrease in the loss of civil rights. They only good that will come of sweaping "D" victory is watching the party hacks at FR and LP give themselves heart attacks. Remember: 'Hope' is a four letter word.
"The more I see of life, the less I fear death" - Me.
These kinds of pieces are reminiscient of criminals that throw themselves on the mercy of the court by saying, "Yeah I killed her. But at least I didn't rape all of her before I did."
i haven't seen a democratic administration pull anything close to what bush has pulled so far. rush might tell you that clinton enslaved hundreds of thousands of americans, but it didn't really happen. bush actually did do away with the 500 year old right to habeas corpus today.
Remember, free speech is a privilege, not a right. In time of war speech should be censored and even prosecuted if it crosses the line. ~ Aaron on LP
Woodrow Wilson pulled it 90 years ago. The modern Democratic party was originally built by Jacob Schiff. As a matter of fact, Al Gore's daughter married into the Schiff family.
i don't think so. and even if this is so, the people involved are all dead. have rush give you some new ammo for the phobia he has instilled in you. else you will have to admit he suckered you for almost 10 years. hint: he was as big a liar back then as he is now. nothing has changed.
Remember, free speech is a privilege, not a right. In time of war speech should be censored and even prosecuted if it crosses the line. ~ Aaron on LP
Read your history. Democrat Wilson and Republican Bush (each backed by the Banking class) are equally guilty of murdering millions of innocents and jailing the opposition. FYI: I've despised Rush Limbaugh from the first moment I heard his voice. Not everyone that disagrees with you is locked into an infantile Rep/Dem/Conservative/Liberal view of the world.
i have read my history. i suggest you read it somewhere other than FreeRepublic. you are comparing apples and oranges here. wilson didn't suspend habeus corpus and there is abosolutely no justification for the war in iraq. at least some sort of case can be made for the others - save perhaps the viet nam war.
Remember, free speech is a privilege, not a right. In time of war speech should be censored and even prosecuted if it crosses the line. ~ Aaron on LP
again, let me add that even if what you are saying is true, the parties involved are all dead. as are their children. why don't you complain about adam and eve instead?
Remember, free speech is a privilege, not a right. In time of war speech should be censored and even prosecuted if it crosses the line. ~ Aaron on LP
Your history is severely deficient. Until Bush, Wilson (along with FDR) had the distinction of being one of the greatest traitors to the American people to ever occupy the White House. His treachery put Louis Brandeis on the Supreme Court, imposed the debt-slavery of the Federal Reserve on generations and also sucked us into WWI. Until Wilson and his Bankers, America had always managed to avoid European wars. Mr. Schiff went down there and had this conversation, came back to New York and the stage was set. And I, as a young man, got into the act. What I am telling you now, I saw with my own eyes, heard with my own ears, but I make it brief. The stage was set: "How can we get rid of the Republican Party; how can we get rid of Taft" - and Mr. Baruch was picked out as the leg man. He was a smart man! They set up the National Democratic Headquarters at 200 Fifth Avenue, which was the site of the old Fifth Avenue Hotel, now an office building, and Mr. Henry Morgenthau, Sr., the old man, the father of the one you all know, was made chairman of the Finance Committee. I was made his confidential assistant in liaison with the Treasurer, who was Mr. Rollo Wells of St. Louis, - the Andrew Mellon of his time. And I was right in the middle! I saw everything that went on, because I handled all the books that had the cash contributions in them. Mr. Jacob Schiff and the Jews (use that word as I told you, with reservations) put up the money to launch this Party, and they looked around for a man to put up as President. To make a long story short, because the details aren't very interesting, they got Woodrow Wilson, a rascal who wasn't worth the powder to blow him to hell! They got Woodrow Wilson, the man who had more ego than any man I have ever read about, they got him to head the Democratic Party. And they got into difficulties! Because the Democrats only got the Electoral votes in the South; where the people in agriculture wanted cheap goods from Europe. But the North wanted the Republicans. They found out they could not elect a President in the United States. So, I handled the money; I was the leg man, the errand boy (I was only a boy then.) They trotted Theodore Roosevelt out of the political "moth-balls" (He was then an editor of a magazine). They told him, "You are the indispensable man. You are the only man who can save the United States." And with his ego they formed the "Bull Moose Party" and Mr. Jacob H. Schiff and the Jews throughout the world - they got plenty of money from England - they formed the Bull Moose Party. And in that way they split the Republican vote between Roosevelt and Taft, and Mr. Wilson walked in with a minority of the popular vote - the lowest man, (and I knew the inside of his private life, which I don't want to go into here). But never was a lower rascal in the White House, and I've known plenty of them since that time! Now, Mr. Wilson really didn't know enough to come in out of the rain! I cannot understand how he ever got there, except that in shuffling the cards, they had the goods on him, You find in politics, every time they pick a candidate, and put him out in front, they have the goods on him. You know he had been sleeping with the wife of the professor who lived next door to him at Princeton, whose name was Peck. And they used to call Wilson, at Princeton, "Peck's bad boy." When she got a divorce and moved to Washington, she married a man who had a son. And that son borrowed $40,000 from the bank, without asking them. He didn't know how to pay it back, and the pressure on him was getting very, very hot. So this woman heard of Samuel Untermeyer (of the big firm, Googenheim, Untermeyer and Marshall) a prominent Democrat; and supplied much money to the party. She went to him with a big package of letters which I read (Wilson was a great letter writer. He knew the language; there's no doubt about it, Wilson knew his vocabulary, when it came to making love, anyway). So, they cooked this up and she got the idea of blackmailing him. She got Samuel Untermeyer to go to see him, as a lawyer. He was a big contributor to the Party and he knew Wilson, and he went there. To make a long story short, Wilson didn't have the money; Untermeyer provided it, and the boy paid the money back. Benjamin Freedman's Address to US Marine Cadets in 1974 Further FYI: I was one of the first people kicked off of Free Republic post-9/11 for questioning the official "19 Arabs dun it" theory and for questioning the legitimacy of the state of Israel.
They weren't partisans nor were they Americans. Democrats, Republicans and their respective apologists are a large part of the problem and no part of the solution that I can see.
Personally, I'd much rather have the Clinton years back. The world Bush and his Rebublican Congress and his Republican Senate gave us quite frankly sucks. And the 911 attacks have now been milked to death ---- so find a new excuse for your boy.
Jacob Schiff financed the the Communist takeover of Russia, and yes, Gores daughter is married to Schiffs grandson. MSM rarely ever mentions the connection.
Wasn't Prescott Bush entangled with Hitler? And what if she was married to the great grandson? Would that be OK or does corruption of blood extend for all time?
A monkey could have run America when the techs were booming. The Clinton donkey was traded for the Bush monkey. The world Bush and his Rebublican Congress and his Republican Senate gave us quite frankly sucks. No one "gives" us anything, unless you believe that the Almighty Fed is some type of candy store. your boy Who is my boy, pray tell?
The ADL is training the New Gestapo
Prescott Bush was not married to Hitler or any member of his family. Gores daughter is married to Schiffs grandson. The marriage is fact of record, there was no "corruption" nor blood mentioned.
I don't know. You as a Republican believe that fiscal restraint, small government and balanced budgets are bullshit. Clinton didn't. I think the managed economy and shrinking government might have affected some outlooks.
I thought of something the other day... In Soviet Russia, their MSM never printed criticism of the Communist ideal or the Communist Party. In Zionist America, our MSM never mentions, much less criticizes, Zionism or the Bankster class. We can tell who and what rules by what isn't discussed or criticized. I was talking about Zionism with a group of 20-somethings recently. None of them had ever heard the word 'Zionist'. I explained it to them and they actually wanted to hear what it was. They instinctively know that the strings are pulled from the shadows and that what's been fed to them in school is most likely BS.
The ADL is training the New Gestapo
His bank did business with Nazi Germany and was shut down by the US govt. in 1942. So did Ford, IBM and most every other large corporation of the day. Many of those same corporations were also doing business with the Soviet Union during the Cold War. and what if she was married to the great grandson? Would that be OK or does corruption of blood extend for all time? If Gore's daughter had married into the Hitler family, what do you suppose the upshot would have been? The Schiff family has had a hand in the deaths of more innocents than the Hitler family did.
The ADL is training the New Gestapo
How many people did the grandson kill?
I'm not a Republican. I'm not a Democrat. I belong to no party and I don't participate in the two-party scam called "Run down and waste your time in a rigged vote". When America goes back to a paper ballot is when I'll start voting again. The first thing I'll vote for is the abolition of the Federal Reserve, the Great Slaver for which the Dems and Reps act as overseers.
The ADL is training the New Gestapo
And how much control did the grandson have over the grandaddy?
BTW, Samuel Bush (Chimps's great-grandpa) was number two or three to Bernard Baruch at the War Industries Board under Wilson during WWI. Sam Bush was also one of the first directors of the Cleveland Federal Reserve. The Bush family has always been shoeshine boys to the Banksters just like the Gores.
The ADL is training the New Gestapo
I have no idea. I do know that if had the wrong last name, he'd be apologizing for his grandpa's misdeeds every day of his life. It's not how many you kill that makes your family criminal pariahs but how many of whom you kill. The Schiffs had a hand in the deaths of tens of millions of Russian Christians and they're respected enough to still attract a Gore girl.
The ADL is training the New Gestapo
Not true, Wilson's World War I was nothing but a big squobble between a bunch of inbred "Royal" families and commies that a genuine republic has no business inserting itself into.
Clinton was a TRAITOR SOCIALIST GUN GRABBER and SO IS SHRUBYA. If we really intend to save the republic we have got to quit lending support to TRAITORS simply because they may agree with us on a few things.
The ADL is training the New Gestapo AngelSpawn posted on 2006-09-30 4:23:30 ET Reply Trace Private Reply I really think there is alot of that. All but the hopeless 30% is suspecting something is not quite right some kinda way.
A Gorey Hitler? Sorry it's so late it's early. I just had my son picked up by the cops so I am up a bit later than usual.
In a letter to Dr. Heinrich Bruning in 1937, Winston Churchill asked for certain information about Hitler and his rise to power. In a letter of responce to Churchill, Bruning a former chancellor of Germany, revealed that the two most regular financial supporters of Hitler from 1927 on were two of the managers of the largest banks in Berlin. Both were Jews, one the leader of Zionist movement in Germany. The letter still exists.
Three New Deals: Why the Nazis and Fascists Loved FDR
Names?
The ADL is training the New Gestapo
That is something that few know. The letter is still in existance. Even Bruning before his death sued to keep it from being published.
FWIW, Bill Shirer's Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, p. 144, names names of industrial supporters of Hitler before he became chancellor -- Emil Kirdorf (coal), Fritz Thyssen (Thyssen steel), Albert Voegler (steel), Georg von Schnitzler (IG Farben), August Rosterg (potash), August Diehn (potash), ___ Cuno (Hamberg-Amerika line), ___ Conti (rubber), Otto Wolf (industrialist), Kurt von Schroeder (Cologne banker), and then mentions (without names): "several leading banks, among which were the Deutsche Bank, the Commerz und Privat Bank, the Dresdener Bank, the Deutsche Kredit Gesellschaft; and Gemany's largest insurance concern, the Allianz."
That is genuine progress, no matter how you slice it. Is it glorious, tearing-down-the-gate-with-fists-in-the-air Immediate Revolution? No. But it's undeniable incremental progress nonetheless.
#2. To: Pissed Off Janitor, Morgana le Fay (#1)
#3. To: Pissed Off Janitor (#1)
#4. To: Morgana le Fay (#3)
i haven't seen a democratic administration pull anything close to what bush has pulled so far.
#5. To: AngelSpawn (#4)
(Edited)
Woodrow Wilson pulled it 90 years ago. The modern Democratic party was originally built by Jacob Schiff.
#6. To: Morgana le Fay (#5)
#7. To: AngelSpawn (#6)
Democrat Wilson and Republican Bush (each backed by the Banking class) are equally guilty of murdering millions of innocents and jailing the opposition.
#8. To: AngelSpawn (#6)
#9. To: Morgana le Fay (#7)
... They ganged up in New York, to get rid of Taft. I was a protégé of Mr. Bernard Baruch - a name that I think you are all familiar with. His father was a doctor, Dr. Simon Baruch, who had brought me into the world, and Bernard Baruch was a visitor at our home all the time. He courted my sister; one of my sisters. So the stage was set to get rid of the Republican Party and the Republican President and put in their own party and their own President. But it was very difficult, because, after the Cleveland depression (President Cleveland was a Democrat, we had Free Trade) we had the worst depression ever seen anywhere. And that swept the Republican Party into power, because they advocated tariff, protective tariff to protect the working man against the cheap labor of Europe and to protect the infant industries, in the United States against foreign competition.
#10. To: Morgana le Fay (#8)
why don't you complain about adam and eve instead?
#11. To: AngelSpawn (#10)
#12. To: AngelSpawn (#4)
As a matter of fact, Al Gore's daughter married into the Schiff family.
#13. To: Cynicom (#12)
Gores daughter is married to Schiffs grandson. MSM rarely ever mentions the connection.
#14. To: Minerva (#11)
I'd much rather have the Clinton years back.
#15. To: Minerva (#13)
Wasn't Prescott Bush entangled with Hitler? And what if she was married to the great grandson? Would that be OK or does corruption of blood extend for all time?
#16. To: AngelSpawn (#14)
A monkey could have run America when the techs were booming.
#17. To: Cynicom (#12)
Jacob Schiff financed the the Communist takeover of Russia, and yes, Gores daughter is married to Schiffs grandson. MSM rarely ever mentions the connection.
#18. To: Minerva (#13)
Wasn't Prescott Bush entangled with Hitler?
#19. To: AngelSpawn (#18)
The Schiff family has had a hand in the deaths of more innocents than the Hitler family did.
#20. To: Minerva (#16)
You as a Republican
#21. To: AngelSpawn (#18)
#22. To: Cynicom (#15)
#23. To: Minerva (#19)
(Edited)
How many people did the grandson kill?
#24. To: Morgana le Fay (#7)
#25. To: Minerva (#16)
#26. To: AngelSpawn (#17)
They instinctively know that the strings are pulled from the shadows and that what's been fed to them in school is most likely BS.
#27. To: AngelSpawn (#18)
f Gore's daughter had married into the Hitler family, what do you suppose the upshot would have been?
#28. To: AngelSpawn (#18)
The Schiff family has had a hand in the deaths of more innocents than the Hitler family did.
#29. To: AngelSpawn, minerva (#18)
#30. To: Cynicom (#28)
he two most regular financial supporters of Hitler from 1927 on were two of the managers of the largest banks in Berlin. Both were Jews, one the leader of Zionist movement in Germany.
#31. To: AngelSpawn (#30)
Names?
#32. To: Cynicom, angel spawn (#31)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest