Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiObama Might Pursue Criminal Charges Against Bush Administration
Biden says criminal violations will be pursued
Democratic vice-presidential nominee Joe Biden said yesterday that he and running mate Barack Obama could pursue criminal charges against the Bush administration if they are elected in November.
![[US Democratic presidential nominee Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) is introduced at a rally by his running mate Senator Joe Biden (D-DE) in Dublin, Ohio, August 30, 2008. Biden said yesterday that he and Barack Obama could pursue criminal charges against the Bush administration if they are elected in November.(REUTERS/Matt Sullivan)]](http://www.commondreams.org/files/article_images/obamabiden.jpg "obamabiden.jpg")
Biden's
comments, first reported by ABC news, attracted little notice on a day
dominated by the drama surrounding his Republican counterpart, Alaska
governor Sarah Palin.
But his statements represent the Democrats' strongest vow so far this year to investigate alleged misdeeds committed during the Bush years.
"If there has been a basis upon which you can pursue someone for a criminal violation, they will be pursued," Biden said during a campaign event in Deerfield Beach, Florida, according to ABC.
"[N]ot out of vengeance, not out of retribution," he added, "out of the need to preserve the notion that no one, no attorney general, no president -- no one is above the law."
Obama sounded a similar note in April, vowing that if elected, he would ask his attorney general to initiate a prompt review of Bush-era actions to distinguish between possible "genuine crimes" and "really bad policies".
"[I]f crimes have been committed, they should be investigated," Obama told the Philadelphia Daily News. "You're also right that I would not want my first term consumed by what was perceived on the part of Republicans as a partisan witch hunt, because I think we've got too many problems we've got to solve."
Congressional Democrats have issued a flurry of subpoenas this year to senior Bush administration aides as part of a broad inquiry into the authorisation of torturous interrogation tactics used at the Guantanamo Bay prison camp.
Three veterans of the Bush White House have been held in criminal contempt of Congress for refusing to respond to subpoenas: former counsel Harriet Miers, former political adviser Karl Rove, and current chief of staff Josh Bolten. The contempt battle is currently before a federal court.
202 Comments so far
Show AllWTF? Why wait till November? Losers!
The fact that Biden is talking about or even suggesting prosecutions of the Bush team is taking a big risk and throwing a gauntlet down. He is raising the stakes for the Republicans and increasing the pressure on them to win and hold office by any means, fair or foul! Only a great groundswell of support for Obama can stop them. The consequences of a McCain win would be frightful and will do nothing to make it easier next time. A Palin Presidency would really be opening Pandora's box!
Anyone who can see and understand this, which really *ought* to be most of CD's readers, has a moral duty to cut the b*s* and start working to help defeat McCain/Palin. If you don't have the stomach for working for Obama, join with those who are going after McCain on the issues. Or do fair election work to register new voters, stop the voter suppression and voter list purging, and challenge the many forms of fraud that can be expected. Or work to put more progressives in the House and Senate, which will help produce turnout for Obama!
Or else go on sniping and bellyaching and justifying doing nothing, but at least have the honesty to admit to yourself then that you are helping the Republicans, and getting a charge out of being right about things going to H***! I can understand this. I have made some dire public predictions. When they come to pass I get to be right, and when they don't I am exposed as being wrong. But that's where the moral duty comes in.
Eor example, having predicted that Bush will attack Iran before November, I then have a moral duty to speak out, write, demonstrate, call congresspeople and try to stop it. Which I've done and continue to do. If it happens anyway, I not only get to be right but I will know that I did what I could to stop it. If I doesn't happen, I'll never know if I had something to do with that, but I'll claim it anyway and I still get to be right!
So get up out of your computer chair and act!
Chris Horton
It's already debunked, as Cindy Sheehan has pointed out. Biden immediately backed away from any wild-eyed notions of actually prosecuting these criminals, because to him and Obama they've committed no crimes. They've been every bit as complicit in the war crimes of Iraq and all the rest of their scofflaw behavior, here and elsewhere, so they have no more interest in prosecuting them than they've had in impeaching. It would only expose them ALL for their enjoined corruption and imperialistic illegality, and they can't have that. Massage the delusions--that's all they intend to do.
If Obama and Democrat Party puts Bush and neocons in jail, Democrats can rule for ever !!
Most americans (not all) but most american people want justice, justice for 9-11, for the criminal genocidal war on Iraq, and for all the shit done to USA and the world by the Republican Party Brown shirts. American people hate Republican Party. The Republican has always been in power thru vote fraud, thru the barrell of the gun, and thru all the minute-men type of ultra-right wing satanic groups in this country. But sane moralist americans hate the Republican Party. American citizens have no problem seeing Bush and neocons in a highly security prison where they belong for crimes and mass murder.
.
The only way for justice to happen is to reinstate the special prosecutor law and separate the investigation/prosecutions from the political process entirely.
As this will impact both Democrats and Republicans it is doubtful that this will ever occur but unless it does our government will never recover the loss of respect and diminished credibility it has suffered since the cover-up of the Iran-Contra affair under Reagan.
It ain't gonna happen. Biden won't support it, the "democrats" who've been complicit with this criminality for years won't support it. If we want justice, we'll have to build our own new political leadership.
Justice is a moral issue, dependent on the will and integrity of the whole of society. It is not a political issue, which is about the control of the power that corrupts 'justice', the historical record and economic pursuits for self-interest. It is well-understood how politics in this country is bought and paid for. New political leadership is an impossibility until the influence of money and the military are separated out from the politics, and principle becomes more important than expediency, integrity more important than wealth, and leadership more important than power.
What do you mean 'might'??? Go after those bastards. They have inflicted enough pain to Americans and the rest of the world. Don't close Guantanamo...send them there for life.
If pigs had wings, they might fly!
I am very interested to see how one of the chief democratic warmongers (Biden) is going to prosecute the group of people that he voted with and verbally supported vis a vis the iraq war, banging the war drum every step of the way.
Biden would have to put his own voting record and support for the war under the microscope as well, which isn't likely.
A well-meaning but errant decision is not the same thing as an intentional misdeed.
According to Kucinich's list, there's plenty of illegal items to go on. "well meaning" and "errant" vs "intentional misdeed" is gobbledygook and irrelevant.
Are we talking about Biden or Bush? I wasn't aware that Kucinich's charges included Biden.
I am certainly not excusing Bush as being well-meaning but inept. Bush, and the whole family are as insidiously malevolent as they come. If more folks had any real passion to know who the hell they were voting for neither Bush would ever have become president.
But anyone that doesn't think there is a difference between 'well meaning' and 'errant' versus committing intentional wrongs better step through life very very carefully.
I'm sure you meant to make a more valid point, but describing 'well meaning' and 'errant' with 'gobbledygook' and 'irrelevant'? No wonder so many discussions on this forum tend to be so ineffective and irrelevant, and so easy to misdirect.
From a legal perspective, 'well meaning' but 'errant' is exactly the argument that will be applied. As Obama himself has questioned, was it just really bad policy, or true criminal intent? That's not 'gobbledygook' and 'irrelevant', that is the very question that needs to be asked and answered. Intent is a cornerstone of legal principle. If folks want to convict Bush (and I would truly enjoy seeing that happen) then we must think more critically and pursue a more objective analysis than to simply dismiss the question as 'gobbledygook' and 'irrelevant'. It is THE question that needs to be lawfully pursued and answered in a court of law, all personal opinions aside.
"Three veterans of the Bush White House have been held in criminal contempt of Congress..." If only. But I'm sure 'held', here, doesn't mean locked behind bars. Boy would that slow the corporatocracy down! If only we could start applying law and order to the politicians who like to dish it out to us, while they give more and more freedom - liberalization - to their partners in the private sector.
I don't know about Obama being zealous for law and order among politicians. This is a guy, recall, who chose to chastise Venezuela when Colombian forces entered Ecuador to assassinate a Farc leader. Maybe the American political class has been so disdainful of international law for so long, they forget it completely.
But if the Republicrats are hungry and need to eat each other, Hey, I'm all for it!
Why do the comments constantly collapse? Is that necessary? Come on CD! It was never necessary to collapse them in the first place. All you folks had to do was point out to the complainers that no one was forcing them to read comments following articles. But okay, You tweaked the forum and the default is with comments collapsed. That's fine. But as a participant in the discussion, I don't enjoy having the comments constantly collapsing. Sheesh!
I agree, Arby.
It would be nice if the software permitted a "pushpin" feature to keep the comments thread displayed after editing/posting.
Still, I gotta give a thumbs up for the existing improvements-- especially (if my guess is correct) the feature that prevents the frame from breaking and expanding whenever someone posts an extra-long alphanumeric string without breaks.
I used to get seasick scrolling from side to side.
Bob Pom...:
accountability? I feel America has lost that in 2000. With over 700 US military bases around the world , involved militarly in over 200 areas in some way around the world and not a word about it in the media. Not even a question of why or costs there is no accountability since no one knows about it. Even if America is wrong there is no one who has to answer for it. Iraq, Afghanistan are just two examples. Now if the GOV had come to Americans and said we need to put a pipeline through Afghanistan or we need to control the oil in Iraq so you can keep your SUV filled up. What would Americans have said about that? I say they would have backed the plan 100%
I always have one question, since more Iraqi people have died by Americans than Saddam. What or who was stopping the USA from cutting an oil deal with Saddam? I am sure Saddam would have greeted them with flowers. Then maybe quietly removing him from power at a later date? America has had no problem in the passed cutting deals with former employees of the CIA.
Democrats are 99,99% of the time just full of empty talk.
Watch what Democrats do, not what they say.
"Watch what Democrats do, not what they say."
What irony. Nowhere is that more relevant than with Republicans, who often exceed empty talk in favor of being downright misleading and malicious.
But that is an innate characteristic of politics and politicians in general - the nature of the beast - and why it so amusing (yet sad) that so many folks buy into the farce and take some of these things so seriously.
The difference between statesmen and politicians was once upon a time a clear distinction, easily perceived and understood. Nowadays it is rarely if ever a part of the discussion and thought process.
These discussions miss what I think is really going on.
What we are seeing is the transition from nation states, roughly something geographic with populations, to economic states, entities without geography or populations as we presently think of them. The economic states will have 'blackwater' armies. This is being accomplished by the 'largest transfer of wealth' in history, using oil, energy, by the vehicle of US armed forces. This system is beyond the rule of law as we understand it, and not subject to accountability. What we are deciding is whether or not we will allow ourselves to be used for this purpose. I mean the Halliburton complex is relocating to Qattr, which bills itself as the new owrld center for commerce. So let's stop thinking of this as liberal vs conservative, but rather as whether we shall retain our ebbing powers of accountability.
In that vein, we might note the appearance of our Meditierranean flagship in Poti, Georgia, north of the Russian fleet, at the end of the oil pipeline, ostensibly on a humanitarian mission. Thus Cheney's energy policy: use the American taxpayer to finance and establish a privately controlled new world order, promising the right wing evangelistas to be Christian and preying for it to be God's will.
Whaddya think about dem apples meetbeetle?
The McCain/Obama ticket represent nothing more than a change in the face of administrators of US empire, the idea that Obama - would do anything to bring any criminal charges against anyone in the Bush administration - has got to be the biggest laughable news that I've read in some time.
The only thing they will change are names, everything else will be more of the same, no matter if Obama is the face, or McCain is the face.
If Obama wanted change, he would have condemned the bombing of children in Afghanistan for one, he would have even strongly condemned the ongoing campaigns to expand the war in Pakistan. But he won't do that, because as he himself has said, he wants to take the war to Afghanistan and Pakistan. If you want more war, more slaughters of children all over the world: vote McCain/Obama.
http://almusawwir.org/resistance/
Given a "choice" between the doddering old warmonger and the slick young player, I pick the young player.
I have no illusions about Obama but, just in case there is any reality to presidential elections in the US (which is doubtful after the last two were rigged by the GOP) I will cast my vote for Obama.
Bring America Back !!!! I must join my fellow/sister Proggers in here (rhymes with bloggers & with Froggers)_ and am a heavy Skeptic of either Obama or Biden successfully prosecuting criminally King George or Prince Cheney !!
CRIMES are crimes now--Severe War Crimes==Evidence is abundant the Neocons lied this country into Iraq==murdering hundreds of thousands of innocent children, women, and men with the so called "SHOCK & AWE" attack. Iraq was, in fact, a defensless nation==unable to fly aircraft in its own airspace for 10 years, or to provide food for its people due to USA blockade policies.
These and the other many criminal acts of Bush Neocon Nation are here now, and do not become effective as of the inauguration day of Barak and Joe--if indeed that happens. If they have NO intention to prosecute Bush and Company now, then they have None if and when they get into the White House !!
The Obama Campaign is getting out-smarted consistently by the McCain team.
Obama's Team is DESPERATE==they will now say and do anything to keep from blowing yet another chance at a sure Democratic Victory==duh, yep they sure need to read 'Elections for Dummies ".
Sarah Palin's joining the McCain Team was a Stroke of Genius==they took away Clinton's glass ceiling; they again laid claim to the immense/hugh Catholic Vote with Palin's Right to Life family values; they can make just as much history
with a female VP, as a black Pres. She's got a natural gas pipeline in Alaska!
So many things Sarah Palin brings to the Repubby Ticket==she's attractive, well spoken, and vibrant !! THEN< Obama looks to his right hand man and what does he see==Joe Biden !!!!
Yeah, sure, they're gonna prosecute the Neocon Crimes---YEAH< SURE !!!!
Bring America Back !!!! I must join my fellow/sister Proggers in here (rhymes with bloggers & with Froggers)_ and am a heavy Skeptic of either Obama or Biden successfully prosecuting criminally King George or Prince Cheney !!
CRIMES are crimes now--Severe War Crimes==Evidence is abundant the Neocons lied this country into Iraq==murdering hundreds of thousands of innocent children, women, and men with the so called "SHOCK & AWE" attack. Iraq was, in fact, a defensless nation==unable to fly aircraft in its own airspace for 10 years, or to provide food for its people due to USA blockade policies.
These and the other many criminal acts of Bush Neocon Nation are here now, and do not become effective as of the inauguration day of Barak and Joe--if indeed that happens. If they have NO intention to prosecute Bush and Company now, then they have None if and when they get into the White House !!
The Obama Campaign is getting out-smarted consistently by the McCain team.
Obama's Team is DESPERATE==they will now say and do anything to keep from blowing yet another chance at a sure Democratic Victory==duh, yep they sure need to read 'Elections for Dummies ".
Sarah Palin's joining the McCain Team was a Stroke of Genius==they took away Clinton's glass ceiling; they again laid claim to the immense/hugh Catholic Vote with Palin's Right to Life family values; they can make just as much history
with a female VP, as a black Pres. She's got a natural gas pipeline in Alaska!
So many things Sarah Palin brings to the Repubby Ticket==she's attractive, well spoken, and vibrant !! THEN< Obama looks to his right hand man and what does he see==Joe Biden !!!!
Yeah, sure, they're gonna prosecute the Neocon Crimes---YEAH< SURE !!!!
I do however, have fond memories of Joe Biden from the ancient political past.
During the Clarence Thomas hearings, after Anita Hill accused the Supreme Court nominee of sexual harassment, rabid right winger Orrin Hatch, the Senator from Utah, called Anita an "alligator" (thereby confusing someone who makes an allegation with a large swamp living reptile). Biden, as I recall, was the judiciary chairman and even he cracked up laughing. I also remember that a copy of "The Exorcist" was used by Hatch in Thomas's defence. Classic politics, nothing's changed. A bunch of confidence men pretending to be on opposing sides.
Huh. They fooled me once when they lied and got my vote and captured the House and the Senate to stop the war, you can’t fool me again.
Bush/Cheney represent the corrupt, undemocratic system that needs to be put on trial and trashed. That includes the self-confessed Zionist Biden.
Might? MIGHT? MIGHT!?!?!? Sorry, Senator, but you're going to have to do better than "might" if you want my vote, although judging by your behavior since winning the primary, you apparently don't want my vote anyway.
Obama or whoever becomes the next "emperor" doesn't really make policy. He carries it out. The decisions are made by the powers that be (PTB) and the water boy and the Congress carry it out. That's why it won't really matter whether we get the White Republican or the "Black" one, either way we will be up to our elbows in the Middle East, killing and dying so Big Oil and the Military Industrial Complex can make a killing too. The drilling will start too.
We live in a time of delusions. Americans are under the delusion that it actually matters who they vote for, Democrat or Republican. It doesn't. The Republicans lost the last two presidential elections and still managed to occupy the White House because the PTB wanted it that way. We are living in 1984. Perpetual war for perpetual peace as Gore Vidal pointed out.
Democrats go vote for your Obama and then stick your collective heads back in the sand and "hope" everything works out. Hope. Keep hoping and voting for status-quo candidates of "change" and what you'll get is status-quo "change".
We need to shake it up and throw them both out by such large majorities they can't steal it back. We need to decisively turn our backs on them and take our country back. We have the numbers but too many saps buy into the very system that is screwing them so good.
Corruption at the highest levels, continual war, drill rig populated shorelines, nukes and $5 gas. D or R? Or something else? Hunt or be hunted.
Well, okay, if this is not just so muxh "red meat" thrown to progressives to try to seduce their vote, maybe we might take a cue from Al Capone, the Chicago gangster and original Mafioso. Although guilty of everything from extortion, to bribery, to murder, What put him away for good was the homely and tweedy crime of tax evasion.
Maybe, just maybe, the Bush crime family (and I am talking about GHW, GW, Jeb, Neil, the entire bunch of them, might be simlilarly entangled in the web of their own stupidity and past entanglements. For the dramatic amongst us wanting them tried for crimes against humanity and murder, forget it. The basic problem is not lack of evidence. The basic problem is that those who would be responsible for conviction have the same blood on their hands and they know it.
Poet
"...GHW, GW, Jeb, Neil, the entire bunch of them..."
Don't forget Barbara, Laura, and the twins.
"...running mate Barack Obama could pursue criminal charges against the Bush administration..."
Yeah right! What bull. Notice he says "COULD" not WILL. This is just a trick to win votes from saps that believe Democrats can be trusted to follow through with their promises, which of course is bunk.
Didn't Obama promise to filibuster the FISA capitulation and wasn't he antiwar before he became an AIPAC serving, saber rattling, warmonger?
"..."[I]f crimes have been committed...."
-IF? Only a sold out Democrat would have any doubts about whether crimes were committed. Nancy Pelosi, their leader has doubts too. Just ask Bugliosi. He has a blueprint to prosecute the war criminal Bush as soon as he leaves office. The Dems will do nothing. The one hearing that had was a farce.
Anybody self deluded enough to believe either a Democrat or a Republican, especially during an election year, deserves them. If the Democrats had wanted to prosecute Bush they wouldn't have granted him immunity for the crime of illegally spying on US citizens and waited until the 11th hour to do anything about his many crimes. Obama, by the way, voted for that immunity.
Go Greens! Go Nader! Go any 3rd party that is opposed to war, for people and against corporate and government corruption!
The FISA Bill did not grant criminal immunity to anyone. All it did was limit the civil liability of the cooperating telecom companies.
As far as being "opposed to war", Obama stated from the very beginning that we must pursue the original war in Afghanistan against Bin Laden and the Taliban for their perpetration of the attacks of 9/11. Unlike Iraq, this is a valid war of response against those who perpetrated the terrorist attacks on us. Bush's diversion of military assets from Afghanistan to Iraq and using deceit to justify waging war against Iraq was what was illegal and wrong.
Right. We'll just count on those blood-thirsty greens
Obama-Biden are already starting to flip-flop.
Joe Biden on Fox:
"What is true is the United States Congress is trying to preserve records
on questions that relate to whether or not the law has been violated by
anyone. You know, there's been an awful lot of unsavoury stuff that's gone on.
And the mere fact that it occurred in a previous administration doesn't mean [a subsequent] Justice Department, if, in fact, there's evidence, shouldn't pursue them."
Ah, good, he's for bringing lawbreakers to justice! ... But then in the next sentence, the next breath, he says:
"But I have no evidence of any of that. No one's talking about pursuing President Bush criminally."
In other words, millions of people will have read the headline: "Obama May Prosecute Bush and Company." But only a small percentage of them will have heard Biden's backpedling on Fox -- re. the above excerpt.
That's classic political doublespeak.
What will happen is that any number of less-than-fully-informed people will say: "Hey, did you hear? Obama may prosecute Bush!"
Congratulations, "Team Obama" -- Mission Accomplished! You've once again laid down a load of all-too-predictable bullshit.
Problem is if Bush goes down a few (or many?) key Democrats will go down with him. For example, it is probable that there were people on the intelligence committee (I'm lookin' at you, Nancy Pelosi!) who knew about Bush crimes long ago and did nothing about it. If Obama has to choose between doing what's right for the American people and protecting his political cronies, which do you think he's going to choose?
I know what youre saying--and what he would choose! But, for most Ams. , who have been so blindsided by this go-along to get-along Congress--I personally dont care if they lock ALL of their asses up , if they were involved! This is NOT a "partisan" issue. The prob is, how do we get it done, when most are guilty! Feingold? Sanders? I dunno--who i probably. NOT guilty and a good lawyer? Doesnt matter--let the chips fall where they may. "The Am. people are so dumb", "the am. people let this war start"-some of that is true. But, I also say that the Am. pepole have been sorely abused! Lied to, left naked and put to bed without my supper, as Romeo would say, I think LOL. Unfortunately , it seems many of them want to go back to the same bullshit trough. I, my fellow citizens, have had quite enough, thanks! I keep getting denounced, but--I just cannot do this anymore!! I was mad as hell when friends voted nader in 2000! I had to apologize! (Most did Nader's traders and were in blue states--I'm stuck in Red!)Eveytime I get castigated for not "bering OPbama enough", I TRY to find reasons to trust him, like him, believe he is "so different"--he doesnt even throw progressives a bone! If I feel I have to do it, because I'm in a Red State, it would be impossiboe for those of you who love Obama (as a candidate) to understand how difficult it is year after year to vote for "better than the fascist"!
One reason to vote for Obama over McCain, (and in fact to forget entirely "third party" candidates who will do noting except to syphon off Democratic votes), in fact the most important reason, is who will be appointed to the Supreme Court during the next presidency (or possibly next two).
Due to the ages of the current Justices there is a strong possibility of up to three vacancies occurring in the Supreme Court during the next presidential term.
If you want to see a right wing ideologue Supreme Court for a minimum of the entirety of the next generation - a minimum of the next 25 to 30 years, then it doesn't matter if Obama doesn't win. One more right wing Supreme Court Justice will ensure the reversal of Roe V Wade and further diminish the rights of citizens in America. It therefore becomes the most important thing to prevent if we are ever to reinstate liberty in America as we have known it!
Judge Obama/Biden and the rest not on the pablum they're spewing now for public consumption, but on their past voting records. That should tell you all you need to know.
WSWS.ORG: Love the dead McCain campaign concept.
SPACE CADET: Good point, one not raised by others.
It's kind of "ageist" isnt it?? LOL!!
The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder - During DNC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIL64mxKUa4
The BIGGEST story week before 9/11 was approx 3 TRILLION DOLLARS MISSING!
The Story was dropped by the MSM. They got their cut.... for cooperation. There was also approx. 6+ TRILLION DOLLAR SURPLUS when Bush and Co. took control in 2001.
Bush and Co. do not work for the People of the United States. They work for a network of International NWO (Criminals) Synarchist Bankers of Europe.
Coffeelover,,,,,,,
Having made this announcement, if I were Obama, I would be damn sure not to be boarding a plane from now until ,well, ever.
Remember what happened to Paul Wellstone?
Walk in peace.
Remember what happened to Patrice Lumumba!
I doubt that Obama and Biden would actually go through with it, but at least the notion that Bush and Co. are far more than a bunch of Keystone Cops is getting even more attention.
I still think they should all be hung.
wsws:
I heard that McCain will never die as Spielberg made a McCain puppet they will put in front of the camera.
Obama-haters....
Those are strong words.
I fundamentally understand that Obama is not worse that John McCain. Bless his heart, McCain's an elderly man who looks more elderly daily. Neurologically, his best days are long past.
But Obama has not grabbed my attention, he does not lift my hopes. He's absolutely floating on a sea of money. The thing, the treacherous thing where Obama and McCain do not differ is that they are _beholden to the same interests_. These are the same interests that have landed us in Iraq and want to keep us there.
In the Bill Moyers interview of Andrew Bachevich, Bachevich said that Congress exists _solely_ to get itself re-elected again. There is nothing that has happened in the last eight years, but even more in the last 20 years, to cause me to disagree with that. And so we have two senatorial members who are vying for the presidency. They bring a predictable set of rules and values with them. "Gotta get re-elected, gotta fundraise, gotta get re-elected, gotta fundraise. Yes, sir, ma'am, deep pockets. I'm _YOUR_ man." Bought and paid for.
Even though Barack OBama is at least not senile yet, he's purchased. There is nothing that I hear him say that gives me hope that he will be about the people's business. Think of pragmatism and "political will" as code words for doing the things your moneyed supporters WANT you to DO and will continue to PAY you to do.
OF course there is no "political will" to prosecute Bush and associates for their crimes. Bush's policies have made a lot of people very, very rich.
What would mark a leader here is willingess to do these things, to divest of the influence of the monied interests because it is simply the right thing to do.
I don't hate Obama. I WANT to want to vote for him.
But I don't see that voting for him would bring America the changes it so desperately needs.
SO I am the undecided. I'd vote for a third party candidate if I thought it mattered. I don't think it will. I think it will take a constant, noisy grass roots. I tend to agree with Vincent Bugliosi who says that prosecuting Bush for his crimes may come down the road, done by some hungry young lawyer eager to make his mark.
I think it will take everyone of us being active and vocal and overcoming the absolute complicit silence of the corporate press.
We need to create a culture of questioning.
Every day in our newspapers, we need to question the moneyed interests that dominate Washington; how a corporately influenced government loses its' incentive for peace (bow to Naomi Klein); how the policies have fed what Krugman calls the second gilded era; how silly ideas like "health savings accounts" are little more than a way to gild neglect of the people's health; on and on. Every destructive idea that gets floated from both sides of the aisle.
Get the people to start asking questions.
I think it is a slim hope at best, but I believe that it is our only hope.
"Even though Barack OBama is at least not senile yet, he's purchased. There is nothing that I hear him say that gives me hope that he will be about the people's business. Think of pragmatism and "political will" as code words for doing the things your moneyed supporters WANT you to DO and will continue to PAY you to do."
Except that Obama's funds come from hundreds of thousands of small contributors - not from lobbyists and mega-corporations. Obama has even ruled that the DNC will not take PAC money.
I understand why you're cynical - but at least take the time and effort to be accurate!
Dump_Bush,
I decided that your challenge to check out the funding was legitimate and this is what I found:
If you go to Open Secrets.org this what they say about the sources of Obama's funding:
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.php?id=N00009638
You will like it: they point out that the great majority of his funding comes from "small contributions".
However, when you click on the link to see who these small contributors are, you find this:
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638
Well,there were no "Jo and Mary Public" type listings. All big sounding companies. But with the exception of Goldman Sachs, none of these companies really ring a bell for me.
So, I looked a little further. This is from SourceWatch but since it is public generated Wiki, it just has the problems that go with that kind of sources. But still let's take a look:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Barack_Obama/Campaign_Financing
It seems to say that PAC's had a significant role at the beginning of Obama's campaign. And it also talks about how Obama has said that lobbyists and PAC's will have a seat at his table but not a big one. That statement may be more of an indication of how big money interests PERVADE the political process more than anything.
Let's look further:
I pawed through my Google results. Disclaimer: I didn't click on the links that purported Obama's links to terrorists.
Then I came upon this blog, which is nothing I've ever been to before:
http://bucknakedpolitics.typepad.com/buck_naked_politics/2008/06/how-should-one.html
This guy suggests that the numbers in Obama's campaign have been tweaked to over-emphasize the small donor impact. I can buy his analysis.
But since my general thesis is that big money interests control the debate and the outcomes in our politics TO THE DETRIMENT of the common person, very little suggests that Obama is "different" from others. He's taking their money.
Check out this link:
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/sectors.php?sector=D
This lets you look at how different industrial groups are contributing to different campaigns. There are simply no big surprises here: Look at defense, lawyers and lobbyists, health care (big pharma likely here)and even labor (which is probably more appropriately placed in the "paper tiger" sections).
When big money interests, unrestrained and unfettered, have so much capacity to influence candidates what would cause them to listen to us first?
That is my fear
What you're leaving out is that opensecrets says that the corporate donors account for 4% of his total---the rest, 96% are from individuals...
................................A MODEST PROPOSAL ..................................
Although I plan on voting for Ralph Nader, if my only choice was voting for Barack Obama or else voting for a *dead* John McCain ... frankly, I'd vote for the corpse.
I mean, let's face it, a dead John McCain will do far less harm than a live John McCain or a live Barack Obama.
Why wait for the inevitable? We all have to die, don't we? ... So here's my modest proposal. ... Summon Dr. Kevorkian to the Republican Convention. Have the good doctor ease John McCain out of this travail of tears. Then prop up ole Johnny-Boy, freshly-deceased -- and run that sucker for president!
In a heartbeat the title of "lesser-of-the-two-evils" would switch from a *live* Barack Obama to a *dead* John McCain.
I mean, how much harm can a dead guy do???
Stuff the guy! Get a good taxidermist, then tour the corpse around these United States of America.
Book that sucker on Oprah. Wheel that stiff onto the Jerry Springer Show. Nobody would lay a hand on him. How can you dislike a dead guy?
Come on, how many times have you dealt with a difficult person and, so exasperated, you yelled out: "Shut up! Goddammit, shut the f*** up! Just sit there and don't say a word!" ... Well, sir, there you have it, there's your perfect candidate -- John "Just-Sit-There-and-Be-Dead" McCain.
I guarantee you: a dead John McCain in the White House would all but guarantee world peace and environmental sanity.
The same applies to Barack Obama. Either candidate would win the Election in a landslide if they'd just be willing to "run dead."
So, come on, John McCain; or else how about you, Barack Obama -- just do it -- JUST DROP DEAD!
Once cremated, a grateful nation will *sweep* you into office.
Good idea on the culture of questioning. Two points.
"Even though Barack OBama is at least not senile yet, he's purchased. There is nothing that I hear him say that gives me hope that he will be about the people's business. Think of pragmatism and "political will" as code words for doing the things your moneyed supporters WANT you to DO and will continue to PAY you to do."
I could be wrong, but my impression was that Obama got the vast majority of his money from a huge base of online donors. ( I think it's been changing since he won the primaries) That's always been something that caught my attention.
"where Obama and McCain do not differ is that they are _beholden to the same interests_. These are the same interests that have landed us in Iraq and want to keep us there."
My impression of the thing that landed us in Iraq was that an insane man named Bush decided it would be a good idea. I could just be naive I guess...
But Obama does saber rattle toward Afghanistan and his recent line about the 79 million Iraqi surplus is certainly bankrupt. I hate to see him pander---but look what he's trying to do, get elected in the USA
Please allow me attack you twice. Well, thrice.
You write, "I hate to see him (Obama) pander---but look what he's trying to do, get elected in the USA."
- If "trying to get elected" excuses a Democrat for playing to the interests of the MIC, Wall St & AIPAC, etc, it also excuses a Republican.
You also write your theory of Iraq: " an insane man named Bush decided it would be a good idea."
- This is wildly wrong. There is a long history of the fond desire, in certain US circles, to use military force to seize control of Middle East & Caspian oil & gas resources. People like Wolfowitz & Cheney proposed seizing Iraq during GHW Bush's admin, but were quickly shushed, because it wasn't considered politically feasible at that time. But the idea has been around for a long time, more or less waiting for the first moment where it would seem politically "doable." It's not an idea having to do with GW Bush in particular, and it's not because he's 'insane.' He was in synch with a significant portion of ruling class sentiment on this.
I'm also skeptical about that story that Obama "got the vast majority of his money from a huge base of online donors." I think he gets much more corporate money than McCain (though of course, that's a different question).
1st point: I wasn't excusing, just trying to explain.
2nd: You're probably right---my "insane" was simplistic.
3rd: skeptical is good
RichM, I agree...
No sooner than Obama and Biden make utterances about bringing Bush et al to justice, they begin their predictable back peddling so they can worm out of their promises. It's all part of the con that Obama is perpetrating on the gullible. All Obama's and Biden's talk of justice adds up to a bucket of warm piss.
Let's see. You're standing in the back of your cave with the light shining in and you're scrutinizing the shadows for the truth of the future.
I'll take try instead of promise.
Joel
Dear Senator Biden,
Vincent Bugliosi is sure as hell talking about it, and his record as a prosecutor would lead one to believe he certainly should know what he is talking about.
George W. Bush is the Charles Manson of the 21st century. Let Vince have at him.
Obama needs a great Attorney General like Ralph Nader.
Biden took it all back today on Fox News:
When asked about his comments by Fox news today, Biden said he has no
evidence that criminal charges would be warranted and no intention of
pursuing action against the current president.
"What is true is the United States Congress is trying to preserve records
on questions that relate to whether or not the law has been violated by
anyone," Biden said, adding: "But, you know, there's been an awful lot of
unsavoury stuff that's gone on. And the mere fact that it occurred in a
previous administration doesn't mean [a subsequent] Justice Department,
if, in fact, there's evidence, shouldn't pursue them [? MCM] .... But I have no
evidence of any of that. No one's talking about pursuing President Bush
criminally."
...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/03/uselections2008.joebiden
Joel
If Obama is serious, he only has to appoint Vincent Bugliosi Attorney General. If you doubt that, read Bugliosi's book "The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder".
Biden took it all back today on Fox News:
When asked about his comments by Fox news today, Biden said he has no
evidence that criminal charges would be warranted and no intention of
pursuing action against the current president.
"What is true is the United States Congress is trying to preserve records
on questions that relate to whether or not the law has been violated by
anyone," Biden said, adding: "But, you know, there's been an awful lot of
unsavoury stuff that's gone on. And the mere fact that it occurred in a
previous administration doesn't mean [a subsequent] Justice Department,
if, in fact, there's evidence, shouldn't pursue them [? MCM] .... But I have no
evidence of any of that. No one's talking about pursuing President Bush
criminally."
...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/03/uselections2008.joebiden
Cindy,
In other words, millions of people will have read the headline: "Obama May Prosecute Bush and Company." ... But only a small percentage of them will have heard Biden's backpedling on Fox -- re. the Biden excerpt you posted.
What will happen is that any number of less-than-fully-informed people will say: "Hey, did you hear? Obama may prosecute Bush!"
I mean look at what Biden said. Joe Biden:
"What is true is the United States Congress is trying to preserve records
on questions that relate to whether or not the law has been violated by
anyone. You know, there's been an awful lot of unsavoury stuff that's gone on.
And the mere fact that it occurred in a previous administration doesn't mean [a subsequent] Justice Department, if, in fact, there's evidence, shouldn't pursue them."
Ah, good, he's for bringing lawbreakers to justice! ... But then in the next sentence, the next breath, he says:
"But I have no evidence of any of that. No one's talking about pursuing President Bush criminally."
Nice work, "Team Obama" -- Mission Accomplished! You've once again laid down a load of all-too-predictable bullshit.
I love this. A candidate for the Senate, having important conversations with the people.
Cindy Sheehan, you are the wave of the future!
Francis Boyle, University of Illinois law professor and activist (specializing in international law, constitutional law), has also laid out serious charges against Bush, the most impeachable presidents ever.
Boyle was one of the expert witnesses in the Ehren Watada case. You can find his articles on the internet. His last book was: Protesting Power (2007)
I am actually running for the House of Reps, Hank.
I know Francis Boyle.
I like to check in here every so often. I find the comments very
thought provoking, and find this the most progressive sites, even
though CD is not where I think it should be, the posters are still,
for the most part, very cool.
I agree with you on the "morsel of hope" thing and my opponent,
Nancy Pelosi, said the same thing in a Time interview....many
Democrats are also complicit (including herself...that's me talking) in the crimes
of the Bush regime.
XO
Cindy
,,,even though CD is not where I think it should be...
Where else?
I thought someone was just using the tag Cindy Sheehan --very cool!! Hey! Iwish you all the best and a great victory!
Thanks KDelphi!
xoxo
Cindy
That's the House, Hank. But, yes, it's great.
Today the House, tomorrow the...
I think we need more nationally elected people somewhere. Like maybe 25 Members oh the House and 10 Senators responsible to a larger electorate. Even if they had no vote, just a 'bully pulpit' -- nah, give'm a vote.
"Obama sounded a similar note in April, vowing that if elected, he would ask his attorney general to initiate a prompt review of Bush-era actions to distinguish between possible "genuine crimes" and "really bad policies".
"[I]f crimes have been committed, they should be investigated..."
Duh...You know, of course, that Obama and his people are not *that* dumb. They are screwing with us again. Even full-fledged Obama supporters must admit that. "Really bad policies" covers a lot of territory and is another "useful" concept. "Let's do it right!"
Forget Ramsey Clark or Vincent Bugliosi as AG. I think the Obama administration will be chock full of former Clinton staff and we will be led to believe Clintonian corporatism and globalism are "progressive", glamourous, etc. Even the reform-lite of Carter will be off-limits and shut away in some dark room down the hall.
Exactly right!
If Obama gets elected, it's goodbye Bill Clinton, hello Bill Clinton.
I said something like that awhile back, during the DNC, when people asked why Clinton adn obama "seemed to dislike each other"--I said, "Because they are almost exactly alike! Theyre both lying charmers!". BOY, I got kicked out of a room for that one!Isnt this ridiculous, that we have al these peole running around screaming at people that dont support Obama completley? What do they think that they are achieving? Is it winning anybody over, it sure as hell isnt me!~I wonder if Obama has any clue how much progressives feel shat upon. If we could open the debates, he might get a strong ideas of it!
Remember when Gerald Ford kicked the bucket. ...
How all the hack politicians came out of the woodword to tell us what a wonderful "service" Gerald Ford had done for the country by pardoning Richard Nixon. ... How good ole Gerry saved the country the "trauma" of a Nixon trial.
What a crock of you-know-what!
Have you ever run into anyone, say, at a bar or a bowling alley, or at church or walking in the park, who in having a conversation with you about politics said: "Sweet God in heaven! I'm so glad Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon! I'd be just so, so, soooooo traumatized to see that poor man brought before the bar of justice."
Down here in Florida, there's a local radio show on each week that features former Florida Congressman Lou Frey, a Republican during the Watergate days. Last week he was discussing Gerald Ford's pardon of Richard Nixon and he said: "I agree with the pardon. But I just wish it had come after the Congressional elections. It would have spared the country so much unnecessary hardship."
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
That was a classic! Yeah, pardon the lyin' crook -- Congressman Lou was all for that -- but the only mistake Gerald Ford made, according to Congressman Lou, was not having waited until *after* the Congressional elections -- see, that way the Republicans wouldn't have lost as many Congressional seats as they did.
And all in the name of "sparing the American people." ... In other words: what's good for the Republican Party is good for America. (But of course!)
Yeah, Obama *might* prosecute Bush and Company. And I might have to fight off Angelina Jolie with a wet noodle.
Is this the same Barack Obama who vowed not to vote for FISA? ... And then did.
Is this the former "peace candidate" who is now willing to fight four (count 'em FOUR) wars in the Middle East -- Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran.
Pleeeze! Barack Obama and his DPAers ("Democratic Party Apologists") should take the following to heart -- "If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem."
As one poster in this thread put it -- politicians are scared to death of any of their ilk being prosecuted. FOR ANYTHING! After all, it might start a trend.
Justice ... what a concept!!!
As one poster in this thread put it -- politicians are scared to death of any of their ilk being prosecuted. FOR ANYTHING! After all, it might start a trend.
But of course!
No king would ever support the idea of the citizens removing their sovereign!
Snow wolf:
Man bring that stuff you have been smoking to the next party. We can Hope ? If GB/Cheney /ROVE/RICE and the rest had swung from a rope 2 years ago it would have made change. Our man from Kenya or his neo running mate will do F all I will bet money on that.
Well...as I've said before...you need to read up on what Presidents can (and do) during Wartime...
Lincoln and FDR are good models to study
The Democrats are well aware of this...and in the end will do nothing because they know one day a Democrat in office will have to do the exact same things
Bush and Cheney change it so often, how could one possibly keep up??
Sounds pretty tepid. Won't get my hopes up on this at all. We've all been just tossed a bone, a morsel.
An extra large bucket of "might" and fist full of change will barely buy a cup of coffee. I'll believe it when I see it.
It really pleases me that you all see through Politicians Bullshit...there may be hope for you yet
How many of you think this is actually going to happen?
It will happen, no matter how much the cynics attack instead of back his attempts to do so.
And you're so sure of this why?
We must prosecute even if only to stabilize our waning constitution and allow us to go forward with what we have long since established as our guiding principles; our Constitution. If we do not, then what's the point of law at all? Perhaps we need to have an amendment to the constitution to re-comit ourselves to the principles that do work for us-when applied. These folks are already in contempt. If we allow them to walk, then why should any of us care at all about the law? Judge Brandeis.,..and all that.
And where are all the lawyers when you need 'em? Lawyers need to stand up and see that this gets corrected, and quickly. After all, if they don't, then who needs 'em?
Lawyers represent clients, not ideas. They rarely get to pick the facts to be tried. When Drs were putting leaches on Geo Washington's ass to cure him of pneumonia, lawyers were writing the Constitution. We live in a democracy. The governed must act.
Ok Doctor...you are a PhD?
I am just a layman...please enlighten me as to why the Democrats (who are now in the Majority) have not moved thusfar to impeach Mr. Bush?...
Especially in light of their patron Saint William Jefferson Clinton being the only elected President ever to be impeached...I would think, a) they are looking for some payback and b) if the case is so clear cut (which I disagree strongly) they are shirking their Congressional duty?
Thank you, Sir
They haven't had the votes. Impeachments, at some stage of the proceedings, requires a super-majority which the number of repluguglicans has prevented.