Tweet
Immediately upon reading Michael Whitney’s post about President Barack Obama’s statement to Logan Price about Bradley — “we are a nation of laws…. he broke the law!” — I was reminded of Richard Nixon’s statement about Charles Manson in the midst of his trial:
“Here was a man who was guilty, directly or indirectly, of eight murders without reason.”
What I didn’t recall from that time was that John Mitchell, easily American history’s crookedest Attorney General ever, was at Nixon’s side when he made that statement in Denver. He recognized right away that there was a serious problem with Nixon’s statement:
“This has got to be clarified,” he told Presidential Aide John Ehrlichman immediately afterward.
Even in an era of news moving only as fast as the wire services, reporters rushed to telephones and the story moved. In half an hour, White House press secretary Ron Ziegler appeared before reporters:
After some minutes of verbal fencing, Ziegler agreed that Nixon’s words about Manson should be retracted. When Ziegler told Nixon what had happened, the President was surprised: “I said ‘charged,’ ” he replied.
Which, of course, Nixon had not said. And, as in Obama’s case, there was video.
During the 3½-hour flight back to Washington, Mitchell persuaded Nixon to put out a statement backing Ziegler up. It read in part: “The last thing I would do is prejudice the legal rights of any person in any circumstances. I do not know and did not intend to speculate as to whether or not the Tate defendants are guilty, in fact, or not.”
Jurors, already sequestered in the Los Angeles, were protected from the next day’s four-inch headlines by papering over the windows of the courthouse: “MANSON GUILTY, NIXON DECLARES.” And, it should be noted, these jurors were not in a directly subordinate relationship to the commander-in-chief, as any jurors in a possible Bradley Manning court-martial would be. Even so, the judge recognized that the influence of a direct statement of guilt by the President of the United States of America would corrupt any jury.
So, in the case of Barack Obama’s statement that Bradley Manning “broke the law,” the question is: Who is Barack Obama’s John Mitchell? Who will tell him he must retract his statement? And does anyone in this Administration have the lightning-fast legal reflexes that even Attorney General John Mitchell had in August of 1970?
108 Comments
So teh O Man is more authoritarian than Nixon. Who knew?
How can you have a military trial if the jurors already “know” the Commander-in-Chief would convict?
And more poorly advised, it seems, as there’s been no retraction of Obama’s statement that Bradley Manning “broke the law.”
I do not believe you can.
I might cut Obammie, the Oligarchs lapdog, a little slack if he would have said the same thing about the Bankers and Wall Street crooks. Instead, he appoints them to his cabinet and bails them out. Oh well. Vote for Obama, or not against him, at your peril. Sure, the Republicans really suck but at least they seem to be waking people up, like Scott Walker in Wisconsin.
With Meese, Mukasey, Fredo, and now Holder, in the competition…
“We are a nation of laws” he said.
For some people, apparently not quite.
Among those, only one served time, though: Martha’s husband.
But yes, that seems to have been no deterrent whatsoever to Mitchell’s successors.
Really good stuff Teddy Partridge. Every sentence a gem.
Excellent, Teddy.
Not too bright for a constitutional genius.
Why, thank you, that’s very kind.
Thanks, Terry Partridge. Good piece. Our judicial system is full of “guilty until proven” folks. Once I was being interviewed for jury duty.
Question: “Will you follow the case, and return a guilty verdict if the facts of the case so indicate?”.
Answer: “Not if this is a victim-less crime” (we hadn’t been told the charges yet).
Judge (nearly coming out of his seat): “There WAS a victim in this case!”.
(Later: We’d like to thank and excuse Mr. PB…)
He is an authoritarian: “l’etat c’est moi!”
Oops. Teddy. I knew that. Teddy Partridge. Should have just written TP. Where’s the edit button?
Seems like the judge had made up her/his mind. If there WAS a victim, as s/he stated to you, a potential juror, then there was a crime, and a guilty criminal. Why bother with a trial, then?
OK, I was pretty sure you meant me!
(edit button is on backorder, we’re told.)
Exactly. I thought after he said that, we should have all been excused, and they should have started over with a new slate of potential jurors. With a good defender, we would have been. It was a farce.
Following Obama’s precedent, I guess we can say without fear of contradiction that our president is a war criminal. After all, we are a nation of laws…
Teddy, this is great. You always find a point of view that I had not thought about. Mitchell, indeed. Thanks.
Obama proclaimed himself judge jury and executioner long ago.
“I am the law!!!”
Next fundraiser a song for Manning called “No charges, no crime.” To the tune of “No, woman, no cry.”
I’m sure there can be a chorus, “Innocent until proven guilty.”
Phenomenal idea!
I get what you’re saying, but I think O very well aware of what and how he said it, as is Holder. I think that both O & Holder are very very comfortable in displaying their utter contempt for the “rule of law,” and how it in no way applies to the vaunted upper 1%. That’s just my take, of course. It would be great to be wrong, but I doubt it.
I’ve worked in the legal system most of my life, and it’s my observation that a tremendous amount of the criminal “justice” system (not as much with civil) is a complete farce. It’s mostly about “going after” & incarcerating minorities. The laws are really skewed in favor of white people, esp middle to upper class (and super rich, of course) white people… and esp rich white men. Anyone who’s worked long enough in the US legal system – IF they’re really honest – will concur with my assertion.
Love it! Go for it. Paging the ghost of the inestimable Bob Marley…
Great post, per usual, Teddy. You bring forward some very interesting points, esp the issue re Mitchell. Hadn’t thought about this in ages, but yeah: who’da thunk we might *long* for Mitchell? geez
That was my experience from seven years working in corrections in Alaska. Lotsa Black, Alaska Native and Latino/a prisoners. None had been framed, but meanwhile the owner of the private corrections company I worked for was bribing many of Alaska’s most prominent politicians on a weekly basis.
Excellent, thought-provoking piece, Teddy. I remember, with your help, when the Nixon-Ziegler-Mitchell event happened. I had forgotten that it happened while the Manson trial was underway.
Flash mobs are getting to be one of my favorite forms of political theater.
If a person tells the president a fact and the president pretends nothing was said, did the person even make a sound?
I’m so glad you brought up this relevant historical analogy.
Ironic that Nixon’s crimes seem like misdemeanors when compared to Obama’s totally lawless presidency.
Dick Cheney was a pioneer. He gave us the modern presidency. The Unitary Executive. It’s just not possible to compare Bush (the lessor) and Obama to prior executives.
Future students will learn that the assumption of dictatorial powers by the executive branch marked the apex of corruption associated with the collapse of empire.
Are you in?
“(edit button is on backorder, we’re told.)”
Bit of humorous snark, or an indication of hope for those of us who have been praying for a return to the old (workable) format?
Apologies to Bob Marley:
‘Cause I remember when we used to sit
In the government yard in Quantico
Obama, serving the hypocrites
And he would mingle with the good people we meet
Good friends we have had, oh good friends we’ve lost along the way
In our dim future you can’t forget your past
So dry your tears I say
No charges, no crime
No charges, no crime
Private Manning, don’t shed no tears
No charges, no crime
Said, said, said I remember when we used to sit
In the government yard in Kansas
All the people standing in candle light
Burnin’ for justice, all through the night
Then we would divide our little crumbs of bread
And share it with our friends
Our fight is our only carriage
So we’ve got to push on through
But while we’re gone…
Innocent until proven, innocent until proven
Innocent until proven, innocent until proven
Innocent until proven, innocent until proven
Innocent until proven, innocent until proven
Innocent until proven, innocent until proven
Ev’rything’s gonna be alright
So, no charges, no crime
No, no charges, no charges, no crime
Oh, Private Manning, don’t shed no tears
No charges, no crime
No charges, no charges, no charges, no crime
No charges, no crime
Oh,Private Manning, please don’t shed no tears
No charges, no crime, yeah
Did Obama just give the Military an order? “Manning is Guilty” could be construed as an order by lower ranks.
tweeted and recommended — who indeed, teddy, who? i don’t think there is anyone speaking truth to power in this administration
Who woulda thought that O coulda made Mitchell one-a-the most honest AGs evah.
And popular lore says Cheney was working on an arc to correct what the neocons saw as *horrendous* limitations put on the president’s power in reaction to Nixon’s crimes. Cheney served in Nixon’s administration as well. This shit goes WAY back and it keeps coming BACK again and again.
*tears*
Innocent until proven guilty is just another quaint concept in 21st century America. Unless of course you have a 7-8 figure bank account and/or are a member in good standing of the village tribe. Then you are innocent until……forever.
But if you think about it this is really quite tame coming from a President who has declared he has the right to assassinate any American citizen, at any time, anywhere in the world, without them ever being charged let alone convicted of a crime.
At least BarryO didn’t order a drone drop on Manning’s ass as he was shuffled off to Leavenworth….
who’da thought,not only does obama admire reagan, he also emulates nixon
accept nixon it seems was more swift afoot
If Obama’s Constitutional Law professor at Harvard is still alive, I hope he or she calls a news conference to announce, “I am retroactively changing Mr. Obama’s grade in my course to an F.”
Looking ahead, do you think Biden should pardon Obama so we can heal?
Rightwingers voted in the CA 3 Strikes law in 2000 (Prop 36), which is basically an unfunded mandate to incarcerate criminals after the 3rd strike. The sentencing regs are strict and give judges little flexibility. The law has done little to reduce crime, and all it’s done is take away funds that could be much better and more productively spent on rehab & education programs for offenders.
Conservatives in CA, however, wanted only to have punitive measures bc they don’t want their taxes spent on “coddling” or “educating” prisoners. In theory, I “get” that, but in reality the 3 strikes law has been incredibly *costly* to CA tax payers by warehousing the mostly poor, indigent and minorities who pass through the system. It’s really done CA and CA citizens no good, as petty crooks are being incarcerated with hardened criminals for small crimes. What happens is that the petty thief, who has a chance to be rehabbed and reintroduced into society, ends up becoming a hardened criminal with a high recidivism rate.
Again the sentencing codes mainly impact the poor and minorities. For ex, there are much harsher sentencing penalities for very very small amounts of crack possession and sale v. a much large amount of cocaine sale and/or possession. Figure it out. Who’s more likely to do crack v. who’s more likely to do cocaine.
It’s a rigged system. There are 2 main prison guard unions in CA, and both contribute to both parties – but both contribute much more heavily and freely to Republicans.
In last year’s CA Gov election, white collar criminal E-Meg Whitman was heavily subsidized by both prison guard unions, and E-Meg was pushing the building of *many more* prisons, whilst also touting how the CA State budget had to be *radically cut* – of course E-Meg wanted most of the cuts to affect the poor, the indigent, the mentally ill, the physically disabled, seniors, public sector workers & unions, and public schools – you know: the “usual suspects” who the right lows to tout as the villains who ran this nation into the ground (rather the greedy white collar CROOKS like E-Meg Whitman).
I digress, but that’s a piece of the puzzle. CA initiatives create law that canNOT be changed by the legislature, although it can be moderated or overturned by the Courts if proven to be unconsitutional. The only way to change, moderate or overturn one initiative is by passing a different one, which is a costly and not very effective process.
Talk about a rigged system. And we all know that the vast preponderance of criminals in the entire USA are predominately minorities and most are from lower/working class backgrounds.
You do the math.
My vote goes for Rolondo Cruz Obama fought to get passed a law that Police video type confessions in Illinois because of the way Rolondo got railroaded and spent years on Death Row.
Obama championing Rolondo helped get him the Hispanic vote and made him an Illinois Senator.
Bradley it seems can’t help Obama get votes so he has no rights? How is Obama’s championing of Rolondo not the exact opposite of suggesting before a trial that Bradley is guilty?
Ghosts of Christmas Past and Present come to mind One more Ghost to visit.
EEK! Don’t give O any “ideas”….
Who would have thought the Lefties at the Lake were not paranoid enough even after we turned on Obama?
I hear lots of I told you so’s about Obama from a few folks and fine they get their victory lap but nobody Left or Right thought Obama was this bad.
The Right might deny it but Obama is the third term of George Bush.
Lawrence Tribe already signed a letter condemning Obama’s endorsement to torture Manning:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/10/bradley-manning-legal-scholars-letter
Tribe was O’s Constitutional Law Prof, and until this past Jan served in the O Admin as O’s “Rule of Law” (ya gotta laugh or you’ll cry) staffer. Tribe left quietly and didn’t make a stink, but one can imagine why Tribe wished to distance himself from his erstwhile Grade A student….
Well put, TSF.
“This administration will strive to be no less dishonest than that of Richard Nixon.”
O’s constitutional law prof at Harvard is prolly patting himself on the back for communicating the real message, which is that constitutions are for wimps. That way the Harvard prof gets consulting contracts, or support for research, or who knows what.
Blowing off the advice of people like Lawrence Tribe, Paul Volcker, and Elizabeth Warren. Notice a pattern here?
There’s widespread support for the notion that some people are beneath the law.
Mr. Obama’s legal and leadership faux pas should result in Mr. Manning’s trial being moved to say, Toronto. Might find a competent, objective, rational, unprejudiced jury there, together with a confident, robust legal system. That is, if finding and recovering truth, justice and the [North] American way is really what Mr. Manning’s trial would be about.
Wherever it is held, it needs to be beyond the immediate reach of so ill-spoken a man. Simply keeping Mr. Manning incommunicado and delaying his trial under after Mr. Obama leaves office would achieve the same thing, at greater expense, and at the added cost of denying justice.
I bet for reasonable remuneration to cover their out-of-pocket expenses, our good friends up North would try all our most difficult cases for us and show us how it’s done.
Yes, there is certainly no longer a need for a conviction any more in America. “He broke the law” is a clear statement of fact. And it should also apply to Obama.
1972 was my freshman year in a public high school in a mostly white suburb of San Antonio. There were maybe 2 black kids and a few hundred Hispanics in a student body of over 3000. Those of us who sported McGovern buttons were actually sent home because he was a “Communist,” according to the principal.
I predicted then that Watergate would bring Nixon down and, two years later, I was regarded as something of a prophet. Oh, how I rejoiced when he resigned!
Now…I miss Nixon. Any way we can clone him and bring him back? He’d definitely be an improvement. BRING BACK DICK!
I didn’t know that – wow! Manning’s treatment will follow President Obama eternally.
I wonder how the Nobel Committee feels? Although the NPP became completely devalued after they awarded it to Kissinger.
Semi-irrelevant side note:
Though the courtroom windows may have been papered over, a copy of the paper and its headline made its way into the court, to a table next to Manson, who held it up for the jurors to see.
I vaguely remember (I was 12) there being questions about whether the jurors saw it, what should be done, etc. but there wasn’t a mistrial.
Well… I dunno if I’d go that far, OhioGringo… albeit I think I get where you’re coming from. But bring back Tricky? Yech. Can’t we find someone more suitable, plz?
A great idea, which sadly will never be followed. Would be appropriate, but the Canadians, ya see, would be too likely to actually, you know, follow the rule of law, and we see here in the USA, that’s not how it’s done… anymore.
Obama also “helped” Tribe write a Con Law article.
I think he got the coffee!
My favorite comment during the darkest Bush/Cheney years was at Digby’s Hullabaloo: “None of this would have happened if Richard Nixon had died in prison.”
And it is true. Cheney, Rumsfeld, GHWB — all of them products of the Nixon era.
great article, thanks.
Again, I believe the Nixon pardon was one of the very first steps in creating our American Unaccountable Elite. Once that was done, the way was clear for not impeaching Ronald Reagan for Iran-Contra, for not impeaching GHWB for the October Surprise, and for not impeaching W for, well, everything. Now we’ve reached the point where Obama can’t possibly be impeached.
Sometimes you have to completely cauterize a wound to allow it to heal. The Nixon pardon festered in the American body politic, and had horrible side effects.
Next day Manson himself displayed a copy of the Times to the jury for some ten seconds before a bailiff grabbed the newspaper from his hands. Judge Older called a recess, then questioned the jurors one by one to satisfy himself that their judgment would not be affected. An alternate juror convulsed the courtroom when he announced his disclaimer: “I didn’t vote for Nixon in the first place.” The judge denied a motion for a mistrial, and the defense lawyers proceeded with cross-examination of the state’s star witness, Linda Kasabian, a former member of the Manson “family.”
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,909547,00.html#ixzz1KIYRADM9
heya, bedbug!
Nobel Peace Prize? It’s more tainted than the Heisman Trophy.
I had finished my senior year ten days before I opened the Saturday Washington Post to see the Metro section (below the fold) article about the break-in at the Watergate. I announced to my assembled parents and younger brother that the Nixon presidency was over.
Of course, we still had to endure the criminally-obtained landslide re-election, but it was all downhill from June 1972.
Thanks for mentioning Martha Mitchell, the only honest person any where near that administration.
You are quite welcome, and thank you for the comment.
What’s interesting is that, to my knowledge, both the repubs and and the Obama turd-polishers don’t want to make an issue of this.
At this point, I think the republicans realize what a good thing they have going with Obama in the White House, licking corporate ass like it was a fudgesicle, at the same time the repubs accuse him of being a “socialist”. If he keeps up with these Bushian fuckups, to go along with the quagmires and the economy, they may not have him to run against in 2012, and that, they are beginning to understand, could cost them dearly, politically speaking.
Of course, there are still a lot of democrats who are stupid enough to want to nominate him again, so that he can finish the job of hamstringing the democratic party, on which he took such a great step, in the mid-terms.
Gonna be a hell of an 18 months until the election.
My favorite Martha Mitchell comment ever, one that still baffles folks when I repeat it, was published in the paper after she and her husband attended some avant-garde production at a Washington theatre. When asked how she enjoyed the performance, Martha replied, with a big smile, “Oh, don’t miss it if you can!”
I’m still not sure what that means, exactly. But I love saying it.
Isn’t this presidential mis-statement grounds for dismissal, since as CinC he’s ultimately in charge of the pending court-martial?
Toronto? Rob Ford, the Archie Bunker of the North, is the mayor. And if Stephen Harper wins a majority government next month, Canadian politics will lurch even more sharply to the right than ours did after the 1980 election.
About the people who each gave Obama $5,000 to sing to him today “we’ll vote for you in 2012, yes that’s true; look at the Republicans; what else can we do?”
Those people are too stupid to be allowed to vote. They did more to HURT Bradley Manning than help him because now Obama has it in his head that he can mistreat Manning with impunity and pay no political price. The idiots will still vote for him!
Those idiots understand nothing about leverage. The way you exercise leverage is to withhold something the other person wants till he gives you something for it.
Is it any wonder that liberals are the biggest political doormats in the country? Most are FOOLS who have bought into the Republican Boogeyman gambit. Well, Obama does all the same things that Bush did but takes them FURTHER. That’s change.
Well, actually, here in Canada we are having our own problems. In the midst of an election where our strictly rightwing conservative Prime Minister is bluffing his way past numerous campaign revelations of scandals, lying, and bullying. All with a sneering disregard for rule of law and common decency. He wants a majority government or he’s warning us the whole damn country is going to hell. He’s stopped just short of saying the terrorists will get us. I have no doubt Harper is on Obama’s side of the Assange/Manning debate. ‘Tis a bother we are having here these days … and we’ll probably NEVER repatriate Omar Khadr.
LOL. Yup. I was typing while you were posting … you got it!
Latest news is polls don’t look good for Harper’s majority … whew.
I served under Nixon in 1968. He was killing people in South East Asia by the hundreds of thousands for no good reason. Nixon started the war on drugs because he hated hippies. If I could I would dig him up and kill him again.
My first president was Truman. The first one I remember was Ike. The best of them was Carter. He at least sincerely meant well. Can’t say about Kennedy. We didn’t really get to know him. And Ford was a place holder.
Obama is the worst I’ve seen. Not because his crimes exceed those of George the Lessor. But because he is a lying, two faced backstabbing son of a bitch.
NPL, I’m not sure if anyone can have leverage with Obama unless their net worth is north of a billion.
Tactically that little song was asymmetric agitation that produced some tremendous results for any of those who are still naive. Whether anything concrete results from Obama’s lack of logic remains to be seen. Just shake the tree and see what falls out worked for me here.
I confronted someone once on their BS and he had to do a 360 spin like a kewpie doll to regain his composure and agree with me. Could happen again.
This is the same constitutional scholar & professor who couldn’t come up with an opinion on the legality of DADT.
If it’s not, it should be. He’s given his order and they must obey. If they don’t, their career is toast.
Sad, non, that lawyer Barack Obama can’t find even a John Mitchell in his White House or DoJ to tell him what he needs to hear.
Gotta hand it to Emanuel and Daley for cowing or getting rid of anyone who dares do that sort of job. You’d think their role model was Dick Cheney. I don’t think that’s what competent CEO’s have in mind when they tell their chiefs of staff to watch their back. It’s what CEO’s like Enron’s Jeffrey Skilling mean.
It is a pity when executives confuse their own futures with those of the institutions they run. Sorry you all are having such troubles up North. I do hope Mr. Harper has his political future sharply curtailed.
For reference, the four-inch headline:
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_vk6j1tEVQd4/SmiEIm5qUpI/AAAAAAAABGA/ga2lC1xqtV4/s1600/Manson.gif
Obama is just a puppet, folks.
He doesn’t actually make decisions.
backatcha, hours later!
Bingo!
On Bradley Manning’s Guilt, Who Will Be Barack Obama’s Joni Mitchell?
“I could make a case of you…”
Thought provoking.
Court and Sparkless
Unfreeman in Leavenworth
All true, and well articulated. This phenomenon has been with us since the founding of the republic.
You know, when T. Roosevelt came into office he found a government subservient to JP Morgan. By the time he left office it was clear that the most powerful institution in society was the state and that a precedent had been set for, if not more democratic control, at least not slavish obedience to the masters of capital and industry.
It’s the capitalism, man. Not just Nixon.
ET!
The Hissing of Some Are Pawns
The message to Obama should be: If you think you got shellacked last November, just wait till November 2012.
Dispassion Betrayed (When All The Knaves Are Freaked)
hiya, punaise. miles of piles of lies since we last bantered.
” “we are a nation of laws…. he broke the law!”
Quite a statement from a constitutional lawyer who taught it for 12 years at the Univ of Chicago Law School.
Obama has broken many laws, and has let others get away with breaking the law, like Pres. George Bush and his water-boarding, Plame leaking, vice-president who has committed more war crimes than almost any other person in the world.
Dear law professor Obama: Pvt. Manning is INNOCENT until proved guilty. That is what our laws say! I realize Bush changed that, but they put the Great Writ of habeas corpus back into the US. Constitution after the Military Commissions Act of 2006, which has been ruled many times to be unconstitutional.
PS: Whoever covered up that Reuter press murders, along with other unarmed civilians, should be at Leavenworth beside Pvt. Manning. As should those who are so numb they can’t tell a strap from a camera from an AK-47. I have seen a lot of them, and they sure don’t look like a camera. Not Manning if he leaked it.
Please put them behind bars because “we are a nation of laws…. (t)he(y) broke the law!” and then made a comment that the 2 children murdered should not be in a combat zone. Really? That is where they live. They didn’t invite us over to murder them!
Yes, I agree ~ the action was VERY successful because it caused an error (but you can’t predict what will be successful, although this had elements that can be duplicated) ~ every error is an opportunity for people to wake up. And people waking the hell up is what we need.
Presidentin’ is hard work, very hard work. ~ paraprhasing GWB.
Yes. It’s horrible.
Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. wrote a visionary piece for the May 1974 Harper’s issue called “What if we don’t impeach him?” where he laid out exactly what was going on and what was at stake for the constitutional intent of the balance of powers. I found a PDF of it at http://warisacrime.org/downloads/ifwedont.pdf . Well worth a read!
I have to agree with this. When P J Crowley called them out on it, they fired him. Now we have Obama declaring Manning guilty by fiat, and claiming that “we’re a nation of laws” to justify it! It is either arrogant or stupid or both. After Crowley’s experience I doubt anyone will step up and be Obama’s Mitchell.
Agree with you. I think I loath Obama so intensely bc I feel so incredibly “used” by this SOB. Not that I had high “hopes” for him, but I thought Obama would be no worse than Clinton – damning with the faintest of praise, that one is. But sheesh! Sonuvabitch, this is just too much! The WORST evah (I hope)!
heh… I remember coming home from College right after the Watergate breakin to be greeted by my mother who *endlessly* “excused” Nixon becuase (and I quote): “EVERYONE else does it, too. It’s just that Nixon got caught.”
I was like: WTF??? I asked mom: So, if other people kill someone but don’t get caught, then it’s A-OK with you? And if a murderer is caught, well, we should grant him/her leniency because “everyone else does it, too”???
That just pissed off mom, and that particular vacation wasn’t loads of fun… other than getting watch my parents bend themselves into pretzels finding ways to “excuse” Tricky’s criminal behavior. Of course, THAT was also MY defining moment, when I KNEW beyond a shadow of a doubt that conservatives were, at the end day, utterly corrupted by their authoritarian belief systems.
That my parents were willingly intent on “excusing” Nixon – based on dubious horse manure – said volumes. It only got worse from there, and I continue to this day to deal with nutbar Tea Party nonsense from my siblings. The only surprise is that I turned out to be the “normal” one (ha ha ha)…
Yes. Hired by the PTB to “act” his role in the Kabuki Show. I quite agree.
There will be no retraction from Obama. He’s not some spineless, cave-in, flip-flopping politician, he’s a man of steel. And those small-time donors know that while he was speaking he was killing innocent women, children, and babies with drones in Pakistan. Had he killed a baby right there in front of them, they’d still vote for him because they believe that the Republicans are worse and that therefore they have no choice. They believe that casting votes which, according to the Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore 2000, need not even be counted, for politicians who can’t be held accountable, is democracy.
It didn’t start with Nixon. It started with the Framers of the Constitution who established neither a democracy nor a republic, but a plutocracy where those who owned the country would always rule it. The Framers betrayed the Founders and the Declaration of Independence, which said that it was a self-evident truth that all men were created equal, and wrote a Constitution where blacks counted as only 3/5 of a person. The Constitution was treason to the American Revolution–it was counterrevolutionary in nature and rather than vesting power in the people, as any democracy or republic must, it vested supreme power, the Divine Right of Kings that the Founders had revolted against, in an unelected Supreme Court whose decisions emanated directly from God and could not be appealed.
When you vote, you are delegating your power and authority to people you can’t hold accountable, and authorizing them to make your decisions for you. You are consenting to be governed by them. In other words, when you vote you are declaring yourself incompetent and requesting guardians to manage your affairs.
Only about half the country is stupid enough to think that a government consisting mostly of millionaires would represent the common people. About half of those voters have below average intelligence and believe anything that right-wing talk show hosts tell them. The other half are of average intelligence, but have been brainwashed by a corrupt educational system into believing that our system is democratic and that they can bring about change by working within the system instead of opposing it.
Don’t be fooled by their fancy clothes and expensive educations. US politicians are mere savages, addicted to violence, torture, and the power that corrupts them. Didn’t Obama say that Raymond Davis, the CIA assassin in Pakistan, was a diplomat? And John Kerry, who supposedly would have been better than Bush, rushed to Pakistan to try to free the “diplomat,” who was eventually freed after the payment of a few million dollars in blood money to the families of his victims.
Liberal and progressive Democrats like those songsters are still debating whether this country is heading towards fascism. When you have the biggest gulag in the world, you’re fascist. When you wage wars of aggression based on lies, you’re fascist. When you torture and assassinate people without trial, you’re fascist. And when you adopt the Eichmann defense, which was held to be invalid at Nuremberg, that those who were just following orders should not be prosecuted, you’re every bit as fascist as the Nazis were.
The only possible leverage we have is to not vote. If the corporations spend billions of dollars getting out the vote (and they donate in almost equal amounts to both major parties, so they don’t really care which one wins–their sole interest is in getting out the vote so that they can claim the legitimacy of having the consent of the governed), which they will, and nobody except the 20% of less who are die-hard fascists votes, it will send them the only message they understand–that they failed in their fiduciary duty to their stockholders because their investment in the election campaigns didn’t produce the needed results. Sure they can install candidates with less than a 20% turnout, but nobody will think that they have the consent of the governed.
No matter who wins, the predetermined results of the 2012 election will be more wars, more torture, more prisons, and greater income disparities. This is fascism. If you like fascism, go ahead and vote. If you don’t like fascism, don’t consent to it. Not even with a protest vote for a independent or third party candidate, because even if they won they wouldn’t have enough power to change the bureaucracy we call government.
When Obama was asked about Bradley Manning, he responded that he’d asked the military if what they were doing was appropriate, and they’d said that it was. Notice that he asked them, he didn’t tell them. More recently a State Department spokesperson tried to explain that the decision is entirely up to the military, which it is, because as Dennis Kucinich found out when he tried to visit Bradley Manning, our military junta is not subject to Presidential or Congressional oversight.
Ah….I’ve been talking to the same wall for years now. There are a few who are ready to listen, but most will continue to rationalize their actions and pretend that they don’t have blood on their hands. Capitalism doesn’t lead to progress and development–it leads, inevitably, to hundreds of BP oil spills and thousands of Fukushimas. That’s what you get when you put profits before people. Sometimes I think that people who support capitalism are no more human than the corporations they work for.
I think you’re right here. Even a kangaroo court will have a hard time dismissing this level of impropriety. Manning may just have been handed a get-out-of-jail-free card.
Could be like Obama wearing the flag lapel pin; take away the opponent’s blowhard issue by mimicking it. Maybe Obama has decided to play hardball against the opponent, for the greater good?
Like “covering” in a sailboat race. If you’re ahead, you don’t just follow your own good instincts for the fastest route to the finish line; instead, you stick right with the trailing boat. Why? Well, what if the seemingly stupid course chosen by the trailer puts the trailer into some fluke fast winds? If you didn’t “cover” he’ll wind up beating you to the finish line. So, stick with the trailer no matter what, and protect your lead.