« Joe the Plumber Touches Down in Israel
Emerging Verdicts On George Bush’s 8 Year Legacy: Mixed, Abysmal, Weak Economic Gains »
Obama’s Janus Dilemma
As he takes the oath in this aptly named month, Barack Obama is faced with looking both forward and back over an enormous list of national problems.
Steering the country through economic minefields will obviously take almost all of his administration’s energies but, to the extent that present difficulties are rooted in the disastrous Bush years, the past can’t be totally ignored.
In cataloguing the major frauds and deceptions, Frank Rich in the New York Times asserts, “The more we learn about where all the bodies and billions were buried on our path to ruin, the easier it may be for our new president to make the case for a bold, whatever-it-takes New Deal.”
In his interview, George Stephanopoulos asked the President-Elect about appointing a special prosecutor to “investigate the greatest crimes of the Bush administration, including torture and warrantless wiretapping” and got an ambivalent response, “I don’t believe that anybody is above the law. On the other hand I also have a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards.”
Those who were outraged by the Bush-Cheney assault on traditional American freedoms may be disappointed by such hesitation but will have to consider the priorities of doing things right for the future against punishing the wrongs of the past.
3 Responses to “Obama’s Janus Dilemma”
…
Whether or not Obama commits to investigating the Bush era, he is unlikely to direct his Justice Department to obstruct civil actions or to support Cheney's “everything the executive branch does is secret” stance. I'm sure we will learn much as leaders and underlings alike are dragged into court to testify about abuses of power. Any citizen wronged by the Bush administration has a right to sue and is entitled to discovery relevant to their cases. I've got my popcorn ready. It's going to be an interesting finale to this dark chapter in American politics.
And consider this: We have extradition treaties with countries whose citizens were kidnapped, tortured and detained without due process. What would motivate Obama to fight extradition of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Yoo or any other member of the war criminal administration? It's not “partisan” or “vengence” to allow a foreign court to try these guys. After all, we expect them to deliver criminals who have violated our laws and are indicted by our courts. It's a two way street.
“What would motivate Obama to fight extradition of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Yoo or any other member of the war criminal administration?”
Common sense.