The Damage Bush Is Still Doing
Frank Rich’s New York Times column yesterday, headed “Obama Can’t Turn the Page on Bush,” was a sad symptom of America’s best and brightest still obsessing over eight years of a national nightmare to the detriment of what needs to be done now.
With an economy in shambles and the Mideast a potential nuclear tinderbox, the Obama Administration has its hands full without “a new commission, backed up by serious law enforcement, to shed light on where every body is buried.”
Although the Bush gang–Cheney, Rumsfeld et al–was a disaster, the American people elected them twice (originally with the help of some of the now-outraged idealists who voted for Ralph Nader), but they are gone.
The only power they have now (pace Cheney) is to control our consciousness with debates over past torture that Obama has now outlawed, with squabbles over what Nancy Pelosi knew and when she knew it, with new “revelations” that Rumsfeld was an arrogant liar.
Nobody wants to forgive and forget, particularly those of us who spent years blogging and howling about Bush abuses, but living in the past is no recipe for undoing it.
19 Responses to “The Damage Bush Is Still Doing”
People voted for change. It all sounded so wonderful.
But now that reality has set in, the only thing Obama is changing is his promises to the far left. No release of pictures, Gitmo will continue on, military tribunals, troops to remain in Iraq, escalation in Afghanistan, no prosecutions, enhanced interrogations to continue if needed, etc. etc.
Yes, it’s a brave new world.
People who thought Sarah Palin would make a bad Vice President now have to make excuses for a bumbling Joe Biden, who just gave away the location of the secret bunker. What an embarrassment to the country this fool has become. The Speaker of the House has now become a laughing stock for her inability to lie effectively.
Imagine if you could channel all the thought and energy it takes to make excuses for these buffoons into something productive. You would be so rich, you would be Republican.
Old Russian saying…You can tell same lie 1000 time(Ms. Pelosi) but not change truth!
Difference between USSR Communist media and USA “mainstream media”
In Russia government make media say what they want – even if lie.
In USA “mainstream media” try make government what they want – even if lie..
…..eventually they become same thing?!
I Igor produce Obama Birth Certificate at http://www.igormaro.org
Old Russian saying…You can tell same lie 1000 time(Ms. Pelosi) but not change truth!
Difference between USSR Communist media and USA “mainstream media”
In Russia government make media say what they want – even if lie.
In USA “mainstream media” try make government what they want – even if lie..
…..eventually they become same thing?!
I Igor produce Obama Birth Certificate at http://www.igormaro.org
“Although the Bush gang–Cheney, Rumsfeld et al–was a disaster, the American people elected them twice (originally with the help of some of the now-outraged idealists who voted for Ralph Nader)”
Sheesh, you're still whining about people exercising their right to vote for whoever they want to, including Nader (gasp). Get over it.
And yet to not thoroughly examine the past under a microscope, one stays subconsciously fixed to it in funny ways.
We need a thorough recapitulation before we can move on. So that's a big “yes” on prosecution and exposing the BigOil/Cheney treason. Then of course we can jot it down in the history books and move on…
I think making trials, courts, and jailtime the result of losing an election is just genuis. It will really encourage the best effort!
During real wars of the past leaders ignored laws and pushed through acts that tarnished our “rules of law”. I would imagine that successors were told to ignore the overturning of habeas corpus, the Sedition Act, the internment of nisei and sansei . The use of torture is a crime, just like those listed above. Why should we wait generations before we address our collective guilt?
All this jawboning from the comfort of armchairs has not produced any real results………I think it time for any and all self-respecting liberals to immediately effect a communal hunger strike. No eating until Cheney is indicted…….now that's a level of commitment the rest of us could respect.
Because of precedent Rudi. Seriously there is much room for debate on all the “FACTS” that are touted “proving” criminal behaviour. I know many people feel it's just so wrong that it must be illegal and that's that. Well that's not how are system works and the reality is that the main force pushing for criminal prosecution is in no small way politically motivated. Is it really a good idea to make prosecution a consequence of losing an election? Lets face it by the attitude here you couldn't get 12 random people to agree with you on what torture is without purging the jurypool of “nonbelievers” so what is the point? If you did load the jury and get the “right” verdict how much damage would that do to the country and how certain are you that it wouldn't backfire as soon as the dems loose a race? Or that knowing the consequences a party does something over the top to prevent a loss that would lead to such events?
If I were forced to rebuild my house because it was firebombed by a neighbor, you better believe I'd want to do a little living in the past….in a courtroom….sending that person to jail. The people that want accountability don't want to toss people in jail for incompetence. They want people tossed in jail because they purposely did was best for them and their friends, as opposed to the American people. They want people tossed in jail for purposely writing legal opinions that they knew were wrong. They want people tossed in jail for invading our legal right to privacy. The list goes on and on.
This country was burnt to the ground by Bush and Cheney. We want our time in court.
To EEllis…if Bush would have shot his wife the day before he left office…would you be saying..”Is it really a good idea to make prosecution a consequence of losing an election”? Of course not.
When people break the law, they should be punished…regardless to the office they hold.
Ever heard of the rule of law?
Great Shan but he didn't shoot anybody. This is what I mean “writing legal opinions that they knew were wrong”. While I'm glad you think you have a retroactive mind reading device here in reality it's BS. Almost everything you said is BS. Privacy! Guess what Obama hasn't changed a Thing! You dislike what happened so you want someone to pay. That is not what we should be doing you are lying to us or yourself. Get over it. People are allow to disagree but when they disagree with you then you want them in jail. No different then those who would call you traitor and want you in jail. That is why we should not go their. Your turn now, their turn later. Over reaction will bread over reaction.
EEllis said: “Great Shan but he didn't shoot anybody…”
Didn't shoot anybody?! Metaphorically maybe but unless you think those 100,000 (to 1,000,000) Iraqi's committed suicide I'd say you're mistaken.
Lies, torture and fabricated 'evidence' was all manufactured in order to advance and promote an immoral and unjustified preemptive war. This is all about how George W. Bush and Dick Cheney sold America down the river just to line their and their buddies (Halliburton, KBR, The Carlyle Group) pockets.
What I'll never understand is how anyone (that didn't profit from this insanity) can still defend what has happened to OUR country.
To bad thats all BS. This isn't about a war you happened to disagreed with, so what. The idea that the war was about Halliburton is absurd and always has been. You didn't like it and scrabble around throwing every piece of shit you can find hoping something would stick, regardless of the source or it's factual basis. You feel maybe but you don't know. It's like a new religion with some people, they just believe it so much it has to be true. Truth was there was more than enough cause for the war, hell many times over, that these accusations are really only supported by the endless baseless repetitions. Don't get me wrong it was always fair to be against the war, but most of the crap is just that, crap. Endless speculations, accusations, and theories repeated adnosium until people who should know better attack some belief to them. Defend, I don't need to defend anything. What is is, so be it. What you said shows the motivation for the push to prosecute though. You just want someone to pay for what you think you have been though. Poor baby. Making you feel better is not worth unjustified witch hunts though, not even close. It's funny that your little rant didn't even touch on our suject, but you just hate Bush so much that it should be obvious to me right.
Mr. Stein, kudos on an outstanding and insightful article. It points out an element that many seem to ignore, that pursuing charges against the prior administration will come at a cost. Those on the extremes will feel no cost is too great, but those nearer the center have to ask whether it will be worth it.
DaGoat,
For me, it's not so much that no cost is too great, as it is that I believe the cost doing nothing will be much higher, especially in the long run.
jwest, “….the only thing Obama is changing is his promises to the far left. No release of pictures, Gitmo will continue on, military tribunals, troops to remain in Iraq, escalation in Afghanistan, no prosecutions, enhanced interrogations to continue if needed, etc. etc.”
Well, first of all I don't recall Obama promising during the campaign that he would release the Abu Ghraib pics (I assume that's what you're referring to). It was not something on my radar, though. As to Gitmo…. he is making changes from Bush (though I will admit some on the left ARE upset). Obama is withdrawing troops from Iraq… as he said he would- in a responsible manner…. Obama said during his campaign that he would escalate the war on terror in Afghanistan (and one of the reasons I support him, because he is willing to take the fight to the people who DID attack us here and who ARE promising to do so again). As far as no prosecutions…. I don't think Obama said that he would prosecute the Bush administration officials… one of the differences I have had with him for a while. So I don't think he promised before he took office that he would prosecute Bush administration officials. As far as enhanced interrogation techniques… Given the last few years of people playing with this phrase, please let me know what you mean by “enhanced interrogation” procedures and I'll respond.
jwest, “Imagine if you could channel all the thought and energy it takes to make excuses for these buffoons into something productive. You would be so rich, you would be Republican.”
LOL! I know the GOP would love to be known as the party of the rich, but there are plenty of rich Dems, including Warren Buffet who are billionaires. And some of the wealthiest members in Congress are Dems. In fact in 2007 of the top ten richest members of Congress, seven were Dems and three were Republicans. The GOP doesn't have a “lock” on rich people. I know the GOP likes to perpetuate this aura of being the party of money because it fits into their belief of being elitists… But it just ain't so. And Dems don't much care to flaunt their money, they don't go around claiming to be the party of the “haves and have-mores”.
I think to be more accurate in your comment you should have said, “Imagine if you could channel all the thought and energy it takes to make excuses for these buffoons into something productive. You would be so rich, you would be a Democrat.”
Unless, of course, you purposely stated “Republican” because you were aiming for that middling crowd.
I think it'ss the Dems who push being the party of the people and that Gop is all about money. Which as you pointed out is a joke.
how can you call this propaganda 'the moderate voice'?