71% of Americans want to see Bush administration investigated

[bascule]

The thing of it is, ultimately what rules this country is not the Constitution or the rule of law. It's actually the willingness and ability of individual men and women who are willing to stand up for what's right and ignore negative and distracting influences that stand in the way.

 

Great! But...

 

Bush failed -- he's already been judged. So to slap Bush around some more and then pat ourselves on the back and call it a day would be a violation of their trust -- an undermining of the men and women we need to have in government.

 

Zuh?

 

The Constitution works because people stand up for the Constitution, so we should... let Bush get away with violating the Constitution, because he's been judged, not by a court of law, but in the court of public opinion?

 

Sorry to inform you, but the court of public opinion doesn't really matter. OJ killed Nicole Simpson, but that's not what the official record says.

 

Bush hasn't had a real trial but we're just going to let him pull an OJ? Without even standing trial? At least let him try on the bloody glove!

[Pangloss]

I disagree -- the court of public opinion is always the ultimate arbiter, right or wrong, in a democracy, since that's ultimately where the power lies.

 

Just ask John McCain.

[Mr Skeptic]

I disagree -- the court of public opinion is always the ultimate arbiter, right or wrong, in a democracy, since that's ultimately where the power lies.

 

Just ask John McCain.

 

So, if the court of public opinion decides we need to lynch Bush, than that is ultimately the right thing to do.

[Pangloss]

I didn't say it was the right thing to do, I said that's the way it is. While the mob can't exactly drag him out and string him up, it CAN pass an amendment to the Constitution overriding any law or constitutional guarantee this country has EVER had. That's the danger of demagoguery, but it's also symbolic of the fact that power in this country ultimately resides with the people.

 

Which is why you want good people going into government, and why you don't want those people to be afraid that there's a demagogue (like Congressional Democrats screaming for a Bush "investigation") waiting around the corner of every unpopular decision.

[bascule]

Which is why you want good people going into government, and why you don't want those people to be afraid that there's a demagogue (like Congressional Democrats screaming for a Bush "investigation") waiting around the corner of every unpopular decision.

 

When that unpopular decision is repeatedly signing an executive order circumventing a Constitutional check of executive power by the judicial branch, I'd hope there's at least 10 screaming demagogues trying to do something about it.

[The Bear's Key]

I disagree -- the court of public opinion is always the ultimate arbiter, right or wrong, in a democracy, since that's ultimately where the power lies.

And if the media isn't free due to conglomerate ownership, then public opinion will be likely be anything the media "informs" us of. Thus, power lies within the best convincer -- in lies or honesty.

 

While the mob can't exactly drag him out and string him up, it CAN pass an amendment to the Constitution overriding any law or constitutional guarantee this country has EVER had.

Please explain how. The mob of public opinion can never pass an amendment that reduces the power of special interests to become less than citizens'.

 

And that's just one example.....lots more abound.

[Pangloss]

The mob of public opinion can never pass an amendment that reduces the power of special interests to become less than citizens'.

 

Of course it can. And it's happened before.

[The Bear's Key]

Of course it can. And it's happened before.

I hope you see the irony of referencing that.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conventions_within_the_states_to_ratify_an_amendment_to_U.S._Constitution

In the history of the United States, this particular method of ratifying an officially proposed amendment has been used only once, that being in the 1933 ratification process of the 21st Amendment. This is also the only case in which one constitutional amendment repealed another constitutional amendment.

It happened one single time in the history of the U.S -- and to repeal an amendment that conservatives forced upon us. The mob of public opinion was given a tool to lower *one* special interest's power, and only because Congress feared the special interest wouldn't let them repeal Prohibition of Alcohol.

 

From your link (below).

Although the US Constitution provides two methods for ratifying constitutional amendments, only one method had been used until then; that was for ratification by the state legislatures of three-fourths of the states. However, the wisdom of the day was that the state legislators of many states were either beholden to or simply fearful of the temperance lobby.

So, the only reason Congress gave the mob of public opinion anything was to go behind that one special interest's back. Nice.

 

And hardly a display of power if that happened once in 232 years.

 

To summarize: a hardcore conservative interest altered our Constitution, we got it altered back only through a loophole, and only because Congress wanted to avoid confronting them directly -- and we're supposed to be impressed.

 

Likely you missed the point. I said we (the mob of public opinion) don't have the ability to scale back the power of *all* special interests down to a level below ours.

[Pangloss]

In fact public opinion was a mandatory requirement for the passage of every amendment to the constitution (including the first ten). Not by law, but by practical reality. Not one of those amendments would have passed -- including prohibition AND its ultimate repeal -- without the overwhelming majority of Americans being firmly convinced that it was absolutely necessary.

 

And again, my only point here is, metaphorically speaking, that we should be careful what we wish for, lest we get it and experience unintended consequences. I understand that such an investigation and even a conviction could take place without the walls coming a-tumblin' down. I'm just saying that in my opinion, based on my personal study of politics and history, this is an overriding concern. You're more than welcome to feel otherwise.

[The Bear's Key]

And again, my only point here is, metaphorically speaking, that we should be careful what we wish for, lest we get it and experience unintended consequences. I understand that such an investigation and even a conviction could take place without the walls coming a-tumblin' down. I'm just saying that in my opinion, based on my personal study of politics and history, this is an overriding concern.

On that we agree. Yes caution is necessary -- lots of it. But overly extreme caution would give free reign to politicians who'd use our fear of resulting consequenses against us.

[CaptainPanic]

If 71% if the Americans want to see an investigation, then why did they wait to express this desire until Bush was replaced by Obama?

I mean, there IS a freedom of speech, so they would be allowed to express this desire also while Bush was still president, or am I mistaken? Or was Bush immune to any investigation as a president?

[npts2020]

If 71% if the Americans want to see an investigation, then why did they wait to express this desire until Bush was replaced by Obama?

I mean, there IS a freedom of speech, so they would be allowed to express this desire also while Bush was still president, or am I mistaken? Or was Bush immune to any investigation as a president?

 

IMO most of those 71% want to see an investigation about the same as I want to see flowers on my kitchen table, it would be nice but I am not going to bother going to the florist to see that some get there.

[Mr Skeptic]

On that note, it is much harder to investigate or prosecute a president while still in office. It does make some sense since otherwise his political opponents could cripple him while in office (regardless of what he's done or not), making us all suffer, and also while in power he has lots of his own people protecting him. Now that he's out of office, he's an easier target.

[The Bear's Key]

On that note, it is much harder to investigate or prosecute a president while still in office.

That is precisely why, any of us can run for the office with dictatorship plans, and convince half the nation that it's folly to investigate us while in office (and the nation still on terror alert with a near-collapsed economy), so let's be prudent and wait until our term is over? (hint: until it's too late?)

 

Any takers?

[Pangloss]

Fear isn't what stopped impeachment of President Bush. At least not fear of President Bush. Fear of public reaction, perhaps. That may seem strange given the reported 71% figure, but remember, the man was re-elected in 2004 by 50.7% of the population. It takes a little while to push that much opinion from one side of a dividing line to the other.

 

It also seems to me at times like this that there is a real lack of understanding here for just how much people hate partisan politics. Or at least what thy perceive to be partisan politics coming from what they view as the opposition. I've heard people call in to the Rush Limbaugh show and complain about how partisan those liberal democrats are. No, really. And I've heard Air America callers scream the same sort of nonsense -- as if it actually makes sense.

 

Those people aren't stupid, they're just too-rarely exposed to a truth that's unencumbered by a convenient, familiar, comfortable ideological shield. Nobody talks to them without an agenda. Ever.

[iNow]

It also seems to me at times like this that there is a real lack of understanding here for just how much people hate partisan politics. Or at least what thy perceive to be partisan politics coming from what they view as the opposition.

 

I perceive a lack of understandnig about just how much people hate leaders who act like they are above the law and who get a free pass after engaging in illegal activities, or who don't even get investigated when their activities were certainly questionable. I find that passion and hatred to be much more profound than a simple distaste for what a relatively small group might see as potentially partisan politics.

[Pangloss]

And yet most of the issues currently aimed at Bush were present in the 2004 election cycle.

[The Bear's Key]

And yet most of the issues currently aimed at Bush were present in the 2004 election cycle.

Yeah, with the propagandas framing the debate so it was about the Iraq war to many people's eyes, and claiming a vote for Dems is surrendering to terror, and with Republican governor Schwarzenegger calling those opposing the war "girlie men".

 

I think it was much different. Back then, the abuses into our government was a trickling stream barely heard.

[Sisyphus]

Yeah, with the propagandas framing the debate so it was about the Iraq war to many people's eyes, and claiming a vote for Dems is surrendering to terror, and with Republican governor Schwarzenegger calling those opposing the war "girlie men".

 

I think it was much different. Back then, the abuses into our government was a trickling stream barely heard.

 

So popular opinion is valid justification now, but not in 2004? Have we evolved significantly higher intelligence in the last 4 years?

[The Bear's Key]

So popular opinion is valid justification now, but not in 2004? Have we evolved significantly higher intelligence in the last 4 years?

Manufactured opinion. Less evidence available back then, with the strategic/mock outrage by propagandas cornering their market of opinion. And people were still afraid to look unpatriotic for questioning the President.

[Sisyphus]

Manufactured opinion. Less evidence available back then, with the strategic/mock outrage by propagandas cornering their market of opinion. And people were still afraid to look unpatriotic for questioning the President.

 

So in other words, yes, we are smarter now?

[waitforufo]

I made the following prediction and post on 02-19-09

 

My prediction is that there will be no meaningful investigations and certainly no prosecutions.

 

This will leave two camps. Those in the "great miscarriage of justice" camp most likely lead by Keith Olbermann who will talk about this ad infinitum until the topic eventually joins other great conspiracy advocacy followings similar to the JFK assassination conspiracy. (Come on get over it Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone.) The other group will think no prosecutions happened because no crimes were committed. Count me in the latter group.

 

Proof to the pudding…

One day after he was sworn in as president of the United States and in the same week signing executive orders ushering in a new era of government transparency, Barack Obama’s Justice Department quietly filed a motion in federal court to dismiss a long-running lawsuit that sought to force the Bush administration to recover as many as 15 million missing White House emails.

 

In a legal briefs filed Jan. 21, the Justice Department admitted that a secretive restoration process implemented during George W. Bush’s last months in office was still incomplete, and that a bulk of the emails sent between 2003 and 2005 were deleted from servers in the Executive Office of the president and unrecoverable. The missing emails cover a time frame that included the lead up to the Iraq war, a lawsuit involving the identities of individuals and corporations who advised Dick Cheney on energy policy and the leak by White House officials of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame’s identity.

 

But despite it all, the newly minted Obama administration said in court papers that the issue revolving around the missing emails is “moot” because some steps, however incomplete, had been taken by the Bush White House to preserve and restore missing emails, even though the work has been conducted under the cover of secrecy by an unknown outside contractor hired by Bush administration officials.

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_4397.shtml

 

Now I appreciate all your passion and logically made arguments but nothing further is going to happen. Congratulations Obama won. Now move on.

 

For those that just can't let it go…. KOlbermann@msnbc.com

[The Bear's Key]

So in other words, yes, we are smarter now?

If that what you call having more evidence available. You might want to reread the post.

[Sisyphus]

If that what you call having more evidence available. You might want to reread the post.

 

What evidence? (And if you have to look it up, it doesn't count.)

 

This has the potential to pointlessly go back and forth, so I'll just say it explicitly: You cannot hold up public opinion as your banner when it is on your side, and write it off as meaningless because the populace is misinformed and manipulated when it is not.

[Pangloss]

This has the potential to pointlessly go back and forth, so I'll just say it explicitly: You cannot hold up public opinion as your banner when it is on your side, and write it off as meaningless because the populace is misinformed and manipulated when it is not.

 

Exactly.

 

BTW, I'm not entirely disagreeing with iNow's post #66 above. I think he's certainly got a point about such things, and probably The Bear's Key is just over-expressing a similar point. There's no question people are disappointed with the Bush administration's handling of Iraq and other issues.

 

But that's a far cry from the kind of anger or outrage commonly expressed by the far left. I don't see that kind of emotion coming from mainstream America. I think people are focused on the economy and not really thinking about Bush much at the moment at all. And I think President Obama is very much in tune with that sentiment. He has clearly identified and focused on the emotional tone of this country, and zoned right on in what it wants him to do. And that synergy is absolutely forward-looking, not backward-looking.

 

And part of the reason for that is the simple fact that in the current political climate of this country, for whatever the reason, whomever's blame it is, "investigation" (which might be a good thing) looks all too much like "politics" and "retribution" (which the country vomits at even a hint of). And there's just no way around that fact at the moment.