Now or never?
Could be...
...the Democrats' apparent plan to wait out the clock on the Bush Administration is an utterly dangerous thing to do --
...not because Bush is dangerous, but because a future President with at least twice his current approval ratings
...and all of Bush's acquired powers and asserted (without effective contet) precedents
...will be tempted to do everything we always feared Bush would do the Republic ---
...and do it to the sound of madly cheering crowds.
And later...
And that is enough support, plus the power concentrated in Bush's hands, to allow Bush...
to have his war and fund it, too....
...to commit high crimes and misdemeanors, and to delegate them, too...
...to refuse summons, to produce evidence and testimony, to lie blatantly and cheerfully under oath, knowing that no one dare call the least of them out for it...
...to destroy in plain sight evidence of the greatest, most systematic destruction of our national security infrastructure since the British sailed up the Potomac and burned Washington DC to the ground and shelled every major port city on the Eastern Seaboard, to boot.
No, I take that back; it is in fact much worse. We used to have some idea of what secrets were compromised.
7 comments:
Take away the hysteria and it's a pretty good thought piece: Are the grounds being laid for a future imperial president?
I think not. If you look back to previous periods where we were at war you'll find presidents acting much more dictatorial than Bush; ie:
Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus and arresting entire state governments.
Wilson and the Sedition Act of 1918.
Roosevelt and the internment of Japanese-Americans.
Take away the hysteria and it's a pretty good thought piece: Are the grounds being laid for a future imperial president?
I think not. If you look back to previous periods where we were at war you'll find presidents acting much more dictatorial than Bush; ie:
Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus and arresting entire state governments.
Wilson and the Sedition Act of 1918.
Roosevelt and the internment of Japanese-Americans.
Researching your examples, I was assuming that the Supreme Court slapped down the Sedition Act: no such luck.
At least it's currently assumed by the majority of Americans that internment is a bad thing, Michelle Malkin's efforts notwithstanding.
Good one, Garrett.
Glad to see you researched it. But why the cheap shot at Malkin?
You mean, besides the fact that she wrote a book entitled In Defense of Internment?
Eric Muller explains how many different ways she missed the target.
Thanks for pointing to that, Garrett.
Why does Malkin still get any respect? Gonzo?
Did I say I respected her? I respect some of her opinions but I don't like her vitriol.
Post a Comment