Ignoring of the massive (and admitted) Bush lawbreaking (warrantless spying, torture, detainment) appears to be a necessary component of the "analysis" as well, as well as the baseless and unconstitutional bloating of executive power and power grabbing.
Of course the bizarre perversion of an all-powerful VP as the star of the show is also unmentioned.
So the manipulated invasion of Iraq and the budget destroying tax cuts probably are the "short term" milestones of disaster. But the loss of crucial "soft power", the return of militarism, the seas of now unavoidable red ink, the destruction of the dollar and upcoming stagflation regime, the fiddling while the climate irrevocably burned and the oil peaked, and the perverted wingnut judges will be the long term catastrophe.
With the fumbling of our last chance to affect global warming the true long term disaster that will bedevil future world generations the most.
And it all began with an unprecendented, lawless 5-4 vote by conservative activists masquerading as "judges" to stop a state court from actually looking at clearly existing (uncounted) votes in a contested election, thus ensuring that the candidate that had (with certainty) lost the popular vote would be sworn in. Yep, they bent over backwards to protect "democracy", that's for sure.
Historians of the future will bless the Bush Era as a fabulous, fascinating subject, too bad the country (and world) had to be destroyed in order to possess the "topic".
Posted by euzoius at January 27, 2008 10:22 AMSo many felonies, so few words.
Posted by paradox at January 27, 2008 10:40 AMTed Kenney endorsing Obama, right along with Caroline. Co-ordinated attack on Hillary.
Al Gore must be smiling right about now.
I expect the bloggers here who are Hillary fans see this as a tragedy for the Party and a sellout.
For someone with such a progressive record and who surrounds herself with campaign ninjas, I guess she saw this coming.
I can't help it. I'm not trying to sound snarky, but it comes out that way. Overall, I think this is a good turn of events for the party because it opens things up now for a whole lot of debate and discussion. I'd rather see the Dems do it now than hold off until closer to the General. Basically, there needs to be more time for healing within the Party than anyone originally planned. Hillary is not out of it by any means, nor is Obama a shoo-in. A Kennedy endorsement could hurt him in some ways. All eyes go to Gore.
Posted by gtash at January 27, 2008 11:05 AMThe tax cuts were not the product a loony Laffer theory. That was just the bullshit for the rubes.
Cutting taxes on the richest Americans and eliminating the estate tax were deliberate and intelligent polices on behalf of the ruling class. They promoted twin goals: increase and preserve wealth in the hands of the ruling class, and starve the government into impotence. The latter removes the federal government as an instrument of the peoples' will to work on behalf of all Americans.
This was not a loony thing, it was and is a dangerous thing. But it is also a clear expression of a governing philosophy.
Posted by James E. Powell at January 27, 2008 11:10 AMAnd, if may be permitted, I would like to add that neither Clinton nor Obama appears to object to this. Rather, they appear to be staking their claim to membership in this ruling class.
Posted by James E. Powell at January 27, 2008 11:12 AMExcellent debunking of the lies of those who still think the conservative "ideas" that Bush espoused will be seen as anything but disgraceful and catastrophic going forward.
And don't forget this definitive piece about Bush as Reagan's Son from the suckup Bill Keller.
Posted by Mary at January 27, 2008 11:12 AMThank you, Mary.
Posted by paradox at January 27, 2008 11:41 AMgtash,
Why do you assume that Al Gore is smiling; I don't remember the Kennedys doing all that much to stand by him when he was under attack in 2000. And make no mistake here, the war against Gore was an extension of the Republican run media war against both Clintons through-out the eight years of his presidency, the same one still running today against Hillary. Please note, I greatly admire both Caroline Kennedy and Ted Kennedy, and if the latter is willing to endorse Obama, that carries some weight with me that Obama is the progressive he claims to be.
Please also note, I am not a supporter of Hillary's candidacy; I wish she hadn't run, precisely because I anticipated the way both Clintons would be treated by the press. It's not something any Democrat, liberal or progressive should feel good about. It's the reason that we weren't allowed to choose Gore for our candidate in 2004 and the reason he refused to mount a candidacy for 2008.
I will certainly vote for Obama if he gets the nomination, I thought he was going to be my second choice for the nomination after Edwards, but I've been turned off by his attempts to elide the Bush presidencies of 41 and 43 with the Clinton presidency, as if the virtues and vices of eitther and both are the same. He has clearly been running against the Clinton/Bush years, as if the the Clintons were to blame for the endless attacks mounted against them.
Min you, I would have had no problem with Obama running against whatever aspects of the Clinton record he feels are worthy of critique, if he'd been more open about it, telling us what he admires about it, and where he faults it,and where and how he hopes to build a more liberal and progressive future for this country.
Instead, he and his campaign have trotted out, subtly to be sure, every Republican anti-Clinton trope, all the while claiming to be the Clintons' victim. That is precisely the tack Republicans took through-out the eight years they devoted to keeping Bill Clinton from having a presidency, fully supported by the SCLM that quite simply hates the Clintons more than it loves truth.
In the end, I will forgive Obama, as I have forgiven the Clintons many moments when I thought they were dead wrong, as in the case of Lani Guinier, for instance.
It would be nice if the Obama supporters would remember that, being human, we are all imperfect, and at one time or another all of us sin,even against the principles we hold the dearest.
Posted by Leah at January 27, 2008 01:41 PMDid any of you watch Al Gore at Davos? I saw an extended conversation between Al, Bono and ugh! Tom Friedman. It occurred to me that this was why Al declined to slip back into the snake pit that is national politics.
He has a good life! He enjoys intellectual discussion without banal sound bites. He has continued to run a world wide campaign to slow global warming and he's happy doing so. I was terribly disappointed that he did not enter and, as some may have read, I do have a dream involving Al, a brokered convention and a sequined cape.
However, I believe we must all let go of our cherished fantasies about a Gore rescue from our current crop of candidates. He simply has better things to do than demean himself, as would inevitably occur if he faced the media magpies once again. I can't blame him. I feel certain he believes he's contributing vastly more than his share already and he has deep scars and very bitter memories of his stolen Presidency.
None of the candidates has magical powers. Whatever progress we want to see will have to come from a concerted, grass roots effort to FORCE them to do the right thing. Congress is infested with venal, corrupted, professional politicians. There are no statesmen and damned few heroes. Our cry should not be, Where are you Al Gore? A nation turns it's lonely eyes to you! Instead, we should be shouting Who'll get the dogs out? We need to clean about 50 Democrats and virtually every Republican cretin out of OUR house. We can't look for heroes to do to for us. It's our own, grim task. Once the primaries are concluded, we must get together and win. It's not just the Presidency. The battle for Congress is, if anything, even more bitter and vital to our futures.
Posted by DeminNewJ at January 27, 2008 03:48 PMLeah--
I think AL is smiling because he has no particular love of the Clintons and because he is content not to get involved at all--he strikes me as someone who will wait until the Party makes a selection, but in the meantime he wishes a pox on all your houses. I didn't see mainline Dems did not rally to him when he needed it; if they did, they also let him be made fun of to the nth degree. I doubt if he cares one way or the other about the Kennedy's. Being a former executive has it rewards and he's enjoying them.
Boy, talk about the primaries consuming everything---we throw a party-thread to denounce the disastrous Cheney legacy and no one shows up!
Make sure to read "Who shrank the Superpower?" in yesterday's NYT Magazine.
Posted by euzoius at January 28, 2008 07:07 AM