Cutting Through The Crap

Saturday, November 14, 2009

Truth, Justice, and the American Way


How much do you have to hate Barack Obama to be upset at a decision to try KSM in American courts? How much do you have to hate America, for that matter, to believe that our judicial system is unable to handle such a case?

As predictable as gas after baked beans, the RWS™ are outraged -- OUTRAGED, I tell you -- at the Eric Holder announcement. It would be laughable were it not the case that their sad minions will dutifully ingest the fury without a nanomoment of reflection. The end is near, they'll agree. It's proof, once again, of the hatred Obama has for our country. How dare he, they'll assimilate like the Borg, act as if the Constitution is a worthy document, that American legal norms are to be honored. That showing the world that democracy is viable, is tantamount to proving the opposite.

And yet, there they are: in the halls of Congress, on the airwaves, scalded and screaming. Can there be any more solid proof that the right wing are willing to destroy everything we are, just to make political hay? And, in taking up their cries, is there any remaining doubt that the Republican party, as currently constituted, has NOTHING to say worth listening to? That they've gone so completely off the rails in their desire to discredit Barack Obama that they constitute a clear and present danger to our survival? That unless things change -- unless we can hope very soon to have a credible and useful opposition party -- we are, quite literally, doomed?

14 comments:

Bill Dyas said...

Wow Great comment that'll show the wimps. Good to see you posting again - I've been a lurker for six months or so and have come to regard you as one of the few sane posters ( well I like Think Prgress and Firedog Lake too)
Bill

Mike Haubrich, FCD said...

Thans, Sid! I kind of like the idea of a Republic guarded by the "rule of law and not men." Maybe we could try that here in America some day?

Frank Drackman said...

Most of the people upset about the decision to give the Terrorists a public platform seem to be relatives of the 2,976 murdered on 9-11.
These pieces of shit should be tried in a Military Court down in Guantanamo (Its still Open BTW), tortured untill we have every bit of useful info out of them, even if its Osama's shoe size, then executed.
But thats just me, and 70% of the country.

Frank

Sid Schwab said...

QED, Frank.

Dr. John Baldwin said...

This is off the subject but I have talked to Sid on this point and would like to see what you bloggers think. The Constitution clearly puts the power to Declare War in the hands of the Congress. Since December 9, 1941, the US has not declared war, but has had almost unending "wars" "conflicts" and a lot of soldiers wounded and killed. These wars, I call, "Commander in Chief Wars" and you can cite Korea, VietNam, Gulf I, Bosnia, Gulf II (Iraq) and now ?Gulf III (Afghanistan/Pakistan). The value of declaring war, and it could be against AlQuaeda if you wish, is that the full weight of responsibility no longer falls on one man...as it destroyed Lyndon Johnson, and if things don't go right, could do the same to President Obama. Make them stand up, debate and vote before we go off half-cocked and kill 58,000 kids over 17 years like we did in Nam, a country that now makes our sneakers and underwear and has a real 5 Star Hanoi Hilton.
A declaration also invokes the ability to call something treason, to fight without restrictive rules of engagement and puts the entire nation, not just the brave volunteer servicemen into the action. I believe that Congress would just as soon "not get involved", and so it abrogates its responsibility by letting the CIC take all the heat. Anybody out there think about this? Seems we are "just used to the president drafting us and sending us off to his personal war." (Like LBJ did to me in 1967....) Your thoughts, please.

AlisonH said...

Dr. Baldwin: hear, hear.

Frank: Saddam believed in torture just as strongly as you seem to. It is evil and it is wrong. We are better than that.

If our legal and democratic system is so good that we are trying to impose it on countries that actively don't want it, we should trust it ourselves that it will work and should set an example for those countries to look up to. And if it doesn't go the way we wish? If those terrorists somehow get completely off? It will be because, under Bush's leadership, we ourselves behaved like the leaders or former leaders of their countries and tainted the evidence beyond redemption as we flouted the Geneva Convention that protects our own soldiers abroad.

But by willing to take the consequences of our actions, should they get off, then we will demonstrate our willingness to live by the very principles we espouse EVEN WHEN IT HURTS US in the--note the word, it's important--immediate--run. Because (at last!) we will be doing the moral and right thing by living by the rule of law.

And the world will sit up and take notice. Hugely. It will reverberate forward in positive ways for decades.

Sid Schwab said...

PS, Frankie: Not all the 9/11 families agree with you.

Adjuster Mike said...

Can I get a prescription for pramipexole? I think I need more dopamine in my noggin.

Frank Drackman said...

PS, Sid, not all the 9/11 families agree with YOU either...
Might wanta go up on the Aricept, Dr. Logical,

Frank

Mr. Obvious said...

No outrage is necessary. It's just a show trial for reasons unknown. The Atty General admits that if KSM is not found guilty, he's still not getting out of prison.

Hmmm...KSM has admitted guilt. He won't go free no matter what. What's the argument from the worthy Constitution here?

http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MDVlMjZkYmFkNDQ4ZmUxOThhZWQ3ZDBhMGY0Y2FjNTU=

Sid Schwab said...

What's the argument from the worthy Constitution here?

I assume you mean to imply the Constitution is not worthy. If so, you're not alone among the RWS™.

Reasons unknown.

Wow.

Mr. Obvious said...

If the Constitution is the basis for the trial, it seems that KSM should go free if found not guilty. Holder has already said he won't. The Constitution doesn't really cover trials with no purpose, such as this one.

So, you must know the reasons for the show trial? Care to share? It's obviously not to find facts or guilt.

Adjuster Mike said...

Sid, sorry for the spam, but...

When doing your Christmas cards this year, take one card and send it to this address. If we pass this on and everyone sends one card, think of how many cards these wonderful special people who have sacrificed so much would get. When you are making out your Christmas card list this year, please include the following:

A Recovering American Soldier
c/o Walter Reed Army Medical Center
6900 Georgia Avenue,NW
Washington,D.C. 20307-5001

Sid Schwab said...

You've easily adopted the RWS™ terminology. "Show trial." Ridiculous. Was that what it was when several terrorists were tried, during the Bush years, in Federal courts? Are you aware there are no cameras allowed in Federal courts? Was it a show trial when Timothy McVey was tried in Federal court? Does the fact that every one of them is now in Federal prison in any way alter your opinion? Or are those just, y'know, troublesome facts of the sort that RWS™ always ignore?

It's a pathetic argument.