T here (yes I should create my own account. Yes, technically I DID, but I need to create one w/a user name that isn't real blah, blah)
Hmmmm. On many points I think you're both in agreement. Even on who your voting for :-).
I think (delete, delete, delete....) I love petmoosie dearly - but I started to write about people "vilifying the idea of a McCain presidency" and she said "well, actually the one that got to me was someone vilifying the idea of an Obama presidency. ' He'll take all our money! '" ... I'm far too lazy to look it up (but if you're curious, I CAN look it up and get references) - but about 23% of the population is congenitally vulnerable to making nearly all political decisions based on blind panic and seeking a protective authority. They nearly all vote Republican. This is because in recent history (the "daisy ad" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daisy_ad was from a Democrat...) they have been the party to push that psychological button hardest. The majority of the current Republican strategy is FUD- Fear Uncertainty and Doubt - and on a much grander scale that Micro$loth ever conceived.
So please, if you are concerned about panic, direct that concern at those who are engendering it.
NOW that said, yes some people on "our" side of the political divide also panic. And panic is generally not productive. But I think the reason why we do not have to worry about getting picked up and thrown in jail w/o recourse to any law or support is NOT because the executive is uniformally obeying those laws. It's because none of us are named Muhommed Hussein Al-bibi (I made that name up, BTW, apologies to anyone who actually has that name) and there are practical (vs legal) limits to what the admin feels they can get away with.
petmoosie's rant is against panic (and ironically enough, ill-informed conservative panic). This is reasonable, and not inconsistent with ashtalet's point.
ashtalet's concern (not panic) is that lack of criminal punishment for politicians who have broken the law will result in future attempts to break the law. In 1975 (if I had been more aware at the time) I might have disagreed. However having seen the SAME people in the Nixon, Reagan, Bush, and Bush II administrations simply get BETTER at breaking the law and getting away with it, and training a new generation of "rat-fuckers" (to use Rove's own term), I believe this is a very valid concern. The remedy is not panic - but it IS voting for Members of Congress and a President who (we hope) will have the spine to resolve this problem.
I'll let petmoosie say to what extent she explicitly agrees or disagrees with that point. I would say however: In general, decisions of policy should not result in a jail sentence. Lying on TV is not a crime. There are things that do and should land one in jail, however. (Ask former Congressman "Top Gun" Cunningham") W/o getting into a list, I think there are people in this administration who have earned an orange jumpsuit, and I think it would benefit our country more than it would hurt it if the official determination was made in a court of law.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Re: It's a matter of scale.
Date: 2008-10-23 02:18 pm (UTC)Hmmmm.
On many points I think you're both in agreement. Even on who your voting for :-).
I think (delete, delete, delete....)
I love petmoosie dearly - but I started to write about people "vilifying the idea of a McCain presidency" and she said "well, actually the one that got to me was someone vilifying the idea of an Obama presidency. ' He'll take all our money! '"
...
I'm far too lazy to look it up (but if you're curious, I CAN look it up and get references) - but about 23% of the population is congenitally vulnerable to making nearly all political decisions based on blind panic and seeking a protective authority. They nearly all vote Republican. This is because in recent history (the "daisy ad" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daisy_ad was from a Democrat...) they have been the party to push that psychological button hardest. The majority of the current Republican strategy is FUD- Fear Uncertainty and Doubt - and on a much grander scale that Micro$loth ever conceived.
So please, if you are concerned about panic, direct that concern at those who are engendering it.
NOW that said, yes some people on "our" side of the political divide also panic. And panic is generally not productive. But I think the reason why we do not have to worry about getting picked up and thrown in jail w/o recourse to any law or support is NOT because the executive is uniformally obeying those laws. It's because none of us are named Muhommed Hussein Al-bibi (I made that name up, BTW, apologies to anyone who actually has that name) and there are practical (vs legal) limits to what the admin feels they can get away with.
petmoosie's rant is against panic (and ironically enough, ill-informed conservative panic). This is reasonable, and not inconsistent with ashtalet's point.
ashtalet's concern (not panic) is that lack of criminal punishment for politicians who have broken the law will result in future attempts to break the law. In 1975 (if I had been more aware at the time) I might have disagreed. However having seen the SAME people in the Nixon, Reagan, Bush, and Bush II administrations simply get BETTER at breaking the law and getting away with it, and training a new generation of "rat-fuckers" (to use Rove's own term), I believe this is a very valid concern. The remedy is not panic - but it IS voting for Members of Congress and a President who (we hope) will have the spine to resolve this problem.
I'll let petmoosie say to what extent she explicitly agrees or disagrees with that point. I would say however: In general, decisions of policy should not result in a jail sentence. Lying on TV is not a crime. There are things that do and should land one in jail, however. (Ask former Congressman "Top Gun" Cunningham") W/o getting into a list, I think there are people in this administration who have earned an orange jumpsuit, and I think it would benefit our country more than it would hurt it if the official determination was made in a court of law.
- hubby of petmoosie