Home » Blog » Executive Efficacy Expanded
Blog for America
Executive Efficacy Expanded
Many, many people in these united states long for the day upon which George W. Bush will vacate the Presidency. During Bush’s terms in office, he has gotten us into a Quagmire in Iraq (and has engaged in a generally arrogant and foolish foreign policy), deftly removed many of our civil liberties from us, racked up record deficits, exploited the people’s fear of terrorism (which helped him to win elections, achieve his agenda, and rob us of our apparently undeserved liberties), and, most importantly, greatly increased the power and influence of the Executive Branch. The People long for Bush’s exit because they are tired of these repeated abuses and usurpations, and with the hope that, once Dubya leaves, we’ll be able to get a Democrat or at least a moderate in office and get America back onto the right track. This perspective is not in agreement with my own; in point of fact, I disagree with it very strongly. It seems to me that this belief is the product of the very ignorance which allowed Bush to expand his office and worsen the state of the country in the first place. Let me take just a few moments in order to explain my thoughts more clearly on this matter.During these past several years, Presidential puppet George W. Bush and the various puppeteers in his administration have worked to greatly expand the power of the Executive Branch in the United States government. They have been very successful in their pursuance of this goal, and it now appears as though we have a new kind of ”imperial presidency” in place. Their ability to expand the power of the Presidency was due to the negligence and cowardice of the Congress and the ignorance and inattentiveness of the American people. It is as Thomas Jefferson wrote, “If once the people become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress and Assemblies, Judges and Governors, shall all become wolves. It seems to be the law of our general nature, in spite of individual exceptions.” The people were inattentive to the Executive office, so the officials associated with the Executive all became wolves, thirsting after, not blood, but power in the excess. But what are the implications of this greatly expanded efficacy of the Executive? What are the implications of all of the new precedents set by the Executive office?
During Bush’s two terms, We the People of the United States have effectively given many new and frightening powers to the Executive Branch, simply because of how much we tolerate. We tolerate phone wiretapping, we tolerate torture, we tolerate the violating of the Constitution, and so that becomes part of the policy, part of the powers of the executive branch, because we allow it. These terrible things will all be set as precedents for the next Executive to follow, and they, whomever they may be, will fall in step with these precedents. I say this because there have not been many in history who have denied themselves nearly unlimited power purposefully (George Washington, the great leader, being a notable exception). The next President shall not deny themselves the excess power because they know that they can get away with exercising such power with no consequences to them. They will not be punished, they will not be impeached, they will reap the rewards of nearly absolute power, and with not a squeak from the American people on the matter because the masses are too busy watching American Idol to watch American Government. However, the next Executive may not be as blatant about exercising these excesses in power as George W. Bush has been. An image to present to the public must be maintained, because image is everything to a People who only look broadly over the surface of the ocean of politics without bothering to look deeper. Bush really has been quite inept at projecting a good public image. However, both political parties are in general very good at fabricating false images with which to hoodwink the People: among other things, the Republicans have been skilled at fabricating an image of being better terrorist-hunters, and the Democrats have been adept at fabricating the illusion that they are a populist Party of the People.
I believe it very likely, and, in fact, inevitable, that these repeated usurpations and injuries will not end with George W. Bush. The precedents have been set for nearly absolute power for the Executive Branch, and power corrupts and is irresistable to falliable human beings. It is fairly apparent to me that the actions of George W. Bush will be perpetuated by every future President of the United States. That is, unless the People and the Congress step up and put the option of impeachment on the table, and preferably impeachment for George W. Bush, because it is best to stop the problem at its source. However, it is very unlikely that we will impeach Bush or Cheney, because the members of Congress are politically calculating cowards who don’t want to do anything controversial with an election coming up. But if we don’t impeach Bush now, we’ll either have to impeach another President farther down the road or perpetually suffer from usurpations from the Executive Branch.
To you people who still believe that electing a Democrat will get rid of the deplorable policies and precedents of George W. Bush, I salute you for navigating, in direct conflict with evident truths, along the channels of blind party loyalty. It is naive to believe that all of the damaging actions that George W. Bush has inflicted upon us will just disappear upon the entry of some other falliable human being, whatever their political affiliation, into the office of the presidency. It is naive to believe that all of this overstepping of constitutional authority will end as soon as George W. Bush is gone. It is naive to believe that a new president, even a Democratic President, will be a magical remedy to the things like loss of civil liberties. Only We the People can ensure that our civil liberties are perpetually protected, and we can protect them by informing ourselves and being attentive to the actions of our government and demanding impeachment for elected officials who overstep their authority. It is lazy to assume that the politicians who we elect to our political offices are the only ones responsible for keeping our civil liberties safe, and that We the People are not responsible in the slightest for preserving our own rights. This responsibilty absolutely does not belong to our assorted elected officials. When I say that the People must protect their own rights, who do you think I mean that the rights have to be protected from? I’ll give you a hint: it’s not the terrorists. These United States politicians who we trust, trust on the basis of faith in their abilities, to protect our liberties, become nothing more than wolves when the people are not attentive, as Thomas Jefferson stated centuries ago. The entire system fails to work if the people are not enlightened and watchful.
The preservation of liberty requires eternal vigilance from the informed Peoples of the United States, creators and overseers of their own elected leaders, safeguards of their own democracy, and keepers of their own country’s well-being. That’s what self-government is all about. And, if we fail to understand that, then perhaps we just don’t deserve our liberties. If we fail to understand that and act upon it, then it is likely that our problems with unprecedented Executive power, created by the lack of political attention and activity among the People, will never be remedied. Perhaps our democracy is destined to fall to the power of an unchecked Executive, and then swirl down the toilet into the Sewers of History.
Show: Expand All Reply
Obama Picks Up Key Newspaper Endorsements in Wisconsin, Texas
By Kim Chipman
Feb. 16 (Bloomberg) -- Barack Obama picked up key newspaper endorsements in Wisconsin and Texas today as he and Hillary Clinton compete for delegates in states that may help determine which candidate wins the Democratic presidential nomination.
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Wisconsin's largest daily newspaper, said it recommends that voters support Obama in the state's Feb. 19 primary because ``change and experience are crucial to moving this country forward'' and the Illinois senator is the ``best-equipped to deliver that change.''
The Houston Chronicle, the biggest daily publication in Texas, gave similar reasons for endorsing Obama, 46, over Clinton. He's ``the best-qualified by life experience, skill and temperament to be the standard bearer for his party,'' the newspaper said in an editorial today. Texas will hold its primary on March 4.
According to the story by Don Van Natta Jr. and Jo Becker, Gore and “a number of other senior Democrats” have decided to remain neutral in the nomination fight, with an eye on the possibility they may be needed to negotiate a deal that would avoid a divided convention.
There are several references to “party leaders” and “party elders,” who include but don’t seem to be limited to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and three Democrats who’ve already dropped out of the presidential race: John Edwards, Joe Biden and Chris Dodd.
A number of these party elders have approached Gore as the race has tightened to a stalemate, according to the story, but all Gore is said to have done is counsel Democratic leaders to stay on the sidelines for now.
Exactly how much of a “neutral force” Gore could be was called into question by an Eleanor Clift column published Friday on Newsweek’s website suggesting the possibility of a “second-ballot scenario” that might nominate Gore. While that isn’t being considered by Democratic party leaders, Clift wrote, it’s being talked about by “a number of individual high-profile Democrats.”
http://www.southernpoliticalreport.com/storylink_216_223.aspx
Joan - This is your thread! LOL. May I join in?
(0.20 seconds) on Google, Sitka.
On an old machine, no less.
Are you an Obama delegate or alternate, Sitka?
Stop avoiding the question.
If you aren't...why NOT?
You're too goddamned lazy to research your own party's delegate selection & state convention rules.
AZ Dems have a very informative portal, too--sorry, no excuses, Sitka.
http://www.azdem.org/
The same is true for the rest of you who are f^cking whining all the time.
Research...superdelegate backgroundes were posted last night.
Go back and read the damned things before commenting on something about which you appear to know NOTHING.
...nor will it be changed in '08.
Sat, 02/16/08
2:06 PMCST
"Nebraska sure got to have fun this year didn't you?"
Our fun here is just beginning. We are compiling new activist voter lists, sending out Thankyous and "Welcome to the Party" letters. We are separating out precincts from legislative districts, and building new neighborhood organizations. Also spending time locating larger venues for county conventions. Most of the delegates chosen in our caucuses are young folks w/no prior political experience. Leadership development, done right, The "Dean way", the Wellstone way, is the order of the day.
Dissatisfied Dems- Join your county organization. Volunteer for the fundraising or new voter registration committees. Use your Dean-granted powers. Then come back here and try to preach negativity and woe. That being said, posting to this random, fluctuating, Yugo of a blog is a lot like tossing a note into a f***ing bucket.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
too good to be lost 20 posts back on an old thread
Unofficial Tallies in City Understated Obama Vote
Michael Nagle/European Pressphoto Agency
A sign supporting Senator Barack Obama on Primary Day in Harlem. Some districts reported that no one had voted for him.
By SAM ROBERTS
Published: February 16, 2008
Black voters are heavily represented in the 94th Election District in Harlem’s 70th Assembly District. Yet according to the unofficial results from the New York Democratic primary last week, not a single vote in the district was cast for Senator Barack Obama.
That anomaly was not unique. In fact, a review by The New York Times of the unofficial results reported on primary night found about 80 election districts among the city’s 6,106 where Mr. Obama supposedly did not receive even one vote, including cases where he ran a respectable race in a nearby district.
City election officials this week said that their formal review of the results, which will not be completed for weeks, had confirmed some major discrepancies between the vote totals reported publicly — and unofficially — on primary night and the actual tally on hundreds of voting machines across the city.
In the Harlem district, for instance, where the primary night returns suggested a 141 to 0 sweep by Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, the vote now stands at 261 to 136. In an even more heavily black district in Brooklyn — where the vote on primary night was recorded as 118 to 0 for Mrs. Clinton — she now barely leads, 118 to 116.
The history of New York elections has been punctuated by episodes of confusion, incompetence and even occasional corruption. And election officials and lawyers for both Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton agree that it is not uncommon for mistakes to be made by weary inspectors rushing on election night to transcribe columns of numbers that are delivered first to the police and then to the news media.
That said, in a presidential campaign in which every vote at the Democratic National Convention may count, a swing of even a couple of hundred votes in New York might help Mr. Obama gain a few additional delegates. ...photo and full article: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/16/nyregi...
Quote of the day from Political Wire:
Quote of the Day
"I told President Clinton that I thought it was really important that pledged delegates be the deciding factor. And he agreed with me."
Rep. Dan Boren (D-OK), quoted by Tulsa World.
-------
Well, except when Obama has the most pledged delegates.
Did you watch Olbermann's clip of Big Dog last night, mary vb?
He called the 20 caucus state's votes "insignificant."
Ouch.
That's a grand example of why Hillary got her clock cleaned by the Wonder Bread state o' Maine.
Poorest state per capita in New England, to boot.
Idiot.
We simply don't *like* Hillary...nothing personal, Big Dog.
http://tinyurl.com/36bmuj
Half of Baghdad is out of water because the electricity still doesn't work.
Stolen Votes
crow says to coyote,"the man"and with sharp eyes alert
the circle begins,the distraction times the theft
and the sandwich missing from the rucksack
is shared later,fairly
not that they each hadn't tried first
alone
Monica from 20. on previous thread Salon article -- 'love' this quote:
"We are looking for individual people," Lt. Col. Walt Manwill says, as he stares up at the massive screens. "Especially when you are killing people, you want to make sure you do it right."
+++++++++++++++++
12. Cool bird Monica
+++++++++++++++++
Previous thread - dog - enjoyed your narrative on your birds and deer
+++++++++++++++++
Elizabeth Cable -- if I had written your piece I would have capitalized 'united states' in the first sentence.
+++++++++++++++++
PPP (personal pet peeve) repeated posts from the previous thread.
+++++++++++++++++
From Annilow's psychiatric pet ward - dog is on phenobarbitol for seizures; cat #2 is on buspar for anxiety. Just call me Nurse Ratched.
Yes, that photo of the U/Maine students close to nodding out at Hillary's U/Maine "rally" is a hoot.
Glad you enjoyed it.
I really think they were paid to wake up *early* on Sat. morning.
Traditionals who live on campus never get up early on weekends.
Or a rare few, that's for sure.
If she'd chosen U/Maine's Alfond Hockey Arena (which was larger); it would've been humiliating if a tiny crowd attended.
She didn't thank her overflow crowd for showing up--nor did she speak w/them at all. Her staffer rudely shut the door on 'em.
Compare w/Obama, who stood outside in the cold; and spoke w/a few thousands (who'd already stood in line for hours)--*before* he spoke to the fire code packed crowd inside of "The Mecca."
...which is the Bangor Auditorium--where basketball is king--tournaments will occur for the next months at "The Mecca."
I sent two YouTubes to ME Minority Whip, Rep. Sean Faircloth (D-Bangor) last night (he introduced Obama; and hadn't seen them yet).
The difference is *stunning*.
People went "buckwild," as kimmy would lament.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLXxYy-rq...
We don't appreciate candidates who waltz into the state; and treat us like "Insignificant" dirt.
It's bad enough tolerating it from "summah complaints."
Go home, Clintons!
Yes, mainfem, I really feel the Clinton's remarks about insignificant states (including yours and mine) will haunt them. We can win in Colorado and Missouri in NOv. I wonder if New Mexico is now relevant/significant? I saw a diary about that over at Kos.
Now Hillary is shortening her stay in WI and she's looking more and more Rudy-esque.
Annilow - Your pets are as messed up as mine. LOL
Harold Ickes helped form and voted for the DNC rules about the primaries. He was all for them then. Now that Hillary needs those delegates he is changing his view. It is just so obvious.
Harold Ickes: FL and MI should be seated.
Add your comment
(to reply directly to a comment, click the reply icon for that comment)Post closed to commenting
 |
|
 |
My DFA |
|
Members |
|
Groups |
|
Events |
|
Candidates |
 |
|
Blog for America
-
It's Time For Obama
By Edward Fletcher on Aug 29, 2008 5:04 PM EDT -
Palin on the VP
By DFA Staff on Aug 29, 2008 3:00 PM EDT -
McCain chooses Palin
By DFA Staff on Aug 29, 2008 12:00 PM EDT -
66
By DFA Staff on Aug 29, 2008 9:00 AM EDT -
Democratic National Convention, Day 4
By DFA Staff on Aug 28, 2008 6:00 PM EDT
Recommended Blog Posts
-
A conversation with a ghost.
By Ed Tubbs on Aug 28, 2008 4:26 PM EDT -
Democratic Women Center Stage at the DNCC
By Susan Rowe on Aug 28, 2008 12:19 PM EDT -
6th Annual DemocracyFest ~ 2009!
By Jessica Falker on Aug 22, 2008 10:11 AM EDT -
McCain's Mansions: The Real Elitist
By Susan Rowe on Aug 21, 2008 4:20 PM EDT -
DC4D is an old friend of Judy Feder
By Keshini Ladduwahetty on Aug 21, 2008 1:11 PM EDT
Recent Blog Posts
-
Barack Did His Part, Now Let's Do Ours
By Kate Drazner on Aug 29, 2008 8:12 PM EDT -
Hey, Goddess?..It's me, Biff..could you please keep an
By Anomalous Biff on Aug 29, 2008 7:30 PM EDT -
Stephen Views the News 8/29/08
By Stephen Weinstein on Aug 29, 2008 6:43 PM EDT -
In July I purchased the domain .........
By Mondo Fountaine on Aug 29, 2008 6:10 PM EDT -
It's Time For Obama
By Edward Fletcher on Aug 29, 2008 5:04 PM EDT
-
By Joan* In*Florida on Feb 16, 2008 3:03 PM ESTYippee! Howard Dean is first again!
In South Dakota,
So far, five of the seven Democratic superdelegates have endorsed Obama, saying they like his messages of togetherness and change. Only Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, who originally backed Democrat John Edwards, remains undecided. The seventh seat is vacant.