Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton took the debate over Libya to a new low yesterday. (For full disclosure, I am lead counsel representing members challenging the constitutionality of the Libyan War). Clinton is largely responsible for entering the United States in another undeclared war. She is now dismissing all of the constitutional and fiscal concerns of members and publicly asking members “Whose side are you on?”
It is a case of hoisting the wretch to silence one’s critics.
The not-so-veiled threat is directed to House members who want to cut off funding for the war — who will now be accused of supporting Gaddafi. It is an approach taken by others. In a recent bizarre debate I had with Abraham Sofaer of the ultra-conservative Hoover Institute, Sofaer continued to push aside the constitutional and statutory problems with the war by repeatedly reminding listeners what a bad guy Gaddafi is. Sound familiar? It is precisely what the Bush Administration did in pushing us into the disastrous Iraq War. Clinton was one of those Senators who went along in approving the action (and later insisted that she had been misled). Back then it was Saddam and his weapons of mass destruction. The legalities and logic of the war were quickly pushed aside by the power of personality.
She may succeed. Not willing to appear pro-Gaddafi, Senators are moving to give Obama post-hoc authorization. Senators Kerry and McCain are pushing to give Obama the authorization that he never asked for — and is still not asking for. It is a rather pathetic display of the Congress desperately trying to appear relevant — even when a president is saying that it is not.
The technique of guilt by association is a time tested approach. Any high school student will tell you that the only thing as successful of pressuring kids to be “in with the in crowd” is to say that if they are not they are sweet on the ugliest or most unpopular kid in class. Next we will hear the State Department spokesman taunting members of being “up in the tree” with Gaddafi “K-I-S-S-I-N-G.” Either you give us the money for an undeclared war or you are BFF to Gaddafi.
Here is the answer for the Secretary of State — we are on the side of the Constitution. Jamaica.
Source: AP
“International judges order arrest of Gadhafi”
http://www.windstream.net/news/read.php?rip_id=%3CD9O46UAO0%40news.ap.org%3E&ps=1018
But why not orders for arrest of Bush, Obama, Blair, et al??
The ICC appears to have no credibility.
HR 2278 appears to be a covert way of authorizing the Libya war. So a ‘No’ vote was appropriate.
The U.S. Libyan War is already a War Crime and funding it is, by law, prohibited.
No need to limit illegal funding of War Crimes. That would endorse the crime.
Both resolutions were voted down in the House. The president was given a pass to do what he wants for now.
Tony,
We are thinking along similar lines.
@Buddha: I have been thinking about this too. I was going to write about it, but in starting I came to the conclusion that I haven’t thought about it enough, so I will refrain.
I still think the solution is not a third party. The Democratic party, like the Republican party, has no real immune system or litmus test. Arlen Specter can run as a Republican one cycle and a Democrat the next and a Republican the next. A politician is a Democrat by self-declaration alone, there is no ideological test that must be passed.
I am not even sure that such a test would be legal, but either way it is the weak point in this system. Certainly for the Republicans they seemed unable to stop some primary Tea Party candidates from running even though the party KNEW they were unelectable.
Even the best funded third party bids cannot get 25% of the vote. Trying to create a third party is a hopeless battle against the entrenched two party system; but an insider-takeover of either party is eminently possible. The strategy to pursue, IMO, is “branded Democrat.” Take whatever your third party name was going to be, put “Democrat” after it, and then infiltrate the Democratic party and spread the infection through grass roots primaries until the brand becomes the majority in the Democratic party. Voila; whole new party.
Since I presume the goal is to actually implement the ideology, I think gaining the power to do that is the real objective. So the objective isn’t to gain fame or prove some esoteric point about having a third party, the goal is just gaining the power to correct the ills of the nation. Accomplishing that goal is best done under the existing, entrenched, recognizable label of “The Democratic Party (Now Under New Management!).”
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/06/what-to-expect-today-on-house-votes-on-libya.php?ref=fpblg
“Do the easy thing, and start a new flavor of Democrat that appeals to the left 55% of voters, which I think is eminently possible.”
Tony C.,
You have capture the essence of how we can do this within this current, corrupt 2 party structure. The essence is developing a “catchy” rubric, develop clear principles and support people that when elected won’t just join up with the “old boy” network in a quest to be popular.
Forgetting Weiner’s indiscretion for a moment, let’s remember that his own party deserted him. The rumor was that he was unpopular with his Democratic colleagues, seen as not being a team player and a constant publicity hound. The truth to me is that he advocated things that the centrist Democrats found “Un-Politic” (i.e. going after Clarence Thomas) and didn’t play the “go along to get along” game. Dennis Kucinich is in the same boat and they exclude him from internal brainstorming and pray for his disappearance. Alan Cranston’s defeat was probably privately hailed by House Democratic leaders.
The people we need should be willing to be “publicity hounds” for the cause and not bothered by initially being shunned by the Democratic Establishment, or the White House. If we can get a small group of them elected and they can work together for support/solidarity, then we have the strong beginnings of a movement, that can morph into a bloc and from there we begin to take back the country from the maniacs and criminals that have stolen it.
It’s always the help 🙂
I use sta love da help. I Help anybody. You needs some help ? How can I help you 🙂
I remember the times when I just couldn’t help myself. No cigars for me though, even though, there is that Cuban connection.
Oh and as for channeling, I do it just find but it still feels like i’m getting nowhere.
Anon nurse, Thanks for the links and excerpts. Below is a link to a much more pessimistic read but not all that far-fetched by Cris Hedges. He uses a phrase to characterize the decline of our way of life, “the great unraveling” that I used a couple of weeks ago while talking to the better-half to make the same allusion. Great, cynical minds think alike 🙂 Having fought determined cats for my yarn on the rarest of occasions, those when I have knitted or crocheted, I think it’s a perfectly apt phrase.
He also briefly noted the flip-side or psychological self-medication to Greenwald’s climate of fear. Greenwald re-quote:
“Nobody wants to believe that they have been put in a state of fear, that they are intimidated, so rationalizations are often contrived: I don’t perceive any violations of my rights because there’s nothing I want to do that I’m not able to do. Inducing a fearful population to refrain from exercising rights — as it convinces itself no such thing is happening — is a far more effective, and far more pernicious, means of suppressing freedoms. That’s what a Climate of Fear uniquely enables.”
The preoccupation with personalities that are little more than hyper-caricature’s of the iconic American attitude and virtues is a logical subconscious response to the climate of fear. As well as the refusal to see things as they are.
From Cris Hedges:
http://www.adbusters.org/magazine/96/chris-hedges-revolution-in-america.html
“Dying civilizations often prefer hope, even absurd hope, to truth. It makes life easier to bear. It lets them turn away from the hard choices ahead to bask in a comforting certitude that God or science or the market will be their salvation. This is why these apologists for globalism continue to find a following. And their systems of propaganda have built a vast, global Potemkin village to entertain us.”
“Bdaman 1, June 23, 2011 at 11:02 pm
Hillary was channeling her inner Bush 🙂 ”
And no one was more surprised than Bill. If she’d been channeling it years ago, maybe Bill would have stayed away from the cigars and the help.
Nate, thanks. If it’s one thing this blawg has it’s personality and personality’s. that’s two things but…. 🙂
I am in complete agreement with you regarding the Peace Prize. The Nobel Prize really illustrated for me that no matter how diminished we might think we are or how little we see our country connected to the world, the world certainly doesn’t think of us that way. We are the 800lb gorilla in the room and if we are not acting in prudent ways, economically or militarily, and the world is very concerned about it. The NPP was the most diplomatic and courteous way for the world to say “you’ve just got to get your countries shit together because our butts are on the line too”.
When I start becoming concerned about the detachment of our government from its citizens, or common sense, or economic enlightened-self-interest, I have to wonder what the world thinks. Every time Sarah Palin (or Hillary Clinton or Paul Ryan) makes a stupid statement or advances an immoral policy with global implications I just know that somewhere half a world away some analog of Lottakatz reading about it on the same website may be doing the same face-palm.
The below story for me illustrates and reinforces my suspicion that our labor class is being turned into a 3rd world-like labor pool and that people elsewhere are watching, possibly deriving lessons that will not work in our favor:
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/apr/10/business/la-fi-ikea-union-20110410
“Ikea’s U.S. factory churns out unhappy workers
A union-organizing battle hangs over the Ikea plant in Virginia. Workers complain of eliminated raises, a frenzied pace, mandatory overtime and racial discrimination.”
“The dust-up has garnered little attention in the U.S. But it’s front-page news in Sweden, where much of the labor force is unionized and Ikea is a cherished institution. Per-Olaf Sjoo, the head of the Swedish union in Swedwood factories, said he was baffled by the friction in Danville. Ikea’s code of conduct, known as IWAY, guarantees workers the right to organize and stipulates that all overtime be voluntary.
“Ikea is a very strong brand and they lean on some kind of good Swedishness in their business profile. That becomes a complication when they act like they do in the United States,” said Sjoo. “For us, it’s a huge problem.”
Laborers in Swedwood plants in Sweden produce bookcases and tables similar to those manufactured in Danville. The big difference is that the Europeans enjoy a minimum wage of about $19 an hour and a government-mandated five weeks of paid vacation. Full-time employees in Danville start at $8 an hour with 12 vacation days — eight of them on dates determined by the company.”
Of course it’s claimed that she has balls 🙂
Hillary was channeling her inner Bush 🙂
your either with us or your with the enemy.
Lottakatz,
I wish I had something wise to reply with, but I’m still kind of reeling from that particular realization.
If true, that woman is done for.
On the other hand, I love reading your posts. I guess that means I’m still susceptible to the cult of personality 🙂
Too bad Obama turned out to be such a fraud. That Peace Prize showed me the entire world had their hopes pinned on him. Now it’s time for the American People to step up to the plate. You and I. There’s just no one else left.
Nate, LOL, Isn’t it amazing that even with politicians one is inclined to put in the good/like category (not specific to HC) one can go from ‘s/he’s OK, I’d support him/her’ to ‘ought to be in jail’ in the blink of an eye based on what vagrant memory flits through your mind at any given moment?
I think the problem is them, not us. What they call flip-flops and triangulation I call pandering and lying. Maybe it’s just me.
On further introspection, I realized that it was just my ‘magination…
All those leaked diplomatic cables via Bradley Manning and Wikileaks.
Hillary Clinton as lead diplomat being Secretary of State, my mind just naturally concurred that she put tremendous pressure in putting away Bradley Manning and labeling Wikileaks as a “terrorist” organization.
Completely no proof to any of these allegations, but it seemed clear in my soul and imagination – and I despise her for it.
http://www.alternet.org/vision/151397/tonight,_watch%3A_van_jones_jumpstarts_new_progressive_movement_to_confront_and_push_back_american_conservative_and_corporate_dominance_
@Buddha, Blouise: My laptop is in repair, so I will comment further in the morning. Have a good night…
Nate,
Thank you. As always, one lives to be of service.
Tony C and Buddha,
Now we’re talkin’!
(Thanks, Tony, for moseyin’ on over)
I’m off to Sesame Street Place where co-operation is the name of the game … I’m going to try and kidnap Super Grover … mums the word.