What If the Next President Is Even Worse?

[Buster's Uncle]

What If the Next President Is Even Worse?
By Ron Fournier | National Journal – 4 hrs ago...

 
George W. Bush in 2001 declared war on a tactic (terrorism), and empowered Big Brother to tap phones, launch drones, and indefinitely imprison people without due process.

Barack Obama in 2008 declared those Bush policies an overreach, and pledged to curb drone strikes, protect media freedoms, and close the prison at Guantanamo Bay. Instead, he escalated drone strikes and spied on the media. Gitmo is still open for its grim business.

These are facts. And yet, they are distorted by extreme and narrow-minded partisans, supporters of both Bush and Obama.

Conservatives contend that Bush single-handedly prevented a major terrorist strike after Sept. 11, 2001. They demagogue efforts to shift the pendulum back toward civil liberties. Last week, when Obama finally proposed a modest reassessment of the Bush doctrine, Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., claimed  the efforts "will be viewed by terrorists as a victory."

Liberals hypocritically gave Obama a pass for furthering the same policies they condemned in 2008. Criticism from the left was half-hearted and muted, compared with their Bush-era indignation. On Gitmo, left-wingers rightly blamed the GOP for blocking closure but didn't shame Obama into using his executive authority to shutter the pit.

Some progressives even tried to justify the Obama administration's efforts to criminalize the work of a Fox News reporter. Would they be so blase about a White House targeting MSNBC?

As Leonard Downie Jr. wrote in Sunday's Washington Post, "Hardly anything seems immune from constitutionally dangerous politicking in a polarized Washington."

But that's no excuse for missing the big picture, which is this: Bush and Obama shouldn't worry you nearly as much as the next president.

Or the one after that.

Think about it, liberals. What if there is a president in your lifetime who is more conservative than Bush? What if that commander in chief is empowered, as were Bush and Obama, by a national tragedy and a compliant Congress?

Your guy Obama has armed a president-turned-zealot with dangerous powers and precedents.

Think about it, conservatives. It may be maddening to listen to Obama tie himself into knots over the balance between liberty and freedom, but what if the next Democratic president sees no limit on a commander in chief's powers? What if he or she doesn't give a whit about offending the mainstream media?

The IRS targeting conservatives is a scandal, but there is no evidence that it was directed by the White House. What if the next Democratic president publicly declared his or her political opponents a direct threat to national security, and openly deployed federal agents against them?

Before your eyes roll out of your heads, it is not unthinkable that a future president could make Bush and Obama look downright libertarian. We live in an age of rapid connectivity and hyper-celebrity, forces that create, destroy, and often resurrect public figures within the lifespan of a cicada.  Does the name Justin Bieber ring a bell?

How about Sarah Palin? Our culture of celebrity coupled with the public's disaffection with Washington, could lead to the election of a true demagogue or reactionary. Put it this way: What if Huey Long had had access to the Internet? Or even Pat Buchanan? Don't be blinded by partisanship.

Left-wingers should be fighting the abuse of executive powers at home and abroad, rather than defending them.

Right-wingers should be demanding that Obama finally carry out the promises of his speech last week, rather than demonizing them.

What about the rest of us? How do we keep the country both safe and free? We don't cede the public square to these extremists.

http://news.yahoo.com/next-president-even-worse-053014797.html

[Tarvok]

Nothing terribly controversial here, not to anyone who is not devotedly partisan, anyway. As for me, I got exactly what I expected from Barak Obama. I was surrounded by kids who thought he represented a paradigm shift. Personally, I saw him as "just another politician", and when others in the peace movement were hyping him up as the greatest potential peacemaker of our time (I still don't know what, exactly, the Nobel committee was thinking), I was actually listening to his speeches... and recognized that his timeline ended the wars shortly AFTER his second term ended. Still, "just another politician" is, in my eyes, superior to a unilateralist, militarist, interventionist, if only marginally.

I *was* happy to see the First Black President elected, for a variety of reasons. First off, it dulls racial demagoguery a bit. But most importantly, I was happy for the old black people, who in their youth had dogs and fire hoses and worse turned on them just for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, and got to see a black man elected president before they died.

[Green1]

They are "all" just another politician.

The only folks who actually control things are those that have the resources. The politicians are public servants of these people. Black, white, Indian, or Progenitor... matters not. Do not let talk radio or the pageantry of TV sound bites lead you different.

[Geo]

The only folks who actually control things are those that have the resources. The politicians are public servants of these people. Black, white, Indian, or Progenitor... matters not. Do not let talk radio or the pageantry of TV sound bites lead you different.

Those 'public servants' get a huge say over the resources of aforementioned people contributing to the political system.

[Buster's Uncle]

Holy crap, is THIS thread ready for a bump.

[Rusty Edge]

Just wait till President Pence,  recognizing that this is a Christian Nation, tries to go national with his Indiana reforms ( diverting AIDS Treatment funding to gay conversion therapy, for example) , and puts only righteous judges on the bench. Hallelujahs and Amens shall be uttered.

[Buster's Uncle]

-An obvious question.  Would a semi-competent person who worked within the accepted boundaries/rules of the system -but who had a truly evil agenda- do more harm or less than what we have now?

[Rusty Edge]

-An obvious question.  Would a semi-competent person who worked within the accepted boundaries/rules of the system -but who had a truly evil agenda- do more harm or less than what we have now?

Uh, I feared Pence would be worse. Now I'm not so sure.

Getting rid of the experienced people in the top of the state department and gutting it's budget, and being inept at finding and confirming replacements, or outright refusing to do so means that our non-military options for dealing with international incidents are vanishing.

We have a peculiar convergence of partisanship in media and public office. Then there's the Russian thing. I'm also concerned about changing norms, such as ethics, objective truth, and Constitutional interpretation.

We survived Nixon just fine, but I wonder about the lasting effects of the [Sleezebag] administration, including figurative and literal nuclear options. I like to believe that the system is self -correcting, that excess leads to reform and restoration. But when we let partisanship ...." [Sleezebag]" ethics, "[Sleezebag]" objective truth and "[Sleezebag]" Constitutional interpretation, I fear that tit for tat will replace restoring standards in one category or another.

SO- I'm starting to think that what we have now is worse in the long run.

[Buster's Uncle]

Good points.  One imagines that Pence would at least allow the train to run on time.

[Geo]

Why? There's still taxi's... or are these driven by illegal migrants? 

[Buster's Uncle]

By comparison to the real estate huckster, who attacks sensible procedure five times before breakfast.

[Elok]

The funny thing is, I assumed this was posted recently, and you were asking if the next president would be worse than [Sleezebag].  Honestly, we got something of a pass with this orangutan; I expected a fascist, more or less, but we got an indecisive buffoon who appears set to spend the next four years bouncing between contradictory advisors.  A bit rough on underpopulated chunks of third world real estate, and incapable of meeting any challenge, but not a direct threat to American liberty.  Hopefully he won't get Seattle nuked or send a flood of starving DPRK refugees into China and SK.

Now, who comes after [Sleezebag], that frightens me more.

[Yitzi]

Hallelujahs and Amens shall be uttered.

Mispronounced ones, no doubt.

[Misanthrope]

They are "all" just another politician.

So VERY True!  All human, all limited, all ready to spend other peoples' money and lives.

Hallelujahs and Amens shall be uttered.

Mispronounced ones, no doubt.

 


Mr. President, we have prepared for you a speech we wish for you to read at a press conference, and DON'T Mispronounce any of the words this time!
-Shadow Government Puppet Show

[Rusty Edge]

I don't want this to be normal.

I'm thinking that Pence is up to his neck in this, too, so he will eventually go. How this all plays out remains to be seen. The order of the prosecutions, the possibilities of pardons, revoked security clearances, etc.

The G.O.P. has been a huge disappointment. I thought more of them would care about The Constitution. They can clean their own house, or wait for the voters to clean The House of Representatives in the mid-terms. Then we'll have President Pelosi in early 2019.

Well, that wouldn't be easy. The country is so badly Gerrymandered that the Democrats will need to be on their game.