If Democrats fail to hold Bush & Cheney accountable, how long until right rises from the dead?

[yurbud]

Congress has shown that they will not take any meaningful action to hold them accountable through impeachment or even investigations of their most most egregious crimes like at the very least sitting on their hands before 9/11, and the meetings with the oil companies before the Iraq War and current pressure on Iraq to sign an oil law that gives most of their oil income to big oil companies. Or signing statements that refute the plain sense of a law, or torture or...

The Clintons showed they have no appetite for it when Bill let Papa Bush off the hook about Iran Contra and the October Surprise even though he got new evidence from Russia and the French confirming the allegations.

If things continue on their present course, how long until the right rises up out of the bathtub like Glenn Close in FATAL ATTRACTION?

[fascisthunter]

1. Other: They WIll Be Around Unscathed for Years to Come

because nothing meaningful was ever done to hold them (the right wing) accountable.

[Richard Steele]

12. Exactly. The Dems have ALREADY failed to hold them accountable...

...so the Repubs aren't going anywhere any time soon.

[Karenina]

14. They've not been held accountable

since the failed coup Smedley Butler foiled. It's been downhill from there...

[Dukkha]

26. and Americans are too stupid to care

beyond their 30 second attention span. They're naive and gullible enough to fall for the usual scare tactics and will march alongside the GOP right off the cliff like lemmings into economic destitute.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

2. Unfortunately, the right is not dead. They still have a chokehold on the nation.

[blm]

3. BushInc was completely cornered by Jan 1993 on BCCI, IranContra, and Iraqgate.

The new President decided he didn't want those matters scrutinized any further and discouraged any more investigations into those matters.

THAT led directly to the rise of Bush2 - stronger than ever thanks to the 90s where there was NO OVERSIGHT of BushInc and its dealings.


http://consortiumnews.com/2006/111106.html


How did that work out for Democrats? For the nation? For the 9-11 families? For Iraq?

[yurbud]

8. exactly my point. Clinton didn't even get cut slack personally for giving Papa Bush a pass

[Wizard777]

10. apparently Hillary has learned NOTHING from this. Cause she wants to do it again with Jr. n/t

[blm]

11. Well, yurbud, you have to realize that Whitewater was another dog and pony show

for the bases and media to keep them distracted while Rose Law Firm was ACTUALLY being scrubbed by Poppy Bush's people because a good deal of Jackson Stephen's BCCI dealings documents would have been contained in the many files of the OTHER lawyers at the firm.

Ever wonder why EVERY file had to be poured over at Rose instead of just just Hillary's files?

And then Rose Law Firm quietly closed down.

[yurbud]

13. do you have a link on that?

[blm]

15. Page 338 of the book WHITEOUT

http://books.google.com/books?id=s5qIj_h_PtkC&pg=PA338&lpg=PA338&dq=jackson+stephens+arkansas+rose+law+firm&source=web&ots=zcmuZfYswa&sig=IF-IXYT2kbFd_CeZDdW87AwMryk


Stephens was the BIGGEST client at Rose Law Firm.

You have to understand that Stephens was also a LONGTIME political benefactor of GHWBush who expected to get impeached over BCCI report that was due to be released in Dec 1992.

Stephens needed protecting on BCCI, too - he BROUGHT that bank into this country. He bankrolled Clinton's primary campaign. Poppy Bush ran the worst campaign ever.

What happened when PRESIDENT Bill Clinton was handed the BCCI report?

[yurbud]

17. what did happen, nothing?

[blm]

20. No Justice Dept. furthering the case after the report SPECIFIED that matters

required further scrutiny.

NO declassification of all the documents and papers Bush had withheld. Clinton continued the stonewalling and never put Justice Dept on the tail of ANy of Bush's cronies while Clark Clifford and Robert Altman's PERIPHERAL involvements DID receive further attention - they were Dems.

Stephens was also the guy behind WTI in E. Liverpool, Ohio. Clinton protecting Stephens on WTI likely lost Ohio for Gore and was used as the reason why Greens felt Gore didn't fight Clinton enough on environmental matters.

[still_one]

4. If they do not hold bush and cheney accountable it is because THEY DO NOT want to be accountable

if and when THEY have power

[blm]

36. Or because alot of it tracks BACK twenty years earlier and THEY are part of the

timeline themselves in some ways.

When did the BCCI report come out and who was it handed to?

[aquart]

5. Two or three seconds?

[Wizard777]

9. I was thinking ten seconds. But your figures may be more accurate. n/t

[Stinky The Clown]

6. I'd say six months ..... tops

They're worse than vampires. They only way to be rid of them is a stake through their black, shriveled hearts.

[Fridays Child]

7. If history is any guide, four to eight years.

[blm]

16. Exactly - let off the hook throughout the 90s by Bill Clinton and we got Bush2

stronger and nastier than Bush1.

[yurbud]

28. stronger, nastier, and willing to burn the bridges of democracy behind them

next time they will be meaner still and probably more ruthless on democracy.

[bryant69]

18. Do you forsee us ever definitively defeating the right?

I mean isn't that kind of a pipe dream at best and coulter-like at worst?

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[yurbud]

19. History has a lot of back and forth. but DLC type compromise doesn't end the tug of war. look at

Bill Clinton. He tried to make nice with them and his reward was the right trying to pull down his pants in public for eight years, and a showdown that nearly shutdown the government.

[bryant69]

21. I don't favor a DLC Approach either, but absent any major change

in public opinion and/or new evidence of the Bush Administrations illegality coming forward, it seems like focusing on their crimes isn't going to turn out very well.

Bryant

[yurbud]

22. Do you mean public backlash or backlash by the financial elite?

[bryant69]

23. Is there a difference? n/t

[yurbud]

24. sometimes manufactured outrage doesn't catch on

[bryant69]

25. Yes - I totally agree.

American's don't tend to be vengeful towards rich white guys.

Bryant

[yurbud]

27. people have been convinced they're a lottery ticket away from becoming one

[bryant69]

32. Which takes me back to the point i made earlier

Unless you can change public opinion to favor punishing the Bush Adminsitration after they are out of office, such a move would probably back fire.

Bryant

[JackRiddler]

29. The month after the inauguration of a Democratic president.

Don't you know the routine?

Since the end of Nixon:

In power, Republicans plunder whatever is not nailed down, run vast illegal operations and genocidal wars, all simultaneously and in your face so that you feel overwhelmed just in keeping track. Democrats spend the entire time enabling or distracting from this. No scandal, no crime leads to accountability. Howl all you like. "The last thing this country needs is another Watergate." It's all so naked and bad you're supposed to take any alternative.

Democrats in power exist to restore the treasury for the next round of plunder by the next Republican admin. The danger in this is that the Democratic constituency actually believes a Democrat is going to change things. So this is how it's done: They tone it down slightly on the imperial crimes and put up a friendlier face to the world. No matter how right wing, the media calls them liberal, every hour on the hour.

Starting 30 seconds into a Democrat's term, the Republicans raise accusations of personal (especially sexual) impropriety, howl like it's Hitler or the Antichrist in the White House, and obstruct all operations. The media give "even handed" coverage, never bothering to determine the truth of any given claim. The Democrats never seriously defend or counterattack, but just hang on.

THAT'S THE GAME.

[jus_the_facts]

31. then I'll ask you what I always get asked when posting about how rigged things are....

.....why are you HERE if you think it's all hopeless...don't you realize your defeatest attitude isn't wanted HERE??? Just go away we don't need the likes of YOU in OUR PARTY!!! :wtf:

I've been told this countless times on DU...when only trying to point out the obvious. :shrug:

[JackRiddler]

33. Because it's not YOUR party or your country.

How dare you tell me where to speak.

It is not "defeatist" to know what is happening in your world - it is practical. The attitude of total helplessness is the one you recommend - where are you are a willing victim.

This party is just as much mine as it is yours, because it advertises that it's the party for working people. Since it has so much power over my life, I demand that it start living up to its own PR.

I didn't ask to get saddled with the two-party monopoly, but I'm sure as hell not going to capitulate to the point where I don't even get to describe it accurately.

So if you were in China, would you call criticism of the one-party system "defeatist"?

It's funny how you pretend you care for getting votes on behalf of the Democratic Party, yet your reaction to all those who are not automatic votes is to tell them to fuck off. Excellent strategy.

I notice you don't bother to dispute the facts of what I say - the attitude is just wrong. If only one engages in a self-delusion, then everything is better, eh?

Shame!

[jus_the_facts]

34. I agree with you....completely....

....wish I'd responded with as much tact...in my frustration all I could say was..."Because I still give a shit...is that okay?!" :D

[JackRiddler]

35. Oh, I see...

You meant to ask what one should say when hit with the "love it or leave it" argument, you weren't actually hitting me with it yourself.

Okay, so I guess we're on the same page.

[Evoman]

30. "Rise from the dead" assumes they're dead. No way. It's the left that is dead.

Unfortunately.

[pat_k]

37. Refuse to impeach and they remain the "undead"

Refusing to impeach says one thing: "Do your worst. We ain't stoppin' you."

Does anyone imagine the outlaws will magically cease being outlaws when the "police" have declared their intent to turn a "blind eye." (And even better, the cops are "reaching out" to them and declaring their intent to "work in unity" with them?)

Does anyone imagine that Cheney's power is limited to the confines of a West Wing office? (Badges? We don't need no stinkin' badges!)

Does anyone imagine that the Republicans and the thousands of "patriots" in our intelligence and military communities would have any qualms about doing Cheney's bidding if he isn't publicly rebuked?

If our so-called "leaders" allow Bush and Cheney the pretense of an honorable exit, does anyone imagine that the Likud and Saudis would think twice about consorting with their "right thinking friends"? (Remember the curious timing of http://www.saudiembassy.net/1996News/News/UsrDetail.asp?cIndex=4246">Poppi Bush's trip to Riyadh to receive the "King Abdul Aziz Medal" in March 1996 -- exactly the same time that the Saudi's said No to Sudan's offer to turn over bin Laden? (WaPo http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A61251-2001Oct2">U.S. Was Foiled)