Rainy-day musings
Feb. 28th, 2009 01:59 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
thatcrazycajunCold, rainy and dangerous to be on the roads today in the City Too Busy to Hate (and Too Traffic-Choked to Move). Good day to stay inside, warm and dry, sip hot cocoa and ruminate.
Saw a newspaper ad for "in-home" drug tests. Unlike pregnancy tests you can buy at the drugstore, however, the sample still has to be sent outside the home to a lab to get the results. It thus seems like false advertising to call it "in-home." If you can have the whole process, start to result, stay in the home for pregnancy tests, why can't you do the same for steroid or marijuana testing? Is the latter really that much more complex or costly that it can't be made easy and idiot-proof for consumers to do it all themselves, without having to involve outsiders and risk privacy breach?
In his speech to Congress this week, Pres. Barack Obama asserted that everyone on both sides of the partisan divide loves this country equally:
"I know that we haven't agreed on every issue thus far, and there are surely times in the future when we will part ways. But I also know that every American who is sitting here tonight loves this country and wants it to succeed. [Emphasis added.] That must be the starting point for every debate we have in the coming months, and where we return after those debates are done. That is the foundation on which the American people expect us to build common ground."
It would be nice if that were a safe presumption. Unfortunately, the Republican Party and conservative movement, as represented by their Congressional members, a number of their state governors and their now-thankfully-former President, have demonstrated that however much they may indeed love their country, they love the following things far more: their party, their ideology, wealth, power and above all, winning. They've been showing this for the past eight years, and they've shown it yet again in their behavior with regard to the stimulus legislation.
Someone needs to hip our new chief executive to the fact that he is not dealing with grownups here, and should not assume they will act in the best interests of all the people when presented with evidence of the need. One of their most prominent "thought leaders" (and I use the term very advisedly) has openly and repeatedly stated that he wants all of Obama's efforts to fail. They know the country is going to hell in a handcart, and they don't give a shit. They got theirs, and they are quite willing to destroy the country to vindicate their misbegotten ideology.
This week, the new administration lost one battle to keep "sensitive" evidence out of court, but its lawyers indicated they will keep fighting to preserve executive secrecy and suppress needed proof of Bush Regime crimes. The Daily Kos reports the latest here. As the writer notes, "Kind of makes one wonder whether the whole 'no one is above the law' assertion we've heard from both President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder was merely rhetorical."
I was amazed, you'll recall, that Bush handed over the reins of power freely and without any resistance. Did he do so because he had some sort of assurance from his successor that his ass would be covered? We can only wonder.
Saw a newspaper ad for "in-home" drug tests. Unlike pregnancy tests you can buy at the drugstore, however, the sample still has to be sent outside the home to a lab to get the results. It thus seems like false advertising to call it "in-home." If you can have the whole process, start to result, stay in the home for pregnancy tests, why can't you do the same for steroid or marijuana testing? Is the latter really that much more complex or costly that it can't be made easy and idiot-proof for consumers to do it all themselves, without having to involve outsiders and risk privacy breach?
In his speech to Congress this week, Pres. Barack Obama asserted that everyone on both sides of the partisan divide loves this country equally:
"I know that we haven't agreed on every issue thus far, and there are surely times in the future when we will part ways. But I also know that every American who is sitting here tonight loves this country and wants it to succeed. [Emphasis added.] That must be the starting point for every debate we have in the coming months, and where we return after those debates are done. That is the foundation on which the American people expect us to build common ground."
It would be nice if that were a safe presumption. Unfortunately, the Republican Party and conservative movement, as represented by their Congressional members, a number of their state governors and their now-thankfully-former President, have demonstrated that however much they may indeed love their country, they love the following things far more: their party, their ideology, wealth, power and above all, winning. They've been showing this for the past eight years, and they've shown it yet again in their behavior with regard to the stimulus legislation.
Someone needs to hip our new chief executive to the fact that he is not dealing with grownups here, and should not assume they will act in the best interests of all the people when presented with evidence of the need. One of their most prominent "thought leaders" (and I use the term very advisedly) has openly and repeatedly stated that he wants all of Obama's efforts to fail. They know the country is going to hell in a handcart, and they don't give a shit. They got theirs, and they are quite willing to destroy the country to vindicate their misbegotten ideology.
This week, the new administration lost one battle to keep "sensitive" evidence out of court, but its lawyers indicated they will keep fighting to preserve executive secrecy and suppress needed proof of Bush Regime crimes. The Daily Kos reports the latest here. As the writer notes, "Kind of makes one wonder whether the whole 'no one is above the law' assertion we've heard from both President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder was merely rhetorical."
I was amazed, you'll recall, that Bush handed over the reins of power freely and without any resistance. Did he do so because he had some sort of assurance from his successor that his ass would be covered? We can only wonder.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-02-28 07:40 pm (UTC)It doesn't make me wonder about that at all.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-28 07:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-28 08:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-28 10:17 pm (UTC)A couple of observations:
Date: 2009-02-28 10:10 pm (UTC)This is a very useful tack for Obama to take, EVEN IF the Repuglicans are being willful and vile and everything you accuse them of. It does two things: it leaves the door open for when/if they want to talk- not burning bridges (something people keep advising *me* not to do). The other thing is that it sets a clear break from previous Administration's policy where the Patriotism of dissenters was clearly and maliciously called into question. I know too many people who think that Obama is going to try to do what Bush/Cheney did WRT to power consolidation in the Govt. Under that admin. we were really sliding into a totalitarian regime, and by welcoming dissent and dissenters to the table, Obama is showing a clear break from that style of rule/vs/leadership.
2nd- wrt "saving" Bush &c from prosecution.
I want to see these prosecutions as much as you do.
But I also am behind Obama NOT leading this charge. It sets a very bad precedent to have the Chief Executive engage in "judicial activism". He's going to have enough of an uphill battle against that phrase as it is, EVEN THO the previous admin. abused it even more.
Leaving it to the truly zealous in the Senate is a very smart move. If it works, then there's a much better chance of it being seen as a "fair" trial. If it doesn't, then his hands and prospects for the future aren't sullied- as well as a potential future for continued Liberal leadership. By not having this originate at Obama's desk, he's more re-electible AND the likelihood of a Democratic successor are higher.
It's really time to get away from this endless political yo-yo nonsense between L&R. Making too much of a deal out of the prosecution makes it "witchhunt" and fuels the opposition, blah blah blah.
This *MAY* mean that the bad guys get away. I'm not cool with that, but if the result is that the good guys get to stay, it might be worth it.
OTOH, as long as they *try* to keep the sensitive evidence out of court, there will continue to be a call for it to be brought forward, and more attention payed to it when it is finally wrested. That would be a win. So watch the Justice dept make a heroic effort that they just can't seem to prevail on. To have *that* effort fail would make it much harder to pull this crap again in the future. So by *trying* to resist the call, they *seem* generous, while actually assuring that the prosecution succeeds AND sabotageing future efforts.
I'd like to hope they're that smart.
Rain?
Date: 2009-03-01 02:18 am (UTC)