(no subject)

[tagryn]

My problem with the outrage over the Libby all-but-pardon by GWB isn't the principle itself, which is correct, but that the Democrats didn't raise nearly much of a stink when Clinton (Bill) did virtually the same thing when he pardoned Mark Rich. The precedent being, its horrible when my opponents are doing it, but when its "my team" being unethical, well, you know...its bad, but...there are higher issues at stake, so...

The more depressing thing for me is that a lot of the stuff that the current Administration is doing had their precedents set back when Clinton was running things. There's no reason to believe that merely changing the parties in office will solve anything, as both parties have had their swing at power already and shown the same tendencies. Which reinforces my suspicion that both parties are being run by basically the same political class who are out to line their pockets, its just a matter of who's pockets are going to be lined...so expecting there to be much difference between them is a fools errand.

I will say, it does make a case to eliminate the second-term of the POTUS, which is when a lot of these abuses seem to happen (or merely come to light?). But, with a six-year term and no prospect of re-election, would that Administration feel free to actually solve problems instead of worry about getting elected again, or go for even worse abuses knowing they were free of accountability short of impeachment?

Comments

[erikred.livejournal.com]

Let me see if I understand you:

Clarence Thomas making an unsolicited pass at a subordinate = Bill Clinton taking up an offer of unsolicited oral sex by a subordinate.

Clinton pardoning the scumbag financier ("hours before leaving office") that Scooter Libby had represented for five years for tax evasion and illegal dealings that occurred when Reagan was President = Bush commuting the sentence (a full year and a half before he has to leave office) of a subordinate who was convicted of lying in a case that may eventually show that the President himself was guilty of blowing the cover of an undercover operative.

Let me turn your problem around to a productive outcome: rather than being irritated with the outrage over Libby, why not throw your weight behind impeaching the current batch of crooks so that when the next batch of crooks gets into power, you'll have a precedent to point to? This is the sort of rock-solid moral high ground that would carry the Right forward for decades.

[erikred.livejournal.com]

T, you might also find interesting these articles by John Dean, former counsel to the late Richard Milhouse Nixon; it's hard to imagine an individual less partisan in his criticisms of the President and VP.