The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner

[NanceGreggs]

I was asked on a thread last night how I felt about the fact that Obama has not yet prosecuted Bush and Cheney for war crimes.

It was an honest question, and one which I think deserves an honest answer – an answer that some will agree with, while others will not. But in keeping with what is meant to be the tenor of this board, I will express my opinion – and take what slings and arrows may be thrown my way.

I want to see Bush, Cheney and the entire gang of torturers rounded up, prosecuted and imprisoned – every last fuckin’ one of them, from the hands-on participants to those who “advised” on how to circumvent the law, prepared and signed the necessary “paperwork”, or kept silent while they knew what was going on.

That being said, I believe it is too soon for this Administration to take up this task. The Republican party is now splintering, and their hold on their once-loyal constituents becomes more tenuous with every passing day.

IMHO, aggressive steps towards going after members of the previous administration at this time would be quickly spun into a Democratic leadership that is focused on seeking revenge rather than focusing on the nation’s other pressing problems – and that spin would be used to rally the troops on the other side of the aisle. This is not a weapon I would readily place in their hands to be used against us – especially in view of the fact that the ass-kissing MSM would take up the “they’re just out for revenge” meme and run with it 24/7. And let’s not fool ourselves on that score; I think we have all learned that lesson well.

And now I will don my asbestos suit …

When I see the phrase, as I have seen many times here, that Obama should do something “even if it affects his chances of re-election”, I just can’t go there. I have my eye on the prize: a Democrat in the White House not for one term, but for decades. I will not stand idly by and watch the Republicans regroup and recapture power, thereby being in a position to undo whatever good the current Administration will have accomplished in four years.

Simply put, I am not willing to settle for winning a battle, if it means losing the war. I am not willing to do what is "right", if it means placing my nation back into the "wrong" hands - hands that will once again torture the innocent, and cover-up their crimes, past and future, in the doing.

We are, IMHO, not in a sprint here – this is a long distance run, and the goals to be achieved will not be reached without a steady, even pace. Crossing the finish line in 2012 and beyond will take perseverance and patience – having hit the halfway point before your competitors means nothing if you allow the other runners to trip you along the way, and put you out of the race completely.

With all of the in-fighting going on right now, I think a lot of us are losing sight of the fact that we are all on the same side, with a common sense of purpose. And we sometimes become so focused on our individual ideas about how to best move forward, we misunderstand each other’s motives – or simply choose to misread or misconstrue those who want to get the same place we do, but get there by way of a different path.

Patience does not mean capitulation; it means holding that arrow in your bow until the most opportune time to release it, certain that it will strike its intended target.

Praising Obama for positive steps taken does not mean being blind to the negatives.

Expressing one’s opinion about the importance of election reform, education reform, job creation or improved healthcare does not mean one is ignoring one topic while speaking out on another. There are so many things to be done, and they are all of importance.

And yes, the prosecution of war criminals is important – and, in my humble opinion, it is absolutely necessary. Those responsible for dragging our once-proud nation into the depths of barbarism must be held accountable, and suffer the consequences of their heinous actions.

But at this juncture, I believe this particular ball is now in our court. We who believe that justice must be done must make our voices heard – loudly, clearly, and as often as possible. Write about it, talk about it; educate your neighbors, your co-workers, your community. Rally those around you to take action; protest, contact your representatives, flood your local newspapers with LTTEs, contribute to organizations that have taken on the challenge of seeing this through to the end.

If the groundswell of support for prosecuting the war criminals who live amongst us comes from the citizenry, a citizenry that refuses to be ignored or go unheard, it cannot be said that a single administration, a lone president, or a political party was acting on its own simply to seek “revenge” for political purpose.

Let’s not forget that Obama said, right from day one, “Yes, WE can.” That means we, the People, working towards what believe to be just and right; not sitting back and waiting for Obama, or any other lone individual, to do it for us.

I want justice, not revenge – but I do keep in mind that the two bear one thing in common: they are both dishes that can be served cold without losing their ability to choke the fuckers who have it coming.

And as long as they do choke on their own just desserts, whether it happens now or later is not uppermost in my mind. As a matter of fact, I am willing to wait it out – it gives me something to look forward to, and I want to savour every minute of it.

Flame away …

[peacefreak]

1. No flames here,

just happy to give the first recommend

[firedupdem]

2. No flames here. I agree 100%. n/t

[Diamonique]

3. Nance gurl you did it again! ^5

[The Wielding Truth]

84. Yep, I agree. This is DU @ it's best!

[underpants]

4. As a long distance runner I can say that it is all about energy

knowing the general course in front of you and where to push it (hills) and how much to keep in the tank for the unforeseen.


I would still like to see them prosecuted but I will understand if they are not.

[HopeOverFear]

5. Wonderful!

[madamesilverspurs]

6. Speaking of flames...

The analogy I use is this: Which do you want first - that your house fire is extinguished or that the firefighters drop that task to chase the arsonists? It's very tempting to want the latter, especially with the miscreants smirking and snarling from the sidelines. But it's comforting to know that our neighbors have made it clear that those individuals are not welcome on their lawns, so to speak, so we do know where to find them when the time is right.

And given the methodical patience with which the current administration achieved the White House, chances are that 'moving forward' involves strengthening our national foundation.

Sidenote -- Isn't it grand that we once again have an 'administration' instead of a 'regime?'




Thanks for yet another great one, Nance!

[NanceGreggs]

8. What a perfect analogy ...

And I totally agree about the "methodical patience" Obama and his team demonstrated time and again.

I, for one, don't believe the Smartest Guy in the Room suddenly got stupid ...

[skepticscott]

86. Sorry, not such a good analogy

The difference is that your house fire will be completely and forever extinguished in a very short time, and you will know exactly what that situation will look like (in any event, police or fire investigators usually chase arsonists, not the guys with the hoses, but we'll leave that for now). The problems that Nance says need to be solved before we can give our attention to prosecuting war criminals will either never be solved or, if they are, other equally pressing problems will take their place. Prosecuting criminals from the Bush administration will never have a significantly higher priority for any Democratic administration or for the American public than it does right now. If you want to argue that these other problems should always take precedence (or that you'd rather have your fire put out, even if it means the arsonists will get off scot-free forever), that's fine, but you can't pretend that waiting for conditions to become more favorable is a reasonable course, because it ain't gonna happen.

[DesertFlower]

7. no flames here. i agree with you. nt

[Blue Gardener]

9. No flames from me

We must have some patience. There is much to do.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

10. My dear Nance...

There are a couple of sentences here that I believe encapsulate your views perfectly:

...this is a long distance run, and the goals to be achieved will not be reached without a steady, even pace.

And:

Patience does not mean capitulation; it means holding that arrow in your bow until the most opportune time to release it, certain that it will strike its intended target.

Perfectly said, my dear Nance!

And I thank you...

K&R

[Political Tiger]

11. I couldn't have said it better!

I believe it's better to take this issue of prosecuting Bush and cronies not from an emotional stance, but from a realistic, sensible stance. Certainly any impulsive move to prosecute Bush, without broad public support, would bring this country to a halt, much like the impeachment of President Clinton did, only probably a hundred times more intense.

Nothing would unite the Republican Party more than an overhasty prosecution of GWB. The right would exploit the issue to no ends. We all saw the absolute hate toward Obama and Democrats during the campaign. Going after W right now would be like that only on steroids.

We could say goodbye to any of the many reforms President Obama hopes to bring about, such as health care reform. Everything else would take a back seat to any impending proceedings toward Dumbya. It would be the only thing talked about. It would rule the headlines like the prosecution of OJ Simpson did, and like the trial of Simpson, it would divide the country, on a much larger scale.

The truth is, the country is not in the mood for it. There are no huge public demonstrations calling for the prosecution of Bush and pals. Most Americans are more worried about today, and the future, than yesterday.

That may not be right and we may not like it, but it is reality. I believe we need to keep in mind the big picture and not let ourselves become fixated on narrow avenues.

In short, your statement "I am not willing to settle for winning a battle, if it means losing the war" sums it up for me!

[NanceGreggs]

12. Well, you may claim that you couldn't have said it better ...

... and yet managed to do exactly that.

Thank you so much for your contribution to this thread. It stands not as a response to the OP, but a very welcome addition thereto.

[Political Tiger]

16. Well thank you very much for your kind words!

I am indeed honored by your generosity!
:fistbump:

[NanceGreggs]

21. Thanks, but it wasn't generosity ...

... it was a recognition of true eloquence, delivered with passion and style.

:fistbump:

[rhett o rick]

36. No you couldn't have said it better. Nance does a pretty good job of saying it.

But since you and her are going to gang up on me, I will accept your views. I don't like it but do understand. Maybe revenge was clouding my judgment. Thanks for being patient. As far as your question re. the prosecution of the former Presidents you mentioned, I honestly don't know. In a perfect life, yes, but life isn't perfect.

[rfranklin]

13. I hear the strains of "As time goes by...." from the piano....

and I believe that as time goes by, memories will fade and the impulse to bring the Bush crime family to the bar will fade, it will be old news, why dig it up they will say. The average American, who barely thought about, who was probably only briefly aware of the torture scandal, will wonder what you are talking about in a year or two. They will be trying to hold onto their house if they haven't lost it already, they will be wondering about how they will keep a job or find one, and they will long for the good old days under Bush when they could refinance and spend.

Sorry, Nance, I think this is a pipe dream.

[tbyg52]

17. >>Sorry, Nance, I think this is a pipe dream.

I think it might be too, but I am hopeful. He is a smart and good-hearted man. And a Constitutional scholar. I continue to push and await events.

[NanceGreggs]

25. I have not set out any dreams here ...

... "pipe dreams" or otherwise.

I have merely asked that those who find this issue of importance, myself included, speak out on it - what happens as a result depends on how much of a priority this is not for some of us, but most of us. And that ultimate decision is in the hands of the citizenry as a whole.

As for people worried about holding on to their homes, or finding and keeping a job in future - I am not about to tell any of them that their priorities are somehow less important than mine.

This goes where it goes - and only time will tell where it all ends up "as time goes by".

[freedom fighter jh]

59. I believe the decision was made . . .

. . . when the U.S. signed on to the Geneva Conventions.

People acting in the name of our country violated a treaty. If we as a nation do not remedy that with prosecution, then we cease to be a party to the treaty.

Not the people's priority? What percentage of the American people have seen the evidence that torture was committed in their name? I'm guessing it's a pretty low number. Part of what a prosecution would accomplish would be to bring things to light, so that the people *would* know what was done in their name, and then could demand the appropriate changes.

Wait until the time is right? Yes, but only if it is clear that there *will* be a right time, not *too* far off.

[denem]

14. "Winning a battle to lose the war" I want to win battles!

and have a sound strategy to win the war.

And I feel continuously frustrated that the tactics advocated by many is to announce your intentions by an artillery barrage, then send an entire division, out of the trenches, over the top, into the waiting banks of machine gun nests. The forces aligned against progress are immense, not to mention a media ready, waiting and more than willing to give a commentary of lies on the course of the battle.

The tactical thinking at DU goes even further back to something like Pickett's Charge. Even the basics of outflanking the enemy are derided as betrayal.

[cliffordu]

15. Noo Flamiage from the peanut gallery. K&R

[gmoney]

18. I think we're still uncovering the extent of the crimes...

...best to prosecute them for everything so that it sticks for sure. A good lawyer will wait until the statute of limitations is almost up before filing.

[Enrique]

19. it's known as keeping one's powder dry

same basic calculation as the congressional dems, but when they do it it's considered cowardice.

[saltpoint]

20. Read with pleasure and appreciation.

There is nothing in many of our local newspapers to match what you contribute to this site.

[annabanana]

22. Just highlighting, if I may. . .

I believe this particular ball is now in our court. We who believe that justice must be done must make our voices heard – loudly, clearly, and as often as possible. Write about it, talk about it; educate your neighbors, your co-workers, your community. Rally those around you to take action; protest, contact your representatives, flood your local newspapers with LTTEs, contribute to organizations that have taken on the challenge of seeing this through to the end.

[genna]

88. tell us how you really feel. the big red underlined font! WoW!

[Bread and Circus]

23. That's where I am. Great original post. K and R.

[MasonJar]

24. What sage advice. However, I disagree, because all Obama has

to do is allow Holder to appoint a Special Prosecutor. Obama is, thereby, freed from involvement. After all Bill Clinton allowed a Special Prosecutor to investigate himself. It is true that that went awry, when a perfectly sensible, competent man was replaced by an ideologue extreme. However, Obama is losing support unnecessarily by not allowing an investigation; the people want it. Bush/ Cheney numbers are in the cellar because the citizens know they both were evildoers. It is embarrassing for other countries to come forward to do what Obama ignores or even perpetrates (as when he goes to court to support indefensible Bush positions) in regard to US war crimes. The world is watching. Are we a nation of laws or just one of political parties and expediencies? Would Washington have put party above what is right? Would Jefferson? Would Madison?

[NanceGreggs]

26. "All Obama has to do ..."

Let's ignore what repercussions there might be as a result, consequences that could put the GOP back-on-track to recapturing power.

"All Obama has to do" is please ALL of the people, ALL of the time - regardless of the fact that what pleasures one may well distance the other.

There is a tightrope being walked here - and ignoring the impact of a possible fall to the ground does not accomplish anything.

[HopeOverFear]

35. there you go nm

[NanceGreggs]

27. Sorry - computer glitch ...

... unintended double post.

[madamesilverspurs]

28. "unintended double post"

Can I borrow that? It just sounds so much classier than "It's cellulite, okay? Now shove over, make some room!"


Sorry. Pain meds...

[rhett o rick]

31. I prefer an olive in my pain med. just sayin. nm

[rhett o rick]

33. Nance tell me if I am wrong. I think what she is saying is that fine, let the public get worked up

by Pres Obama's lack of action for prosecution, until there is a good big ground swell and the Pres has to say, "Oh well, I guess if it's what the people demand, then I better prosecute (wink)." Actually not a bad plan.

[BeFree]

29. That's pretty convincing

If the people do build a case that the media can no longer ignore, the trial and conviction will be a piece of cake. If.

So it is a challenge that you've laid down well. Go out and work for it. Make it a grassroots effort. Methinks that once the euphoria we all feel of having someone in office that we are proud to call our President wears off some, we will make our case. I hope. You never can tell about the American public.

[BeFree]

70. But not good enough

We know that when we let criminals go about their merry ways, they go way out there, as they did.

Enough!

Obama needs to declare war on the criminals that tortured and terrorized the world. He doesn't necessarily have to do battle. Just declare them the "New Axis of Evil" or some other label that is strong enough to let them know he means business, and that will lead the people to act.

So, no more coddling, no more excuses, lets make war on the bastards!

[rucognizant]

83. Oh sure.......

And then be asassinated?
Tick off a list of good things he has already accomplished in 2 months & 2 weeks ............
Today Gates announced the Pentagon budget will cutback. No more obsolete fighter planes out of our pockets
He did a pretty good job of restoring our image in the world this week, etc etc.
Every time Pres. does something to overturn the damage done by bush write it down and memorize the list...you know like the Partridge in a Pear Tree song! You'll feel better.....
Now look at the complexity of the Nurenburg trials, and then tell me how Obama & Biden and a handfull of staff can pull that off smoothly by tomorrow! WIth those Muther rutten Repigs out there snorting and pawing the ground.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Trials
For starters; they had most of the war criminals in custody, having won a war! Secondly the leaders of the ALLied Countries, figured it out together and even then they made a few mistakes. Third a lot of criminals made it to Brazil, and continued to lead good lives with their ill gotten gains.
You make a public announcement like that and the bushs & cheneys and their favorite neocon team would arrive in Paraguay before you could say war criminal"! WHy do you think they bought that land.

[veganlush]

30. I agree with you, but...

..there is going to come a time when turning a blind eye makes you an accomplice-after-the-fact...I hope it doesn't go that far...

[NanceGreggs]

41. Nobody is turning a blind eye here ...

Once again, calling for patience and waiting for the opportune moment to strike is misconstrued as a deliberate failure to acknowledge what is before our eyes.

[Undercurrent]

32. Well said, Nance.

I've been having a running conversation on this subject with my 89 year old dad. He's rather anxious to see the doors slam shut on the Bush criminal gang in the old crowbar hotel. You see, he realizes he may not live long enough to see justice served, and it makes him angry. Especially after he thought he had a part in killing the Fascist beast in WWII, only to find it was not dead, but living right in the heart of our very own government.

I think I've finally convinced him that now is the time to try and save our country from an economic black hole, and if we can manage that we can go after the criminals (either that, or he has just grown tired of hearing me talk.) Anyway, he's not so anxious and angry now, which has helped his blood pressure considerably.

[rhett o rick]

34. Thank you, I needed that. nm

[WyoHiker]

37. There are some legal and practical limits

to how cold you can let that dish of justice get -- memories fade, evidence gets misplaced, legal statutes expire, and the political will wanes.

The investigation must move forward -- now. The commissions and special prosecutors and whatever else is needed have got to get rolling if they are to have any chance producing indictments solid enough to become convictions.

And, yes, no matter how delicately it is handled, this will be a media circus. Is that a bad thing? Probably. (Although, I will enjoy watching MSM trying to spin torture into something that's good for the nation.)

Now to shine the spotlight on the elephant in the room: Is it not just possible, that we, collectively as a country, might actually believe that what they did was justifiable and right -- that "torturing of a few dirty Muslims to save millions of New Yorkers from another, bigger, attack" is a fair trade, that giving up some personal freedoms by allowing surveillance of our personal lives in exchange for a promise of greater safety is a good thing, that legal protections like habeus can be ignored when times are dangerous, that convictions of cronies who helped to support these notions can be nullified, that the aggressive use of military force for the benefit of the nation is, well, good for the nation? Is it not possible that a majority of our fellow citizens actually believe this?

I know there are some do, fully and completely. How depressing and sad it would be to learn that we, as a nation, basically agree with them.

But do we really wanna know? No matter. We're gonna find out -- either by addressing this thing head on and getting solid yes/nos through convictions, or by passively letting it fade into history and thereby providing our tacit approval.

Tacit is the much more expedient route. It doesn't make waves. It keeps the peace. It allows us to concentrate on pressing economic issues. It might help to keep the Dems in power past 2012, or even 2016.

Since Washington gravitates towards expediency, I believe that this is how things will play out. Consequently, we will be no more innocent of the previous administration's crimes than the German people were of Hitler's.

This is an effin' MORAL issue! This question fundamentally asks, "For what purpose and calling does the United States of America exist?" Get this one wrong, and our current economic crises or our prospects for future political control will not amount to a tinker's damn.

And, to repeat, our window of opportunity to get it right is closing rapidly. The way I see it, Ms. Greggs, this cannot wait. It must not wait.

[ekwhite]

61. Good argument

Now make it outside Democratic Underground. How about a letter to your local news media?

[skepticscott]

38. So what do you propose?

You say that you don't want to risk the Republicans regrouping and re-taking power because of a public backlash. But prosecuting them will always carry that risk. You say that you don't want the Democrats to be accused of ignoring other pressing problems that the country faces. But this country will always face problems more pressing than un-prosecuted war criminals. So exactly how long do you propose that we wait, keeping in mind that the longer we wait, the more difficult it will be to prosecute succesfully (as it is for ANY crime) and the more such a prosecution will look like a political stunt by whatever administration initiates it? What will the opportune moment look like?

To say that we should wait for a groundswell of public support for the prosecution of war criminals in the Bush administration is to completely ignore human nature and the political attention span of most American citizens, not to mention the media. If you're being honest with yourself and your audience, you have to acknowledge that there will never be any more public support for such a prosecution than there is right now (and there isn't that much right now), no matter how many passionate letter-writing campaigns you advocate.

Sorry, Nance. Your rhetoric is good, as usual, but your thinking doesn't measure up to your flowery words.

[NanceGreggs]

40. Can I turn that around?

What do you propose?

It is easy to say "I don't agree with your plan" - but if you have no viable alternative, it's just empty rhetoric on your part.

Go after the criminals with less-than-enthusiastic support from a nation, and let the chips fall where they may?

Sorry, but if the chips fall into the laps of the GOP, the crimes of the next Republican administration will, without doubt, surpass those of the previous regime.

[skepticscott]

57. Nice try, Nance

but its your OP. You put it out there, but now it seems that you're unwilling to address any of the points I've made criticizing your argument. It is not a defense of your own position to wonder what mine is, it is simply a deflection.

You seem to be saying that we should hesitate to do the right thing out of fear, even though, in fact, you have no idea what the next Republican administration would look like or what their crimes would be. Even if you did, should we fail to vigorously prosecute any criminal because they might return after their incarceration to commit even worse crimes? No district attorney in the country would concur with that. Should we refuse to pursue and prosecute terrorists who murder American citizens because we're frightened of another terrorist attack in retaliation? Should we have failed to aggressively press the issue of civil rights for blacks, because the country wasn't ready for it, or out of fear of a backlash from racist whites?

[NanceGreggs]

58. Nice try yourself ...

I have said nothing here about hesitating to do what's right out of fear.

If that were my position, why would I close the piece by encouraging people to speak out on this issue, and bring pressure to bear on the powers that be?

Believe me, I love to debate - but I rarely take two opposing positions in the same OP in order to argue with myself.

[skepticscott]

73. You say you don't mind debating

But you refuse to respond to any of my substantive points, the most important of which is that there is no in between here, and that the only sensible positions to argue for are prosecution as soon as possible, regardless of the political climate, or never. As far as this situation is concerned, later is no different than never.

You argue that there is a danger of adverse consequences to our political position if prosecutions go ahead now. Whether you call it afraid, worried, concerned or whatever doesn't really matter; those are just word games. At the bottom, your position is that we have to wait until conditions are more favorable, but you're unable to give us any idea what that will look like, since none of the things that you warn against are likely to go away in our lifetimes. You know that as well as you know your own name.

And if the conditions you feel are necessary never come, are you willing to just shrug your shoulders 15 or 20 years from now and say "Oh, well..guess they got away with it"? How long do you suggest we wait, and how long should we embolden the next generation of Republican criminals by showing them the impunity we grant their mentors out of pure expediency?

[NanceGreggs]

85. I think you've missed a few of the fine points ...

... and that might be attributable to the writer, rather than the reader.

You yourself mentioned it looking like a "political stunt" - exactly, and that is precisely the message that the GOP will spew, 24-7, along with their minions (aka the MSM).

That's why I think a groundswell of public clamoring would take the they're-doing-it-for-political-revenge sword out of the Republicans' hands.

I am not "debating" the point with you only because I have expressed my opinion in the OP - and it is just that, my opinion. Some here agree with it, others vehemently disagree. I thought it was a good topic to spark some discussion - and it seems to have done just that.

[skepticscott]

87. My point was actually

that the longer prosecution is put off, the easier it will be to dismiss it as a political stunt (the question that could be fairly asked then is "If these people are really guilty of such horrible crimes, and if you can prove it, why did you wait until now?"). The fact that the Republicans will try to dismiss it as a stunt now is no argument for waiting.

And yes, I understand that the OP was your opinion, but isn't the object of a good discussion to refine opinions and not just declare them?

[BlooInBloo]

39. But... I want my pony NOW NOW NOW!!!!!

[Number23]

42. "We are, IMHO, not in a sprint here – this is a long distance run"

Words of truth and of genuine wisdom, but they will fall upon many deaf ears here...

[livefreest]

43. oh my, this is simply orgasmic.

i did feel a thrill go up my leg.
Seriously though, i agree with you 100%. asking questions is not a betrayal to progressive movement or moderation. patience is not capitulation. The battle to punish Bush's administration's war-crimes is reversible if we don't win the war once and for all, meaning these republicans in congress have to be convinced that they will never be elected in office again as long as they support the Bush's neo-conservatives' agenda.

[NanceGreggs]

44. Thank you, livefreest ...

... and welcome to the DU conversation.

I see we are fellow Torontonians - which makes us sound more like warriors from a distant planet in the solar system than residents of one of the most beautiful cities on Earth.

:hi:

[livefreest]

46. lol. not so distant given how american politics seem to rear their heads in the Canadian sky.

i think the fact that we can see america from home gives us plenty of authority to speak about american issues

[NanceGreggs]

49. Well, I AM an American citizen ..

I moved to Toronto as an adult, married and with a child in tow.

It took years (uh, okay, decades) to come to love this city - and now I cannot imagine living anywhere else.

But I can't seem to shake my Americanism any more readily than I can lose my Brooklyn accent. Go figyah ...

[ekwhite]

62. Toronto is a nice city

I haven't been there in decades, but I remember it as a nice, clean city full of very polite people. The only drawback is that it has very cold winters. I used to work for a subsidiary of a Canadian corporation headquartered in Toronto, and had to fly there periodically for business meetings. I enjoyed my time there very much.

[NanceGreggs]

63. I grew up on Long Island ...

... and I don't find the winters here to be colder than they were there. However, they do seem to last a lot longer. As a matter of fact, it is snowing here right now - and I was out yesterday without a coat!

[kid a]

45. k & r - nice post!

[bjobotts]

47. At the same time we can't sit back and allow it to be made worse by a cover up

[bjobotts]

48. Keep in mind it's principles and not personalities, expressing what we do or do not want

[bjobotts]

50. regardless of who the president is.We demand an end to obstructionism

[bjobotts]

52. an end to a two tier justice system.An end to greedy oiligarchs buying legislation

[bjobotts]

53. Obama was overwhelmingly elected to do these things and you are being paranoid to think he wouldn't

get re-elected by doing what we elected him to do as long as he remains true to what he said he stands for. When he falters the public that elected him should point it out. Why would you even think that he would lose votes. Just look at the republican field and their ideas. Short of turning into Bush there is little he could do that would not get him reelected...but he should be pressured at every turn so he has a reason to move to the left...otherwise he will only get pressured by the right and will feel forced to move right. Stop being paranoid or apologetic for Obama and just continue to point the way to what you know is right without all the worry that this might get Obama defeated. The right will do everything possible to do that but will fail again and again...because they have no plans or ideas. They are an insult to democracy and have been exposed for their hypocrisy. Obama merely points the direction we the people have decided to move the country. We must show the same strength as the oligarchs who are trying to turn him.

[NanceGreggs]

51. No, we can't ...

... so don't sit back.

[Catamount]

54. We are making our voices heard and I believe the

"groundswell" has already arrived with Obama's election by such a large margin.

I hate to borrow the phrase but--'who could have foreseen' the dire circumstances the last administration left us all in.

We knew so much already,( Iraq, Afghanistan, stolen elections corruption everywhere we looked, torture, Blackwater, etc etc) but then the looming financial fiasco was largely ignored before his election and the crap conveniently hit the fan as soon as the shrubs went out of office.

Our new president was thrown into a pile of garbage higher than the former World Trade Center and yet somehow my life has been happier ever since and I'm sure its the same for all of you, despite of all the crap

But realistically---how can anyone now think about anything much except survival? No jobs, soon no more newspapers, more and more neocons on the radio reaching vast audiences and people who are ignorant and willing to blame the one person in power --while we progressives are losing our voices once more on the public airwaves?

I'm afraid if we wait to long there will be no one left to give a shit about what the shrubs did four, five years down the road.

I agree with you Nance that there is sooooooooo much to do and so little time to do it in--that we have to think everything through in order not to blow it for 2012 and even the mid terms before that.

But we must insist that justice be brought as an example now--while we and especially our president has the means and popularity to bring about the changes we seek.

What if all the stimulus packages don't work--or at least not as fast as we'd like--do you think that will make people think back and blame their sorry state on the war crimes committed years ago? No they'll be blaming Obama for everything as people's memories are short at times like these. I mean there are people already doing that now.

And what about all the local misdeeds by the shrubs--like the terrible injustice done to Governor Don Siegelman, through Karl Rove and his cronies? How much longer we wait to see justice done in that case? He could be going back to jail soon and very few people seem to be aware of that--or care very much.

That's what happens when you let the path to justice wait too long, of course this is all in my humble opinion.

I think you're right that we must continue to pressure the administration and they are totally open to it--I have found.

Writing to them actually yields results, a president who wants to be held accountable is the best possible person we could ever have and it's up to us to lead him where we the people want the country to go.

I urge all you folks not to wait --apply the pressure now and don't stop.

It is the right thing to do and we should not be afraid of the consequences.

Just my opinion of course.

[dcindian]

55. Sometimes you have to do the hard thing.

I think many of us would support your position if the administration would show progress on holding the previous government as responsible as it has held this one. The problem is we see just the opposite. We keep getting the business as usual from them on this regard and often we see a direct disregard for the law in this case. The administration has come right out and said they would not prosecute criminals in the CIA who committed torture.

The administration took no stance on the war crime charge announcements from overseas. Let me ask you how long does it take to make a statement on those announcements? It seems as if the wheels of justice are not turning.

You say the prosecution of war criminals is important I say it is the most important issue today. With a ruling class impervious to the law in such a heinous crime it proves to us that we have no government of the people for the people. And yes if they cannot be held to the law then they are the ruling class. Where is our democracy, our rule of law, our moral standing, our sense of right and of wrong?

Political expediency has no place in justice. Look what it has gotten us so far a nation who's moral backbone has been twisted by plausible deniability. With out the rule of law there can be no assurance of democracy.

[genna]

90. Agreed. the fact that there is a term such as plausible deniability grates.

[Political Heretic]

56. The problem with this Nance, is a misrepresentation of the actual debate:

"Simply put, I am not willing to settle for winning a battle, if it means losing the war. I am not willing to do what is "right", if it means placing my nation back into the "wrong" hands - hands that will once again torture the innocent, and cover-up their crimes, past and future, in the doing."

Well said. And I have said this many times in the past about other issues. However, this is a statement on which everyone agrees.

So the debate isn't about whether we should win the battle and lose the war or not. The debate is over whether or not we can win the war without fighting this battle now. It's about the definition of "winning" the war. It's about whether or not fighting this battle is even at odds with winning the war.

That's the debate.

If it was a debate between people who wanted to win the war and people who were willing to lose it, that would be easy. Just ban the people who want to lose and move on.

But that's not what's going on here...

[ekwhite]

60. Great Post!

You are right. Now is the time to build a groundswell of support for prosecution of the previous administration. We must write letters to the editor, and convince our friends and neighbors of the necessity of prosecution. If the prosecution is seen coming out of the White House only, it will be spun as petty revenge by the MSM.

[elocs]

64. Patience and pragmatism are not much in vogue here at DU.

We want what we want and we want it NOW. Go after Bushco right now and it will be the #1 story 24/7 from now. I think Republicans would love it because it would give them the opportunity to change the focus from other important things and constantly scream about Democratic revenge.

So forget about helping people to get jobs, save their houses, or improved healthcare because Obama and the Democrats will be handcuffed. Democrats would likely lose seats in 2010 and Obama would lose reelection because the accusation that would ring true to millions of Americans who might otherwise have supported Democratic policies would be that Democrats were mostly interested in revenge. It doesn't matter that it would be justice because it would believably be painted as revenge.

Life is not fair and reality is a harsh mistress. For now, Obama is keeping his eye on the ball and is doing what needs to be done. If my neighbor loses his house and job and cannot care for his family because the economy is falling apart it will not comfort him to know that Democrats chose to go after Bushco rather than fix the financial mess. Remember: "It's the economy, stupid!"

[SlingBlade]

69. Good Points :)

[stevenleser]

72. Yes, I'm reminded of a little girl in a movie once who said, I want an Oompa Loompa, NOW!!!!

when I hear some of these folks making all sorts of accusations against Obama.

[Javaman]

65. Thank you Nance!!!

I have been saying just this, (just not as eloquently as you) for a few weeks now.

People just don't get it.

I'm so glad you wrote this! Thanks!

[GeorgeGist]

66. For what it's worth, it's not pragmatic for me to hold you to your principles.

That war you'll have to win yourself.

[LittleGirl]

67. No matches for that flame here.

I'm with you all of the way. Just like Ted Stevens conviction was thrown away, I don't want an indictment of the Bush Administration to be tossed out because it was too quick and didn't follow the proper channels.

I'm in no hurry to rush their arrest even though I think the f*ckers should be tortured just like the ones at Gitmo. I like your analogy of the long distance run...I want the GOP to die...die suckers die. They will not take America down again under my watch. Not if I can help it.

[SlingBlade]

68. 110 % Correct, Thank You NanceGreggs

Your title said it all, "The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner"


Exactly my own feelings, We have fought too long, too hard and come too far to allow this.

"I will not stand idly by and watch the Republicans regroup and recapture power, thereby being in a position to undo whatever good the current Administration will have accomplished in four years.

Simply put, I am not willing to settle for winning a battle, if it means losing the war. I am not willing to do what is "right", if it means placing my nation back into the "wrong" hands - hands that will once again torture the innocent, and cover-up their crimes, past and future, in the doing."

[FourScore]

71. Bravo!!! k/r

[Runcible Spoon]

74. I don't think going after Bush et al would damage Obama's popularity.

DU consistently conflates Obama's popularity with Congress with Obama's popularity with the people. Two different things. If Obama pussyfoots around Congress with no regards for what the PEOPLE want, he loses my respect.

Besides, I care more about justice than I do about Obama's reelection. There's other Dems in the world besides him who can be elected. After Bush, a rock with a (D) would have won.

[genna]

75. Justice delayed is justice denied.

I will use an example I tend to avoid. The law had been set against homosexual conduct (either it is buggery or sodomy in old law) until a court shielded the behavior as a right to privacy. Being outed was not even a consideration, the behavior itself (sexual relations) was enough to get them thrown into jail.

It took the long distance run to discuss the intimate public (oxymoron but the public declaration of an intimacy) relationship outside of the private conduct. Equal rights in every aspect of life has been slow to come to these American citizens.


Anyone can point out to these citizens that they have come a long way from the days of jail sentences, but for those who are not treated equally the distance ahead seems just as far.


Why must those of us wait who believe in the right to a fair trial, the right of an accused person to know the charges against them and to be free to move about unless a court determines the person is a danger to society, and the right to free from neglect and abuse?

How long did it take the Serbs to turn over Milosevic? What about other Pinochet? Is the U.S. and our leaders above human rights? It might make others cringe, but these human rights are God given and above rulers ability to give or take away.


It is not about the next election. Bush would not have been possible if Nixon had faced punishment for his crimes. We stand on the precipice of repeating the same pattern. Will we be able to stand under a new Nixon, a new Bush or a new Republican party in 30 years when this Bush thing blows over?


I don't want to chance a new dawn of an old stain. We don't all have to work on the same projects in order for this to go forward. I think Obama will be fine so long as Eric Holder goes after bad apples in the Justice Department. If the Justice Department only has a small number of good actors, then Eric Holder needs to empty out the Department. I think we will be fine so long as Human Rights groups press forward the case of each detainee and every individual tortured under orders from the Bush administration. I don't think the bad apples should get a light tap on their hands. I think they should stand before the Federal Bar or state bars to tell them why they should gang unto their license.

I don't think every Democrat should be involved in this, but I don't agree that lawyers should press forward in getting a hearing and/or a trial for each person affected. I also think it makes sense for those here and abroad who participated in these prisons (is it black sites?) should also stand before a court and defend their behavior.


No stone should be left uncovered. If there are more areas where Cheney and Rice colluded with the media give a journalist a storyline to write and then use that published account as justification for their argument as was the case with WMDs, then I believe the journalist should that reflected in their professional reputation. Why should we listen to these armchair retired generals when their credentials don't relect their histories?

[FrenchieCat]

76. My sig encapsulates some of your wonderful essay....

as to whom is impatient and therefore less than virteous in a few simple words.

The cynics reign cynically and comment as though a slice of time in the mids yields a conclusion certain. They are wrong. period.

[graywarrior]

77. Sounds reasonable to me

Thanks for spelling all that out. I think the same way you do, NanceGreggs.

[FloridaJudy]

78. Bu$h dumped such an unholy mess in Obama's lap

That our President already has his hands full trying to clean up the worst of it. I, too, want to see the perpetrators of the last administration's crimes hauled off to the Hague in chains, to answer to the world for their misdeeds.

But I'm reminded of a Buddhist parable. When a man has an arrow sticking out of his chest, your first priority should be to get the damned arrow out, stop the bleeding and repair any damage. Later, you can worry about who shot the arrow.

And in the meantime, if the Republicans are waiting in fear for the midnight knock on their door - much as the rest have for the last eight years - I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

[bertman]

79. I understand your position and the reasoning behind it, Nance; however, there is a large

problem with the idea that President Obama should not do anything to energize the Republican base, which you say is splintering. The problem is that it's not the issue of BushCo's guilt or innocence that will keep our new President from being re-elected no matter how hard the MSM try to portray a Special Prosecutor's investigation as a "witch hunt" or "revenge-seeking".

The biggest threat to his re-election is the one that is STILL being ignored by him and by our Democratic leadership. That threat is the same threat that got Bush elected in '00 and re-elected in '04. We know that the voting machine issue is the single biggest threat to our democracy, yet our Democratic leaders act as if they'll contract a deadly rash if they so much as talk about it.

For my money, President Obama could make himself the most popular President in American history simply by following through on his goals of re-energizing the American economy through programs that benefit the planet (green projects) and that bring jobs to America; by pushing through a truly universally-available and affordable health care plan (I won't debate which one I support here); by bringing most of our troops back from Iraq on his timetable; by charting a course in Afghanistan that shows progress in stabilizing that nation and its neighbor, Pakistan; and by continuing to be open and mostly transparent in his agenda. If he does that he will be unbeatable at the polls even if war crimes trials are being held for BushCo. But, of course, being the President most Americans want does not necessarily translate into having that President elected--or re-elected, as the case may be.

Leadership is being willing to take risks that lead to success. Your plan is the typical Democratic response to tough times: be ultra-careful, try not to step on important toes, don't offend anyone, keep the powder dry, don't rock the boat too much. These are times that demand a leader who is willing to stand up for the most important values of our country, especially our rights under the Constitution and our obligations under international treaties that we had lived up to for generations until the Bush Crime Family nullified both. President Obama must stand up for those rights now or he will become overwhelmed with other crises and national and international demands that will push the war crimes to the back burner, then off the stove altogether.

[Fire1]

80. If he does not lobby for support of EFCA he will lose the union

vote for his next term.

[genna]

91. Why is the voting machine problem still a back burner issue?

Especially in all the states that has had problems with them in 2000 or 2004 or the midterms?

[RedCloud]

81. Because Prescott Bush aided the Nazis...

using Jewish concentration camp labor at fucking Auschwitz of all places, little happened to him after his conviction was overturned by a Republican congress. His son who had shady dealings with Iranian terrorists in Paris in Oct, 1980 served as a prelude to the arms for hostages ploy that followed but also blocked Carter's chances for renomination. Bush I was a nobody then and not in power to conduct business with our hostile countries. It was treason and he could have been executed for it.

I say the Bush family will keep fucking us over until they get dealt the sentence they deserve.

Just how many more motherfuckers will they breed and just how much more treason can we tolerate? Don't forget that W did not move on NY until 3 freaking days later 9/11 and then he stole the donations and turned them into a promise not to sue me or you won't get this money I am bullying away from charitable groups. That right there is totally fucked and it IS what he did and nobody except for me is livid about it.

[Hutzpa]

82. You the difference between you and me is,

you have the patience to spell it out while I don't, I believe if folks here who claims to
be Democrats understand the consequences most will not be falling over themselves about
well co-ordinated outrage from the same group of people whose task it is to disrupt and
distort whatever Obama does.

You don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand whats at stake, but if some chose to
believe the idiotic hype them its on their idiotic selves. If today you have not learned a
thing, then you're not meant to learn anything.


"The Vulture is a patience bird" people need to use that approach in life.

[RonHack]

89. I agree, but....

You said:
"IMHO, aggressive steps towards going after members of the previous administration at this time would be quickly spun into a Democrat ic leadership that is focused on seeking revenge rather than focusing on the nation’s other pressing problems – and that spin would be used to rally the troops on the other side of the aisle."

I'm thinking, though:

Every day we DON'T prosecute, or even get the info gathered and ready, is narrowing the opening we have on getting the BushRats, and their accomplices.

Every day passed: tick, tick, tick..........

Every tick, I get more nervous.