Forum Thread

Why not use the "question" of Bush/Cheney treason to put Republicans on the defensive?

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 5 Posts
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
    Republicans win people over with emotional arguments. Many of their arguments are made in spite of the facts and remain effective. Making emotional arguments, based in fact, is something Dems better learn to do.

    An example is asking Republicans why Bush, Cheney, and friends have not been tried for treason. They have committed treason. Valerie Plame is a clear case. Bush 1 stated that anyone outing an active CIA agent should be convicted of treason and executed. Cheney clearly wanted us to go to war in Iraq for oil and Bush backed him up. Bush admits authorizing water-boarding and America executed Japanese as war criminals for having been convicted of the same act, an act against the Geneva Convention.

    Democrats have not addressed the anti-intellectual fever that drives the Republican base to vote against themselves. There are people afraid because the Republicans made them afraid and made them feel good about being afraid and about supporting the people that made them feel good - people that take harsh measures against the people they have been taught to fear.
    The emotional arguments began with Regan and have not stopped because they have not been countered. I know that no politician will have the courage to call Bush a traitor, even though we all (Republicans too) know he is a traitor. It is asking the question that throws the emotional mud, mud that will stick.

    Furthermore, there is the very real argument that we are supposed to be a nation of laws and not persons. So why hasn't Bush been tried for treason?
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
    Mark Davis raises some valid questions that many of us on the left would like addressed, and certainly now with Republican Rep Darrell Issa threatening to hold seven hearings a week (280 hearings over two years) on the actions and motives of the Obama adminstration these past two years.

    Of course I understand the reason Obama didn't want to "litigate the past." He felt that such actions would end up polarizing the government and result in not getting any important legislation passed. He may be right in that regard. His accomplishments are remarkable even though we have one of the most polarized governments in history.

    On the other hand, we are a nation of laws, and to totally ignore outright treasonable offenses against Bush and Cheney undermines our own democracy.  And what does it tell our young people who voted for hope in 2008 and stayed home in large numbers on November 2nd? When a person is murdered, part of the healing process for family members affected is for justice to be served in the courts. When a president and vice-president commit crimes, those crimes will act as cancer on our society until the healing process begins in a court of law...and not the court of public opinion.  The conservatives are experts in manipulating public opinion and revisionist history making.

    If you reverse the roles, there is no doubt in my mind that Republicans would not only be seeking impeachment but also imprisonment for treason.  The Republican controlled House of Representatives impeached Clinton for lying about his sex life. But somehow a Democratically controlled House won't even investigate Cheney/Bush for lying to the American public about the reasons for taking us to war and openly admitting to committing acts of torture.

    That defines one of the differences between liberals and conservatives.  Liberals value compassion and forgiveness and will equivocate and rationaize why they shouldn't prosecute. Conservatives are single minded, driven by rage and won't hesitate to punish without rationalizing the potential outcome.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
    Bush was given a chance to walk away....
    Now with Deception Points....he has continued to open his mouth with lies and misinformation for the sake of personal gain, at the expense our strategic interests. 

    If he will not shut up....he must be prosecuted:  National security demands it!
    See ChristyR's post:  Do you think Bush should be investigated for torture?

    I lay out my position in blistering, bruising GONZO fashion.
    Warning not all of my fellow Democrats and Liberals will agree with my 'post-Tet Offensive, Clark Clifford move away from the anti-war position'-like views and many of my Palestinian and Muslim friends are alarmed..
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
    Check out Anis Shivani's

    Bush's 'Decision Points' Is A Terrifying Journey Into the Authoritarian Mind

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
    I have read a lot of stuff on W.  But this Shivani is reading my mind.  What a glorious thinker and writer! 
    We are beyond Babylon now!   This should be mandatory reading for the Democrats.  No excuses.   Make your friends read this article and pass it along.   We are the first brigade in the eyes of our forefathers!  Don't let anyone tell you differently!  We are duty bound to oppose this monster!    I should not have to cry on the internet to find Democrats willing to protest outside this guy's fucking house.  There should no peace in Preston Hollow.  No fucking peace.