Sunday Morning Headlines
*yawns* Sooooo sleepy. I think I might go back to bed after posting this. In the meantime, have some linkspam!
++ Let's see, I guess we should start out by mentioning Saddam Hussein has been sentenced to death by hanging for crimes against humanity. Good fucking riddance.
++ Democratic win may prod Bush on Iraq.
++ The Red-State revue, ( Read more... )
++ Let's see, I guess we should start out by mentioning Saddam Hussein has been sentenced to death by hanging for crimes against humanity. Good fucking riddance.
++ Democratic win may prod Bush on Iraq.
++ The Red-State revue, ( Read more... )
For us, the breaking point came over the Republicans’ attempt to undermine the fundamental checks and balances that have safeguarded American democracy since its inception. The fact that the White House, House and Senate are all controlled by one party is not a threat to the balance of powers, as long as everyone understands the roles assigned to each by the Constitution. But over the past two years, the White House has made it clear that it claims sweeping powers that go well beyond any acceptable limits. Rather than doing their duty to curb these excesses, the Congressional Republicans have dedicated themselves to removing restraints on the president’s ability to do whatever he wants. To paraphrase Tom DeLay, the Republicans feel you don’t need to have oversight hearings if your party is in control of everything. ...
This election is indeed about George W. Bush - and the Congressional majority’s insistence on protecting him from the consequences of his mistakes and misdeeds. Mr. Bush lost the popular vote in 2000 and proceeded to govern as if he had an enormous mandate. After he actually beat his opponent in 2004, he announced he now had real political capital and intended to spend it. We have seen the results. It is frightening to contemplate the new excesses he could concoct if he woke up next Wednesday and found that his party had maintained its hold on the House and Senate.
Nothing earth-shattering in that it's stuff we already knew... except for the part about Bush winning in 2004 *cough*Ohio*cough*... but it's not some lefty blogger, it's the New York Times. Ok, so part of the country already thinks they're godless anti-American blahbittyblah, but if the Times says it, it enters the political discourse.
All to the good.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment