« "Lone Survivor" a review by Alan Farrell | Main | "American Hustle" a Review by Alan Farrell »

29 January 2014


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Edward Amame

If anybody is walking towards disaster it's our wildly unpopular POS congress. If they try to impeach Obama for the "smaller actions that the White House can perform on its own" (that's the NY Times. The WaPo calls them "modest proposals") they'll get exactly what they deserve. President Hillary Clinton. Expletive here idiots.


Ignoring the fact that America generally engages in "Throw the OTHER bums out, my guy is alright" mentality, its pretty obvious that you've got no problems with Obama ripping up the Constitution as long as its Team Your Guy doing the shredding.

I don't have a lot of good things to say about Bush II, but AFAIK he didn't engage in sky executions against US Citizens and then try to justify the same on US soil because of 'the terraists!'



The well informed and close to them tell me that Bill is opposed to the idea that she should run. pl

Edward Amame

Col Lang

Too bad. I'd love to see all the cranky Tea Party heads explode. Plus I don't think she'd be half bad. Unlike Obama, she's not averse to a good fight.

Edward Amame

Stop being such a drama king, Tyler. Obama's not gonna rip up anything. The guy's taken "cautious" to new heights.


I can't help but wonder whether BHO is taking a page from the playbook of the FDR administration during the Great Depression 1.0?


Drama queen?


That's hilarious coming from you. Weaponizing the IRS, "discretionary" enforcement of immigration laws, and of course the sky assassinations are simply "caution" because Obama has a D next to his name. What a joke.


BHO is a short timer with a short timers attitude. Make noise but tip-toe home. The only honest person in the Capitol last night was that recuperating Army Sgt. who rightfully brought the house down. There is hope.


If Obama had ever been serious about economic inequality (which he never was), he could have simply enforced the law and frog marched a few banksters and war profiteers to Rikers Island. (What a sight to behold!) Nothing has dispirited the middle class and drained their resources like the unrestricted looting of the predator classes.

In addition, coddling wealthy criminals undermines the rule of law, which means that middle class wallets will continue to be drained while Obama fiddles with a bunch of marginally constitutional and ultimately ineffective patches.

Since when does Harvard Law School teach its students to flagrantly disregard the law?


Barry smoke too much dope in high school. He spent his youth in cloud dreaming of creating a utopia, and now he's in a position where he can ignore the rules he never learned to dictate the foundations of a "more perfect union."

He mentioned using executive order for gun control. Wonder what that could be.

There are two PACs for Hillary already. She will run.


The idea that Obama is simply not doing anything is rather misleading. He has been steadily expanding presidential power that his predecessors have already dangerously extended (e.g. electronic surveillance, unaccountable drone attacks, and apparently, a good deal of unaccountable detentions abroad.) He continues to make case for Nixon-like unaccountable presidential power (like his claim of the authority to bypass Congress made on SOTU). If one were to take off the partisan blinders, Obama's claims of increasingly unrestricted presidential power, justified only on the basis of his being "right" (according to the man himself and his fanbase) poses as great a threat to liberty as those by Nixon and Bush II. Yes, he is (supposedly) a liberal and they were conservative (well, supposedly, anyways). But all of them were/are unprincipled and that is the dangerous part.


Pat - If the house tries to impeach Obama, this country will explode and the gulf between the left and the right will become an unbridgeable chasm. There are a lot of things I don't like about Obama but he is a lot better than Bush II. Lots of Presidents have issued Executive Orders and while Obama may have pushed to borders a bit, the hit to the Constitution is just a matter of degree.


That Congress is only unpopular in the aggregate. The re-election rates of incumbents in 2012 was 90%. It's the 'other' congressmen that people are opposed to and not their own.



All you have to do is to watch Obama's body language and facial expressions to know we are pretty much there already. pl


You don't think we're there already?


Remember friends, HSBC doing business with drug cartels and the DEA shipping arms to the Sinaloa Cartel is business as usual and can't be brought up for charges, but D'Souza can be prosecuted for violating some obscure campaign finance law while the IRS MUST know the member list of a small group of conservative Hollywood types.

I think the Soviets at least knew that they didn't live in a 'free' country, while we still labor under that delusion.


Not a chance.
The Republicans got burned big time with Clinton.
Bad news and good news.
Bad news: He really wants to turn America into some massive government welfare state.
Good news: He is incompetent and seems pretty lazy.
Result: Turning America inside-out is too much like work.
More golfing, million dollar vacations and hanging out with "beautiful people."



So, they will just let him turn and burn. pl

Alba Etie

We disagree strongly on some issues , gay marriage equality for example - But we do find agreement broadly with the notion that our Constitution is under direct threat from successive Imperial Presidencies. Perhaps in the end you will be right we will see devolution of These United States , if so it will be largely due to an out of control Executive . You referred back to the Soviets and that era - it makes me nostalgic for Pappy Bush ,in his time he sent a bunch of the Savings and Loans hucksters to jail. Plus Bush Sr had a pretty deep CV as I recall - decorated war time pilot surviving a shoot down , CIA director , Congressman , & Ambassador to China .

Alba Etie

John H
It might just be romantic memory - but it seems to me I recall President Bush Sr sent many of the Savings & Loans hucksters to jail . Including one of his first campaign contributors from the United Savings & Loans right here in Austin Texas . Yes we need some Bankster perp walks - no doubt about that , nothing concentrates the mind like time inside a prison ..



Progressives tend to believe that they have some sort of secular truth, and if the world would only listen - everyone would fall in line. It's the sort of religiosity you'd expect underneath a tent. Once Puritans, always Puritans I suppose.

different clue

And Obama, by contrast, has made a very firm point of refusing even to contemplate such a thing. He and his Holder have worked very firmly and steadily to prevent any investigations which might lead to any prosecutions of financialist fraudulators. The HolderBama Department of Justice Obstruction is determined to run out the clock and the statute of limitations on every fraudster and fraudster-helper in order to impunitize them. When Obama told a gathering of senior banking executives "I am the only thing between you and the pitchforks", he was being entirely sincere.



I can't remember who said that religion is an innate aspect of human nature. Get rid of organized religion and you will have to replace that psychic hole with something--science, hedonism, political activism. The progressives, mostly from the northeast, carry on the moral traditions of the Puritans without realizing it. It's not completely wrong though. especially when I think about the the Progressive Republicans of the early twentieth century, like T.R. Wanting to help the less fortunate is admirable. Carnegie, a ruthless capitalist, did more good for the average person than today's billionaire. It's the fanatical arrogance of the modern progressive, and regressive, I can't tolerate.

Maybe it's because I can't stand romantic poetry, I find the South's romantic attachment to an idealized past just as foolish as the progressives attachment to an idealized future.

Mark Logan

Teddy Roosevelt publicly declared the Senate to be a bunch of "shrill eunuchs" and proceeded with the Panama Canal without asking permission. He got away with that.

IMO this congress has spent whatever ability they had to damage Obama with expressions of disapproval. They have cried wolf too many times. Their base would certainly applaud impeachment, but if they are competing for that they are fools. They get a high crime or misdemeanor they should go for it, but a technical legal argument over constitutionality risks straining the thin ice they have put themselves on. If whatever it is that Obama does is popular, might be smarter to hop on that wagon.

I doubt he will attempt anything grandiose by decree. He should be seeking to highlight the role of the House in this system of government. Few among his "base" seem to be aware of that.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

October 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Blog powered by Typepad