Thread: Scooter Libby, Iraq, and the VA scandals: Why Congress will do nothing.

Of late we have seen some significant issues emerge. First and foremost of these issues is the deplorable conditions at the Walter Reed Hospital and other VA facilities. The secondissue is the conduct of the war in Iraq, and determining the need to remain or to leave. The third issue is the Scooter Libby convictions, and how the case was made to go to war in Iraq in the first place.

IMHO, these are not issues that either side of the congressional aisle particularly want to address in detail. I say this because it would disclose a crucial fact: Congress has not been doing their constitutionally mandated duty- and has not done so for decades.

This is not a matter of either political party being "right" but rather a failure of duty on a monumental scale by BOTH parties. The simple truth is this: Had Congress done their duty, we would not now be in Iraq, the issue of Scooter Libby would be moot, and the VA hospitals would not now be in such deplorable condition. Some will try to spin this into a partisan political issue- but it's larger than that narrow perspective. The question now becomes- will the American public REQUIRE that Congress do their duty, or will we continue to allow these self aggrandizing mountebanks to cover their political posteriors?

Often when you start "requiring" politicians to do their duty martial law is introduced.
And if you look at some of the legislatinion this administration has been sneaking through - it makes precisely that much easier.

Originally Posted by johnlocke

Of late we have seen some significant issues emerge. First and foremost of these issues is the deplorable conditions at the Walter Reed Hospital and other VA facilities. The secondissue is the conduct of the war in Iraq, and determining the need to remain or to leave. The third issue is the Scooter Libby convictions, and how the case was made to go to war in Iraq in the first place.

IMHO, these are not issues that either side of the congressional aisle particularly want to address in detail. I say this because it would disclose a crucial fact: Congress has not been doing their constitutionally mandated duty- and has not done so for decades.

This is not a matter of either political party being "right" but rather a failure of duty on a monumental scale by BOTH parties. The simple truth is this: Had Congress done their duty, we would not now be in Iraq, the issue of Scooter Libby would be moot, and the VA hospitals would not now be in such deplorable condition. Some will try to spin this into a partisan political issue- but it's larger than that narrow perspective. The question now becomes- will the American public REQUIRE that Congress do their duty, or will we continue to allow these self aggrandizing mountebanks to cover their political posteriors?

My prediction is that unfortunately Congress will do nothing and that Scooter Libby will get Pardoned by at least January 19th, 2009.

With regard to we wouldn't be in Iraq if Congress would have done it's job....I think it shows that it's a massive mistake to give ANY President effectively a blank check to wage war as HE sees fit.

Originally Posted by InspectorMorse

Often when you start "requiring" politicians to do their duty martial law is introduced.
And if you look at some of the legislatinion this administration has been sneaking through - it makes precisely that much easier.

I disagree. It doesn't require martial law, all it requires is the political will to institute change, by not voting the party ticket. All it requires is that people become more concerned about the good of society rather than getting their partisan agenda passed. It requires that Americans be versed in civics.

Originally Posted by InspectorMorse

Often when you start "requiring" politicians to do their duty martial law is introduced.
And if you look at some of the legislatinion this administration has been sneaking through - it makes precisely that much easier.

I don't think Martial Law is going to be introduced, there would be uproar and a massive political backlash against whichever party introduced it.

Then again, I can see a frightened and gullible public accepting Martial Law only under the circumstances if God Forbid, there was a HUGE terrorist attack involving say a dirty nuke being detonated in a major city.

Originally Posted by ...of J.Temperance

My prediction is that unfortunately Congress will do nothing and that Scooter Libby will get Pardoned by at least January 19th, 2009.

With regard to we wouldn't be in Iraq if Congress would have done it's job....I think it shows that it's a massive mistake to give ANY President effectively a blank check to wage war as HE sees fit.

Exactly so, and THESE are the issues that we should be raising in the 2008 campaigns. I couldn't care less whether someone sees John McCain as being more "moral" than Mitt Romney, or that Hillary Clinton is more "progressive" than Edwards or Obama. Those issues are all "fluff" and no substance. What we need to DEMAND of our elected officials is an explanation on WHY they haven't been doing their jobs, and why we should believe that they will do them in the future.

Originally Posted by johnlocke

I disagree. It doesn't require martial law, all it requires is the political will to institute change, by not voting the party ticket. All it requires is that people become more concerned about the good of society rather than getting their partisan agenda passed. It requires that Americans be versed in civics.

That could be a tall order though. Many people are primarily concerned about what a politician or political party is going to do for THEM as opposed to what they're going to do for society.

Originally Posted by johnlocke

Exactly so, and THESE are the issues that we should be raising in the 2008 campaigns. I couldn't care less whether someone sees John McCain as being more "moral" than Mitt Romney, or that Hillary Clinton is more "progressive" than Edwards or Obama. Those issues are all "fluff" and no substance. What we need to DEMAND of our elected officials is an explanation on WHY they haven't been doing their jobs, and why we should believe that they will do them in the future.

The media has never really demanded substance from politicians, it's obvious that they much prefer to focus on trivial things, such as who has the nicer hair, who you'd prefer to have a beer with....so yes, fluff over substance.

The public watch all of this stuff, so is it any wonder the public seems to concentrate on the fluff....does the public ever get fed anything of substance? No.

Originally Posted by ...of J.Temperance

I don't think Martial Law is going to be introduced, there would be uproar and a massive political backlash against whichever party introduced it.

Then again, I can see a frightened and gullible public accepting Martial Law only under the circumstances if God Forbid, there was a HUGE terrorist attack involving say a dirty nuke being detonated in a major city.

Which I believe is exactly what the current administration will ensure happens.

Originally Posted by InspectorMorse

Which I believe is exactly what the current administration will ensure happens.

Are you saying that you think that before November 2008, the W Administration are deliberately going to allow another terrorist attack, albeit a more devastating one that possibly involves a dirty nuke being detonated in a major city....as a means of declaring Martial Law in order to cancel the 2008 Presidential Election so that W can remain in office beyond his term?

I myself don't see this occuring, I can't believe that ANYONE is THAT evil....I fundamentally disagree with almost everything the W Administration stands for, but I can't see them deliberately allowing what amounts to mass murder of American citizens in order to further their political survival.

It's funny, I remember prior to the 2000 Presidential Election, many Right-Wingers were saying that President Clinton was going to find some way to declare Martial Law, so that the 2000 Presidential Election wouldn't go ahead and he could remain in office....didn't happen in 2000, won't happen in 2008.