For the life of me, I just don't understand this "We must look forward" line of thinking.

[Atman]

Rahm just repeated it on "This Week." I thought I was listening to a Republican. EVERY crime is committed in THE PAST. Why don't you and me and everyone with a court case just tell the judge "Your honor, retribution isn't the answer, we must look forward." It is absurd! You PUNISH criminal activity, you don't "look forward" out of fear of upsetting the criminals. I just don't get it.

I am so far very, very disappointed in the new administration. But I hold out hope that the freight train is moving on this one, and it may well become out of Obama's ability to control it.

We can only hope.

.

[Dinger]

1. Well, There's Always Hope

K & R

[HowHasItComeToThis]

12. IF THE BAD GUYS ARE NOT PURSUED, WE ARE GUARANTEED A REPEAT

[Dinger]

22. Sad To Say, It Looks Like That will Be The Case (nt)

[Dinger]

23. Self-Delete (nt)

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. I don't have any special insight into what's really going on, but

If I were in charge, the last thing I would do right now is make any public statement or implication that I intended to prosecute Cheney, et al. What I would do instead is get the CIA's cooperation and very quietly, with no public fanfare, start investigating the big guys. I would not want them to know this; instead I would want them to think they were off the hook so they don't start destroying whatever evidence they haven't destroyed already, and, more importantly, so they don't put pressure on the little fish to shut up or build political support. And I would carry on with the business of repairing the economy and building up political capital. And maybe a few years from now, when all the ducks are in a row the time would be right to get a special prosecutor appointed and go for it.

I don't know that this is what's going on, but Obama is one of the best political chess players I've ever seen and it would be consistent with the way he operates -- he goes for the long run. Of course in the meantime he needs to know that this is what the people want and that he would have political support for it. But I'm not about to conclude that nothing will ever happen.

[Psychic Consortium]

5. You are correct.. nt

[Bluerthanblue]

17. very well said-

thank you for this.

:hi:

[Turbineguy]

3. I think it's still too early.

This is not as simple and straightforward as the Nuremberg Trials. I think in the next few years, more evidence will be revealed and more credible witnesses will come forward.

Patience.

In the end it has to be a justice we can all live with.

[KharmaTrain]

4. It's Tit For Tat...

Methinks too many beltway Democrats still have nightmares of the 90's...the endless investigations...Jim Wright, Dan Rostenkowski and then the Clinton inquisition. Many Democrats at the time refused to renew the Independent Consul statute at the height of the Clinton fiasco and it was widely supported by the rank and file. That was like putting up a big white flag...it all but cemented the "conventional wisdom" of IOKIYAR.

Bottom line is Rahm is the "congressional liason"...responsible for getting President Obama's agenda through both houses. To do this, he needs to "placate" the blue dogs and moderate rushpublicans. There's the fear that by holding the past regime accountable that Democrats are somehow seeking retribution for the Clinton years or that if the Obama administration goes after the last regime, that a future GOOP president will do the same to those in this administration, including Rahm. And sadly, he has a point. We've seen how the GOOP will trump up outrage and charges that have ruined careers and put the Democrats on the defensive.

My hope is President Obama is playing rope-a-dope again. Things we're hearing now aren't set in stone...even if it's "off the table", that's a temporary condition. This President walked into a rat's nest of messes as well as long needed reforms. Is it cynical or just smart politics to put off sticking an eye in the opposition while trying to push forward bigger reforms such as health care and a long laundry list of backlogged Democratic programs. The hope is that in this first year he can achieve many of the needed reforms, then be able to allow investigations to move forward. Electing more progressive and liberal Democrats to the House and Senate in 2010 would also be a help.

[PassingFair]

7. He's not "placating" the Blue Dogs and the moderate "rushpublicans"...

He's implementing and enforcing the
"New Dem" policies that will continue
to feed the military/industrial complex.

[KharmaTrain]

8. All Part & Parcel

Many were blinded with "hope"...a word that has different meanings to different people. It's a great political device. First and foremost, President Obama is a politician, nothing more or less. He's been able to rise by working within the system and playing it to his advantage. And, yes, this includes the military/industrial complex. It's almost every politician...just look at how many (including Progressives and liberals) who will vote for some flag waving measure.

Now I never saw a "New Dem" policy...just speculation. I saw a politician who built up a lot of expectations and reality is setting in.

[PassingFair]

9. I don't think many were "blinded by hope". We honestly choose...

the politician who represented hope
over the one who VOTED FOR THE IWR,
and was an acknowledged DLC leader.

We pulled the lever and hoped for
the best.

What we got was more DLC, but we
were NOT blinded.

[KharmaTrain]

11. Then The Future Job Is Clear...

For many it was electing Democrats...and in purple and red areas. Dr. Dean's 50-state strategy involved many different types...including DLCers and conservatives. The alternative would be more of the same criminality and corruption of the past 8 years had McCain won. Many voted for change...and for some it wasn't fast enough or far enough.

I'm critical of some actions of this administration, but, again...what's the alternative? In some cases it will be finding and electing "better", more Progressive and Liberal Democrats...but to use the DLC as the evil or that President Obama is some manchurian candidate is ignoring the "way of the world" in the beltway and how entreched and difficult it is to change the status quo.

[Individualist]

26. Damn the DLC

Howard Dean described the DLC as "the Republican wing of the Democratic party".
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/politics/20040113-9999_1n13dean.html

"The Democratic Leadership Council's agenda is indistinguishable from the Republican Neoconservative agenda," Dennis Kucinich
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Kucinich_DLC_agenda_undistinguishable_from_Neocon_0813.html

http://rightweb.irc-online.org/rw/3476.html

[HowHasItComeToThis]

13. GOOD EXAMPLES OF HOW THE REPUBS FIGHT

THEY MUST BE EXTERMINATED

[anigbrowl]

25. Ahem

[truth2power]

6. You beat me to it, Atman. I've been fuming about this for the past hour...

How in holy hell can anyone who's been through law school and who's taught Constitutional Law not be embarrassed to promote this nonsense? Rham, of course, is just carrying the President's message.

I think I'm going to steal a car, and when I'm caught and put on trial I'll accuse the Court of engaging in retribution, and furthermore, I've resolved that I won't steal any more cars. Yeah, that'll work!

I have not seen ONE argument, ANYWHERE, that addresses this issue other than to say we need to wait a few years, that Obama probably has some brilliant plan to get these guys after all. BS on stilts, as far as I'm concerned. I GUARANTEE you that in two years these same individuals will want to wait another two or three years, and on and on.

I've said it before; by this way of thinking there never should have been any Nuremberg trials. All the crimes of the Nazis were committed in the past, and without a doubt there were many people who wanted retribution as well as justice. Apparently this is not reason enough to bring people to trial anymore. :mad:

[billyoc]

10. It's a triangulator's pandering, and Rahm's a master of it.

He knows liberals have nowhere else to go, so he can sprint further and further to right with no consequences.

[TahitiNut]

14. Penitence, rehabilitation, and deterrence are "forward-looking" objectives.

:evilgrin:

[Senator]

15. "Look Forward" Is Euphemized "Look Away"

Sorry rationalizers, there is no secret strategery behind it. It has been going on http://talkingimpeachment.com/blog/Hall-of-Shame-Inductee----Barak-Obama.html">for literally years. Driving the Torture Getaway Car is a crime in itself.

And it is a crime worse than the torture itself. Yes, worse -- would you prefer a few criminals or a corrupt, criminal police force?

Torture will remain http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Senator/17">Obama's Steroids Problem unless and until he admits his own complicity/failure and puts American values ahead of DC expediency.

--

[Skittles]

35. B I N G O

Senator nails it :mad:

[LWolf]

16. "We must look forward, because we will not be

accountable for bringing criminals to justice or redressing the abuses of the last 8 years."

[ConcernedCanuk]

18. Doh! - it really means "we don't wanna look back and be responsible for what we've done"

.
.
.

Starts WAY back with the slaughter and genocide of the natives . .

not much has changed . . .

(sigh)

[santamargarita]

19. I don't believe you can move forward until you've reconciled the past

And that means prosecuting the Bush Crime Family!

[cascadiance]

20. So Rahm, do you want to release EVERYONE from prison to "look forward"? OR...

Are you trying to give special protection to Bushco over what American citizens would normally expect? The citizens don't like hearing that you feel only you and your Washington buddies have privileges the rest of us don't!

Take a hint! The natives are restless! REALLY RESTLESS!

[DIKB]

21. I agree

"Looking forward is how you get stabbed in the back."

[Mari333]

24. sorry Rahm, many of us will not forget

and if nothing is done, we wont forget in 2010. or 2012.

[salguine]

27. What makes this so infuriating is that this is not

the garden-variety Washington corrupt bullshit we've all come to expect—this is fucking CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY we're dealing with here.

[anigbrowl]

28. I'll bet that's not the only thing you don't understand

Look, the world is not going to stop turning for us to conduct our self-examination, nor are they nearly as interested in the outcome as some here seem to believe. There are still daily present and future challenges that need to be addressed, from the state of the economy to conduct of the wars inherited by the administration, one well-founded and the other not.

Resolving the torture issue is important...but the administration's primary job is to govern the country. And if you look at other countries which have disgraceful or shameful political episodes (which is almost all of them) you'll find that it's invariably a slow process. The reality is that the more idealistic you are, the greater your disappointment is going to be because you will never get everything you dream of - any more than the right-wingers were ever going to get the instant gratification of us dropping nuclear warheads on Mecca or something.

there will eventually be prosecutions and some kind of resolution, but it will be slow and incomplete. That's the nature of the world. Comparisons with Nuremberg are sophomoric and stupid; while I'm passionately opposed to what the Bush regime did, it is demeaning to those who died in WW2 to draw a direct comparison. The Bush administration were pikers compared to the Nazis and to a lot of other regimes in other countries since. Those who say the US had a fascist government for the last 8 years and suchlike have never actually lived in a truly repressive country. the Bush administration was bad, but frankly the US got off very lightly indeed.

[Atman]

29. You used the made-up word "suchlike," therefore I reject your entire post.

Sorry.

I know it's just me. But my son uses it, too, and I've told him to stop it. It's not a word. I don't know where it comes from, but the current linguistic trend of using "suchlike" makes my stomach turn. "SUCHLIKE?" WTF is suchlike? Your case was specious from the beginning, but when you used "suchlike" I lost all interest in what you have to say.

.

[salguine]

31. But irregardless...

[anigbrowl]

32. It's an English expression (vs American English)

and I'm European, so I'm fond of it.

[spanone]

30. you can delude yourself that we got off lightly....time will tell

[Snazzy]

33. I don't get it either

And wouldn't be spectacularly friggin' amazing if just one time the steno-corps responded by asking: "why?"

Why do we have to look forward instead of back? Where does this particular soundbite-kernel of Washington wishy-washyism come from that instantly causes the media air heads to nod knowingly. Well, "case closed! No one would dare question such obvious wisdom, no sir!"

Cheney and the powers that be ("that were" I'd hope, but that's naive) woke up everyday for the last 36 years or so and said "yeah, but what would Nixon have been like with a really good PR firm." Kind of taking looking back to an psycho obsessive extent, granted, but look what happened to the media and the country as a result. Cheney pretty much ran out of pages from the Nixon playbook to perfect and moved on to his other heroes I figure, like maybe Hitler.

Meanwhile, Democrats are not going to look back, 'k. So history, common law--hell justice--doesn't really matter too much so long as we can reinvent ourselves whenever we happen to win. Isn't that the absurd conclusion of the absurd soundbite. Well it's close.

Yep rear-view mirrors are for wussies (no offense to the wussy community intended).

[dorkulon]

34. You don't get it because it's bullshit.

That is to say, it's precisely the same bullshit line the Bush admin used over and over again when they were dodging accountability. "Mistakes were made, but we need to look forward, not back," etc. etc.

Bullshit is bullshit, regardless of who says it.

[GeorgeGist]

36. Ooops, you looked back ...

and saw "we've been had", by that nice Obama, man.

[Terry in Austin]

37. He's only President

Truth is, being President only goes so far.

Obama's appeal, certainly, is the fact that he's a progressive, but I think his strength lies in his political pragmatism.

As disappointed as we might be with all the things that need doing that he's not doing, the fact is he has to pick his battles very wisely in order to get anything done. That means walking a pretty fine line sometimes, and I believe the "looking forward" narrative is a case in point.

Yeah, it sucks. But to the extent that politics is the "art of the possible," I believe Obama will continue to prove himself a damned fine artist.