"The path of least resistance is the path of a loser" HG Wells

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

Old HG summarizes how I feel.

President Obama has underestimated the numbers of voters who elected him to RESTORE the Rule of Law, not just reflect upon it. His poll numbers will drop as increasing numbers of the disillusioned left, progressives, liberals, whatever you want to call us, start picking "wrong direction" in that all important poll question.

And the sad thing is that the right and their subservient media will claim credit and say that it is due to Americans rejecting their (non-existent)higher taxes and deficits. We will once again be cheated out of responsible national health care, and probably see Social Security and Medicare gutted. President Obama will be defeated for re-election because the margins will be much closer and the "left behinds" will be comfortable pulling off another heist.

No one said it would be easy, but I never expected President Obama to chose the expedient over the right.

[empyreanisles]

1. Most people didn't elect Obama to "restore the rule of law".

They elected a responsible, competent leader who could get things done. And that is what Obama is.

You really think that despite delivering on the big stuff, a pass on prosecutions would doom a 2nd Obama term?

Get real.

Everyone is shocked about the content of the memos. Yet only a minority believes that prosecutions need to be front and center.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

2. There's a lot of law that needs restoring.

Laws governing elections, civil rights, labor laws, financial frauds, illegal wars and conduct therein, etc. You just can't give a pass to all those things. It's not looking backwards. It's restoring confidence in the system. Heck, it's saying that we HAVE a system.

[Bluenorthwest]

3. You play with the truth as apologists do

so tell me, where is your evidence that 'only a minority believes' in prosceuting criminals? What are the exact figures, and from where do they come?
Making stuff up does not make it true. You said it. Show some proof, or make it clear that your are stating an assumption as if it were a fact.

[depakid]

4. "I never expected President Obama to chose the expedient over the right. "

Unfortunately, I did- it's all there in the record- which has reflected a go along to get along attitude throughout his entire career.

[cliffordu]

5. I'm sad you have so little faith and patience.

As is true about many here in fix-it-now or else land.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

7. If not fixed "now" when are we supposed to fix it?

I've been patient for literally years watching miscreants shred our society with impunity.

[cliffordu]

10. Well, you're right, of course he's been in for 90 days and this isn't done yet.

He really is callously indifferent to your priorities, isn't he??

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

24. I didn't set his schedule. He did just make a major decision that reflection

was more important than retribution. Of course, the entire judicial system is reactive and based on retribution which is the penalty when laws are broken.

I doubt that he is as surprised as you are that some,possibly many people are disappointed.

[Fire1]

6. Better yet, where and when dd he campaign to 'prosecute'

war criminals (which he can't do anyway)?

[Dr.Phool]

8. It was in his oath of office.

"To uphold and defend the constitution". You don't have to campaign on it. It goes with the job.

[Fire1]

11. Here we go with the screed about the Constitution. Upholding

the Constitution does not change the fact that 'he' can't prosecute.

[Dr.Phool]

13. It's funny. I always thought we were a nation of laws, not men.

At least that's what they taught me in civics class years ago.

And the Attorney General has the power to prosecute. All he needs is a nod from the President.

[cliffordu]

15. And, really, he doesn't even need that, does he??

[Fire1]

21. Yeah, he does.

[Fire1]

19. Or independent prosecutor or DOJ.

[Political Tiger]

20. Where in the Constitution

does it state the current president is required to police the past president(s)?

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

14. Enforcement is part of Rule of Law

http://www.barackobama.com/2007/08/01/remarks_of_senator_obama_the_w_1.php

As President, I will close Guantanamo, reject the Military Commissions Act, and adhere to the Geneva Conventions.

skip

No more ignoring the law when it is inconvenient. That is not who we are. And it is not what is necessary to defeat the terrorists. The FISA court works. The separation of powers works. Our Constitution works. We will again set an example for the world that the law is not subject to the whims of stubborn rulers, and that justice is not arbitrary.


From his inaugeral address
"Our Founding Fathers, faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience's sake."

[Fire1]

18. From all indications, he is not 'able' to reject the MCA. As others

have alluded to on other threads, there may be more to this than meets the eye.

[Solomon]

9. Let it sink people.

Three months is much too long to wait. Should have been done on January 21st.

[patriotvoice]

12. What is the source of that quotation?

I've read most of H. G. Wells' published works, and I can't recall seeing this quotation. Google was no help: there are only 12 results, most of which are from DU.

On edit:
Grammar.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

22. It is on the HG Wells wiki page as "unsourced"

I just googled the quote, which I had heard, but did not know who to attribute it to. I found a number of famous quote type sites that attributed it to HG Wells. Since it is unsourced, I can't say exactly when he said it or why and how it became attributed to him.

[Dr.Phool]

16. Kick

Just because someone said to let it sink.

:evilgrin: :rofl: :rofl:

[Uncle Joe]

17. In regards to the use of political power, I somewhat disagree with this summary of H.G. Wells quote.

My own belief being the path of least resistance is the path of water and just as water flows toward unification and if enough becoming an irresistible force toward changing the environment so too will President Obama's policies.

Having said that, I don't believe this is always the case, the motivation of the power user or the power user's opponents are key, whether they work to damn up the flood, preventing any change, dredge paths for the water to flow in a more orderly manner of change or just letting it flood toward it's natural course in a more chaotic fashion.

Those resisting change by damning it up will only see their structures crumble if there is enough water accumulation, furthermore if a power user truly wants change and they're facing stiff resistance, they must accept the water from any and all direction toward the singular goal. As the water flows from surrounding hills, people's ideologies come from different directions, hence less ideological restraint, more flow of water.

I believe, allowing the CIA memos regarding torture practices to be opened is the beginning of a downpour. If the Republicans and their corporate media puppets don't have the good sense to recognize those atrocious policies committed and encouraged by the previous administration, as the national toxic waste for which it is, they will be washed away along with it.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

23. Very interesting as always from you.

You are one of my very favorite posters on this site because you have your own thoughtful slant regardless of whether you agree or disagree with someone.

I made my post because I thought that Pres Obama was choosing expediency out of, well, expediency. I like your description of the torture memos as "national toxic waste" which SHOULD wash away those who created it. My fear ,to continue your water analogy, is that the toxic waste isn't washing away but rather accumulating and drowning even those seeking a higher ground. It's polluting our national souls.

Never in my life did I ever expect to live to see the day when people on television and radio would WITHOUT SHAME talk about whether torture had been "worthwhile" or somehow conceivably "legal".

[Uncle Joe]

26. Thanks, Phoebe

You are one of my very favorite posters as well, I love your passion and strong sense of justice.

If it weren't for the growing power and influence of the Internet allowing for the open, free exchange of ideas, I would be more pessimistic regarding our chances of drowning in the toxic waste of torture policies.

However I do believe there will be a point where the American People's logic, reason, sense of justice, faith and compassion overcome those damns of fear and hatred; created by 9/11 only to be magnified by Cheney/Bush and their corporate media apologists.

In short I believe anyone resisting that point will he held in the same contempt as Joe McCarthy, after he took advantage of the people's fear and hatred to wage his witch hunts. Attorney Joseph Welch's accusatory question of "have you no sense of decency sir?" was McCarthy's damn cracking.

In the meantime we need more rain to wash the stench away.

[Life Long Dem]

25. Is it surprising how out of touch they could be?

Maybe not.

[ecstatic]

27. Logic fail. The path of least resistance would be the one where his base

was very pleased with every single thing he did. Instead, he has whiners on the left and right who hate him right now. There's nothing "least resistant" about the things the president is trying to get done right now. And, it's only been 3 months. So you're not seeming very logical right now...