November 27, 2007

Meet the Only Two Candidates Worse Than Bush and Cheney

Rudy or Hillary: Pick Your Poison

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

In new books writers as disparate as Naomi Wolf and Pat Buchanan conclude that America as we know her is disappearing. Both writers hope, but are not confident, that enough Americans will catch on in time to find the leadership to pull America back from the brink.

If polls are reliable, a majority of Americans are dissatisfied with President Bush and Congress. However, Americans are far short of Wolf and Buchanan's grasp of our peril.

Americans are unable to connect their dissatisfaction with the current political leadership with their choice of new leaders. All polls show that Hillary Clinton is far in the lead for the Democratic presidential nomination and Rudy Giuliani is far in the lead for the Republican nomination These are the only two candidates guaranteed to be worse than Bush/Cheney.

Both Hillary and Rudy are committed to the war. Both refuse to rule out expanding the war to Iran and beyond. Both are totally in the pocket of the Israel Lobby. Indeed, practically every Giuliani advisor is a member of the Lobby. Both defend the police state measures that "protect us from terrorism." And neither gives a hoot for the US Constitution and the civil liberties it guarantees. The Republican Giuliani is likely to overturn the Second Amendment even quicker than the Democrat Hillary.

Both Hillary and Rudy are creatures of ambition, not of principle. Both are one up on Karl Marx. Marx said truth serves class interests. For Hillary and Rudy, truth is what serves their individual interests. They both wear black hats, and the horse they ride is called power.

Yet in November polls, Republicans prefer Giuliani by a margin of five or six to one over Ron Paul, the only principled Republican candidate and a person who without any doubt believes in the Constitution and would protect it.

Democrats prefer Hillary by a margin of twenty to one over Dennis Kucinich, the only member of Congress sufficiently concerned and courageous to introduce impeachment against the notorious war criminal Dick Cheney. By margins as much as forty-four to one, Democrats prefer Hillary to Senator Christopher Dodd, who promises to give America back its Constitution in the first hour of his administration. Former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel does not even register in the polls.

Obviously, the American people haven't a clue. In November 2007 they show a distinct preference for leaders who are even worse than the ones with whom they are currently dissatisfied. What does this tell us about the American people and their commitment to be sufficiently informed for democracy to function?

It tells us that they are not up to the challenge. It is only a matter of time before America succumbs to the plutocracy, against which Warren Buffet recently warned Congress, or the fascist tyranny that Naomi Wolf sees in our future.

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

This Presidential election is surreal: We have two parties avoiding facts (which might be gleaned through an impeachment investigation), and we're being asked -- as voters without access to those non-investigated facts -- to make a choice.

This is absurd. The very problems which might be gleaned in an impeachment investigation are the very issues either of these candidates would have to consider. Without fact finding, the candidates are not confronted before they become President: "What is your plan to provide leadership in these areas?" Without facts, there is no way to challenge, ask questions, or to assess the needed leadership.

Credible Leadership Must Be Linked With Facts

Lack of facts got us into the mess in Iraq. Failed leaders have kept us there. Complicit leaders refuse to ask why or what is to be done about it.

Neither of the candidates -- without an impeachment investigation -- are being forced to publicly comment on what they will support as President to modernize this failed US government. It needs to be harmonized with Geneva, not left to remain out of tune. We need the facts about the impeachable offenses on the table. This will force the candidates to outline their solutions, vision, and way forward.

The time for an impeachment investigation is at hand. The candidates and parties need to clear the way to permit the voters time to assess which candidate, if any, has any plan to provide some leadership. The voters will be able to decide who is best positioned to ensure these impeachable offenses are more timely challenged going forward. Until then, We the People need to challenge all the obstacles to fact finding. On the table is the lawful removal of all obstacles, including the Speaker herself.

Anonymous said...

Lady Broadoak,

For your entertainment, here are some comment threads which appear to defeat the arguments against removing Pelosi:

Summary:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/11/25/mid-day-open-thread-16/#comment-340351

Sample A
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/11/25/mid-day-open-thread-16/#comment-340196

Sample B
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/11/25/mid-day-open-thread-16/#comment-340223

Sample C
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/11/25/mid-day-open-thread-16/#comment-340278

Closing
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/11/25/open-thread-644/#comment-339529

ShareThis