Wednesday, January 21, 2009

The Obamanation, day 1

I figured I'd try to do some small blog posting on observations about the Obama presidency, at least for the first few days/weeks/months (eg: the "critical time"), in an attempt to document in small part the actions of our "historical but not because of his race" (actual reason for historical-ness un-cited) 44th president.

Executive order: increasing transparency in government. That's a good idea, I think. I mean, I can't think of a much more transparent way to start your administration other than personally lobbying Congress behind closed doors to release the 2nd half of a $700 Billion blank check, of which the first $350 Billion was spent in secret, and the Treasury officials in charge are still either not sure exactly how they wasted all the money, or aren't eager to tell. I'm sure there will be more accountability for the 2nd $350 Billion, surely that was included in the new "transparency and openness" guidelines. Surely our new "belt tightening", "transparent", "work for the people" government wouldn't just request another $350 Billion blank check to spend without oversight, a clear plan, or even stated spending proposals, right? Oh, wait... they already did. I think I'll count that as fantasy "1", reality "0".

Other items of note on day 1:
- Obama plans to close Gitmo (duh, easy call, politically a no-brainer). Good plan, it was not functional as is (as I've said before, and bashed Bush about); you get a solid point for this.
- Obama's acceptance speech included the lofty goal of putting petty squabbles and partisan vendetta's behind the country; good plan, it'll be interesting to see what happens when that runs into the quintessential example of that in the Democrats pursuing charges against Bush's aides for war crimes, and other petty partisan idiocies. It'll be interesting to see if this point goes to fantasy or reality.
- Obama will halt all Bush policy directives pending "review" (read: reversal). No points either way here; this is fairly standard operating procedure for new administrations which are ideologically opposed.

More to come, as more reality of the Obamanation is revealed.


  1. If Bush aides were involved in war crimes, I wouldn't consider that a petty issue.

    I think we will see more accountability regarding stimulus / bailout monies, but we may not like what we see. Among people who support a stimulus, there are many ideas of what to do with all that borrowed money to try to stimulate the economy.

  2. Sure... war crimes, as the world in general understands them, are not a petty issue. For example, if a Bush aide were directly responsible for the slaughter of, say, a million people during a perpetration of genocide, that would be grounds for prosecution. Or if, say, a Bush aide were accused of ordering the rape of thousands of Iraq women and children, that could also be considered a war crime. Anything like that go on, or anybody think anything rising to that level transpired? Yeah, I didn't think so.

    No, what the Democrats are doing is petty partisan politics on a despicable and contemptible level, period. If you expand the definition of "war crimes" to include any acts during a military conflict which you find ideologically distasteful, you diminish the cause of the people who actually suffer from real war crimes, as well as undermine the ability of the military to effectively defend the country.

    My suggestion would be:

    - Allow anyone with standing (eg: someone in Congress, group with enough signatures, etc.) to accuse someone in the US government (past or present) of war crimes, publicly, in writing, before any accusations of such can be made
    - Require a 2/3 majority of Congress to convict someone of war crimes
    - An acquittal implies an automatic conviction of all the accusers for treason, with the appropriate penalties.

    Effect: no more BS petty partisan accusations sullying the victims of real, serious crimes.