Every single time I think that Obama and his people have done their worst, they come back and go one better. Now our very own democratic AG is telling us that we will probably have to cut back on Miranda warnings given to those who are (they always ARE, they are never accused) terrorists, because well because we are in an existential war with them. Which as I understand it means that we are having some sort of French Indochina or Algerian experience again. No it means that we are in a fight to the death with a couple of hundred of people who for the most part live in tents and caves half a world away who can kill a couple of us an scare the rest of us to death I guess. So in a clever response to this we will destroy our own freedoms before they can do it to us. That will show them.
I read about outrage overload on another blog the other day (forgot which one), but it is where I am. I have decided that will become my catch phrase for awhile. Well perhaps I am actually in Weimar. No oversight for the Fed, no real control over Wall Street, but by god we will pull you in and interrogate you without the right to counsel. 5th Amendment? Oh don’t worry your little head about that, you don’t need it if you are innocent and you don’t deserve it if you are guilty and you are always only guilty if we have you in this room and are interrogating you.
Now we have a wonnerful, wonnerful nominee for the Supreme Court, except no one knows anything about her except maybe Obama. Of course, the usually suspects are more than ready to support anything Obama does. One of my (formerly?) favorite bloggers TBogg takes some time out to excoriate those of us who have doubts.
In particular you should read the comments defending the post and Obama. They have a number of points, the point of the blogger: He's Obama, therefore I Trust Him. Nothing we say will make any difference. I never expected him to be a radical liberal (although no one is arguing he is a radical and any more no one is arguing that he is a liberal, well no one with half a brain).
So anyway, the AG says we've got to cut back on basic rights, and Obama nominates someone who is really gung ho into the concept of expanded executive power. And the usual suspects are more than willing to climb on board and back her sight unseen. Had Obama a history of doing things that were kind of liberal or a history of appointing people who were kind of liberal then trusting him would make a certain about (although not total) sense. He has a history of appointing people and ensuring, continuing, enabling policies that are beloved of the plutocracy and those who serve them.
The incredibly frustrating part of public life discourse right now is the number of people and organizations that I thought were liberal or progressive (not radical, not ultra liberal, whatever that means) just kind of liberal that are unwilling to pressure the prez or his people. Hell I am watching people I thought were truly liberal maybe even ultra liberal (see Sanders, Bernie) cave at pressure from the WH and back most any corporate position Obama wants. No single payer, no Medicare for all, no complete audit of the Fed. In return for backing these positions they turn on those who refuse to be buffaloed and eviscerate them and attack them for being "unreasonable and for demanding purity" few of us really demand.
So to loop back again, I look at us like we are indeed Weimar, or perhaps a house of cards which is simply waiting for the one man (or woman now a days) on horse back to blow us over with a relatively light breath. I suspect it would have happened by now if Palin wasn't beyond belief corrupt and was simply bought off with money rather than power. Lucky Us?