Posted on 01/16/2009 3:30:25 PM PST by re_tail20
Last Sunday President-elect Barack Obama was asked whether he would seek an investigation of possible crimes by the Bush administration. “I don’t believe that anybody is above the law,” he responded, but “we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards.”
I’m sorry, but if we don’t have an inquest into what happened during the Bush years — and nearly everyone has taken Mr. Obama’s remarks to mean that we won’t — this means that those who hold power are indeed above the law because they don’t face any consequences if they abuse their power.
Let’s be clear what we’re talking about here. It’s not just torture and illegal wiretapping, whose perpetrators claim, however implausibly, that they were patriots acting to defend the nation’s security. The fact is that the Bush administration’s abuses extended from environmental policy to voting rights. And most of the abuses involved using the power of government to reward political friends and punish political enemies.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Is Krugman writing about the Bush presidency or the Clinton administration?
Paul Krugman is just another whiney “journaliste.” God help us if this country were to ever be run by the laureates.
ya know what? let them arrest and try the current administration. Maybe people will wake up and do something.
Only if .....Obama proves his citizenship.
So, sue, Paul, sue.
Oh, he must mean the pick for Treas. Secretary who broke the law by not paying taxes.
/s/
A number of Bush haters are having to learn a few fundamental facts: first, that accusation repeated ad infinitum does not constitute evidence, much less proof, and second, that differences in policy are not criminal. And third, that imprisoning political opponents is the hallmark of despotism, and that what goes around, comes around.
The 'evidence' of Bush's alleged 'crimes' only exists in the minds of the Bush-haters like Krugman, who seems to think policy differences deserve criminal charges and prison sentences. How much more useful for propaganda purposes to endlessly accuse and demand trials for Bush and Cheney on specious charges then to actually bring these charges to light and have to see them demolished, losing the Democrats credibility and trust and spoiling the hate-Bush game louts such as Krugman have engaged in for the past eight years.
Krugman is going to eat these words. Obama is just a old fashion Chicago ward heeler and his administration will be the most corrupt in history. It will be funny seeing dolts like Krugman excuse and ignore the crimes of the Obama regime.
And that is exactly what it would be an - Inquisition.
Krugman better be on the lookout for young men in brown shirts.
How do we know he isn’t already? After all, he does associate with the NYT staff. Who knows who else he might be hanging around with?
Time to up the dosages, Krugman.
The American people will not stand for an inquisition, and the creation of a banana republic—and I don’t mean a clothing line—in this country. Obama knows if he tries this, public opinion will turn against him decisively.
Mr. Krugman:
I share your concern about Presidents “being above the law.”
Now will you produce Obama’s birth certificate?
Oh, and an indepedent audit of his campaign finances?
And Illinois Senate legislative records?
Let’s investigate Krugman’s ties to ENRON.
“And most of the abuses involved using the power of government to reward political friends and punish political enemies.”
Krugman hasn’t seen anything yet..wait till Obamachev gets the keys to the kingdom
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.