Recently a couple court trials reminded me of why I’m so disenchanted with my government.  Yes, I’m definitely going to vote for President Obama in November, but it will be mostly a vote against the republicans and Mitt Romney.  There are some clear reasons why I believe “The change we can believe in” isn’t quite here yet.  The first case I want to mention is the recent trial of John Edwards that ended in a not guilty verdict on one of the six counts he was charged with and a mistrial on the other five.  To be honest, it wouldn’t surprise me if the Obama Justice Department went after a new trial, but that would just further make the point I’m trying to get across with this post.  As a person who would have supported Edwards, I too was shocked and appalled that he would carry on the affair and still think he might win the Democratic nomination for president or, short of that, get the call for vice president.  In my mind, Edwards deserves the disgrace he’s brought upon himself.  But, to have our Justice Department – in their evidently curious way – include him in their choice of selective prosecutions – well, it’s just as shocking to me.  To be right up front here, I expected an entirely different approach from the Justice Department once Obama took office.  That was one of the main reasons I voted for him.  He’s a constitutional lawyer and I expected him to restore the Justice Department to it’s rightful place as a “beacon” of our nation’s integrity.  When people question the fairness of our legal system, the entire nation is at peril.

The other case that has really bothered me is the trial of Roger Clemons, former ace baseball pitcher (whom, by the way, I was never a fan), for lying in front of congress as to whether or not he took steroids when playing baseball.  My original thought: of course he took steroids – during the period in question steroid use in baseball was rampant.  So, let’s just assume that Clemons lied.  My response:  Is that worth the time of a reported 100 Justice Department lawyers to prove it in a court of law?  Are you kidding me?  Here’s the real rub with this, because I agree you shouldn’t lie anywhere, let alone after you’ve taken an oath to tell the truth and your sitting before a committee of our national congress.  This, again, is an ugly case of selective prosecution.  Clemons is a BASEBALL player, Alberto Gonzales was the Attorney General of the United States and I watched him lie through his teeth REPEATEDLY in front of Congress regarding the political purging of State Attorney Generals by the Bush administration with nary a whimper from our Justice Department.  Why did Gonzales get a “free pass?”  And, there’s plenty more reasons to wonder why our governing legal entity chose Edwards and Clemons to make their stand.

Let’s start with George W Bush, himself.  Evidently, he learned from his father how to violate America’s laws (that he swore to uphold) without accountability.  Honestly, based on what I’ve seen in my lifetime, there must be an unwritten rule among people who assume the role of president to leave “well enough alone.”  I’ve watched President Ford pardon President Nixon (who I now believe was a victim of the right wing of his own party), I watched Ronald Reagan CLEARLY violate laws in the Iran/Contra “affair” and not have to do anything more than say “I can’t remember,” I watched George HW Bush violate laws in the same scandal as Reagan with no accountability – he’s got questions that should be answered that go back to the days of JFK, and then there was GW Bush and Dick Cheney who BOTH on national TV admitted to authorizing TORTURE – waterboarding –  (among other crimes) and, again, not the slightest amount of accountability.  Now all these cases were pre-Obama except for Bush/Cheney and I expected nothing less than detailed investigations of what went on during their “reign.”  However, Barrack Obama was not in office for long before he declared we were going to “look forward instead of back.”  What that evidently meant was there would be no investigations or, where warranted, prosecutions of the Bush administration – much to my dismay (and to the dismay and disgust of millions of Americans and people around the world that want to believe the United States really does believe in the protection of basic human rights – and a legal system which applies EQUALLY to all).  I’ve stated more than once on this site, if you took Obama’s position (looking forward and not back) to all crimes – well, there would be no more prosecutions.  YOU HAVE TO LOOK BACK to hold people accountable for their behavior!  Evidently with Edwards and Clemons (and, make no mistake – with you and me) “looking back” is OK – just not with Bush/Cheney and America’s “elite” class.

I repeatedly pointed out on this blog what the result would be of the above choices of President Obama.  For some reason, he must have thought (or been advised) that investigating the Bush/Cheney administration would be too much of a distraction and would cause a “backlash” of some degree interfering with his planned agenda.  Looking back, it should be easy to see the folly of that kind of thinking.  First of all, the republicans NEVER had any intention of allowing Obama’s agenda to get through congress.  The “backlash” was already “etched in stone.”  (In fact, I’ve said the only way he could have mitigated the “backlash” would have been through the investigations which would have exposed the “real” republicans)  All they (republicans) needed was 41 votes in the Senate – which they had right from day one.  And, for those who think Obama had at one point the 60 votes he needed, they weren’t being realistic about who Joe Lieberman or Ben Nelson or Blanche Lincoln really are.  (Once Teddy Kennedy died, that all became a moot point anyway) The time to go after the REAL republican agenda was the first day President Obama took office.  What we’re seeing now is that President Obama is finding himself in the position of having to do now what he should have done then.  The problem with that is it’s too late to hold Bush/Cheney accountable for the torture, the violations of FISA, the outing of a covert CIA agent, the TARP bailouts, the lying America into the Iraq fiasco, the blunderous policy in Afghanistan, the purging of the Justice department (where new hires had to take the equivalent of a GOP loyalty oath), the deregulation of our financial system, the Housing crisis, and I could go on and on.  What Obama accomplished by “looking forward instead of back” was allowing the republican spin machine to convince a significant portion of America’s voting public that he actually created this MESS – and for the perpetrators to “get away with their crimes!”

It didn’t help the president when he selected Rahm Emmanuel as his chief of staff – the consummate Washington “insider” – and then filled his “inner circle” with Wall Street cronies like Tim Geithner, Larry Summers, and as Attorney General Eric Holder.  For me, Holder has turned out to be the ultimate disappointment.  This particular post obviously is aimed at him along with the president.  I have often wondered what was the real motivation behind their timidity toward republican accountability.  Were they thinking that by being “nice” the republicans would return the “favor” and cooperate legislatively?  Is that what led to the constant “caving” as Obama sought “bipartisanship?”  I have to say that if that was the thinking, they are more naive than me (and, I’m right up their in the “clueless” category).  I predicted within a couple months (the posts are still on the site if you want to check) of Obama’s inauguration that he was risking being a “one term” president by taking this course of action.  Unfortunately, one of my other predictions has already come through, and that was the 2010 disaster at the polls for the democrats.  The American people just don’t want presidents who are indecisive – even if it’s just in appearance.  The progressives didn’t vote for republicans or tea partiers in 2010, it’s just that many didn’t vote at all.  I voted (I always vote :o), but it was easy to predict what was going to happen.  I just don’t understand why President Obama and his advisers couldn’t see this coming.

Now, I have to say that President Obama has proven himself anything but indecisive in many instances – ie  saving the auto industry in America (and, make no mistake about this – his 2012 opponent and the rest of the republican party was willing to throw GM, Chrysler, and what would have been Ford “UNDER THE BUS” in 2009 – that was a bailout that worked and was necessary to save MILLIONS of American blue collar [and white collar] jobs – and, it was orchestrated solely by the Obama administration) –  the decision to FINALLY get Osama bin Laden took more courage than the republicans showed for the 7 years following 9/11 that Bush/Cheney ruled – think of the outcry if the raid that killed bin Laden had failed – that was a decisive decision! (I’m predicting republicans won’t want to talk about this – remember, when Bush/Cheney were in office the famous Bush quote “I don’t know where he is, I really don’t spend that much time on him” regarding the perpetrator of 9/11 said it all to me.  9/11 gave Bush/Cheney and their supporters from the “Project for a New American Century” the reason to invade Iraq and push our defense spending [these people are mostly executives from the defense oriented industries] into the stratosphere)  I believe the president has come to “grips” with this “perception problem” and lately  has been attempting to “reconnect” with his “base” (people like me) with some very populist rhetoric.  The problem he has for 2012 (which I’ve also predicted) is that many of his original supporters don’t trust his rhetoric anymore.

What I’m trying to point out here is how misguided some of the decisions of the Obama administration have been and how they have done nothing positive for Obama or America, but how they are threatening at this point to allow republicans to regain control of our government – and, with the help of Citizens United – this time it could be a stranglehold.  I have to say that those behind the scenes who are controlling the republican agenda are having a clear struggle finding their mouthpieces – GW Bush had difficulty putting a complete sentence together most of the time and I’m not sure if Mitt Romney might not be a step down in that regard.  I can only hope that should Romney prevail in November (the thought makes my stomach queezy) that his incompetence as a political thinker and his clear lack of leadership ability will be so obvious that it will derail the “next” attempt of Karl Rove and people like Grover Norquist to impose their “permanent republican majority” on America.  I’m worried that Citizens United could allow enough money into our political process to actually destroy the foundation of our republic according to the “whims” of America’s corporate elite.  (remember, they count their money in the BILLIONS and they still want MORE)

The problem progressives have with a situation that should be a walkover (ie  1% vs 99%) – is the amount of money that’s going to come down in 2012 (we’re already seeing signs of this – Scott Walker was able to spend close to $100 MILLION to defend himself against the recent recall – think about that, $100 MILLION for a $200 THOUSAND/year job).  How much do you think the so-called Super PACs will spend to defeat Obama?  And, remember; there is virtually NO accountability for these PACs.  We’ll never know who’s infusing the money and there is no requirement for truth to be any part of their message.  I don’t expect Eric Holder to step in and attempt to insure there is NO foreign money involved, that NONE of the PACs are affiliated with a candidate (let’s face it, Obama will have his own “Super PAC”), and that people follow the intent (whatever that is) of the law.  Holder is continuing the Bush/Cheney/Gonzales tradition that the Justice Department is there to hold us “little people” accountable.  (I’ve often wondered, who in our government did Roger Clemons piss off? Why did they choose him? Why is lying about steroids worse than authorizing multiple tortures – some resulting in death? or outing a covert CIA agent? or sending troops to war based on lies?)  Clearly, the Obama/Holder tie to Wall Street has been a detriment to President Obama’s administration politically (it’s turned off massive numbers of “progressives”) and it hasn’t resulted in much positive from Wall Street itself in return – the reports are that Wall Street is SOLIDLY backing (financially) Romney.  Mr. President, do you see what “nice” is getting you?

Here’s where I stand.  Despite my disappointment with President Obama in many ways, as I’ve had to do for the 40+ years I’ve been voting, I’m picking the better of two imperfect options – and, Barrack Obama is such a HUGE upgrade from Mitt Romney that my inner self is telling me the American people are, despite my discussion of “low information voters,” not STUPID enough to go back to the “republican way” four short years after what they did to this nation.  Honestly, if that happens, I think I will go into a state of depression.  It was all I could do to stomach 8 long years of GW Bush, knowing that him and his cronies were ROBBING the American taxpayers of TRILLIONS of dollars that could go to education, infrastructure, good will to the many hungry people around the globe, and a list of things that is too long for this post.  The entire world was upbeat when Obama took office, and it’s like the air has been slowly leaving the balloon since those first erroneous decisions.  And, for some reason, presidents can’t admit mistakes – evidently we’ve convinced ourselves that OUR presidents MUST be perfect – but, based on the recent rhetoric of Obama, I believe his mistakes have finally set in.  I believe he’s FINALLY realizing this political battle is a WAR for the heart and soul of America.  Are we a nation whose strength emanates from the bottom? Or, are we going to continue the fantasy of “Trickle Down” imposed upon us 30+ years ago by Mr. Reagan (who, by the way, would be a liberal by today’s republican standards)?  Mitt Romney is proposing TRILLIONS in additional tax cuts for him and his buddies at the top – are “we the people” stupid enough to say “yes?”  (remember, not only is the health of our economy at stake in 2012, but if we get a couple more Supreme Court justices like John Roberts and Sam Alito, the damage of Obama’s missteps could last for more than a generation!)

The bottom line:  People like me, who consider themselves liberal (progressive) – honestly, it was only about 20 years ago that I would have called myself a “moderate conservative” – had better become active in trying to help President Obama get reelected – plus get a majority in the House and a larger majority in the Senate – or the future for our children and grandchildren will take a huge move in the wrong direction.  I’m sending what little money I have to people like Elizabeth Warren in Massachusetts, Allan Grayson in Florida,  and, in my case, the democratic candidate for governor in my state (Washington).  The republican opponent is a Scott Walker clone – and, the reality is there seems to be no shortage of candidates willing to do the bidding of the Kochs and people like them – “we the people” had better get educated so at the very least we know what we’re voting for (or against).  The Walker types are coming at us in droves and there is a national “plan” the right wing of the republican party has to pull off this “takeover” of our government right down to the state levels – state by state.

I’ll end by saying, as a teacher, EVERY person I work with has a college degree (most have Masters degrees), and based on my informal polling, the number of people who don’t even know what Citizens United is makes me very nervous.  Many of the teachers in my school are watching Fox “news” and believing it’s really news.  To me that is really scary!