Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: c.hinton who wrote (237519)	7/23/2007 9:33:29 AM
From: bentway	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

The "office" has no intrinsic respect due. It's the actions of the men HOLDING the office that gains or loses respect. Your litany of names proves this fact. When a man enters the office, he's accorded not respect, but a "honeymoon period", to see what sort of office holder he'll be. After nearly seven years, Bush has answered this question beyond any doubt, the worst holder of the office EVER, and deserves no respect whatsoever - what he deserves is impeachment.

To: c.hinton who wrote (237519)	7/23/2007 12:09:08 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

>> I am not sure your analogy is appropriate...stalin made his "office"...in demeaning the office because of Bush you demean washington,jefferson, lincoln, kennedy ... What I find truly demeaning to Jefferson, Lincoln, etc is to imply somehow GW is in the same ballpark as them. My analogy is apt for this reason: men of power have always demanded respect. It will get tiring for them to keep fighting for it and to keep using their power to smash everyone into line. So they promote a culture of respect for their office, be it the cop down the street, a manager or CEO in a company, just some rich dude, or ultimately the leadership of a country. Your respect for the symbols and leadership is no different than respect for the King and the Aristocrats and their "noble blood" or the Ayatollahs in Iran who claim to be descendant of Mohamed. All that you have done is to replace the genetics with assumption of the role. Whereas I believe that the only respect a man deserves is based on his own conduct. The rich and the powerful deserve no more respect than anyone else. It is their character not what position they hold that should define how much respect we give them.

To: c.hinton who wrote (237519)	7/23/2007 12:34:24 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Respond to of 281500

The Opportunistic Commuter-in-Chief The use and misuse of presidential clemency power by Prof. Marjorie Cohn Global Research, July 6, 2007 Email this article to a friend Print this article When he announced the commutation of Scooter Libby's 30-month sentence, George W. Bush cited the ways Libby has and will suffer: damage to his reputation, the suffering of his wife and children, large fines, and the "long-lasting" consequences of being a convicted felon. When he was governor of Texas , however, Bush showed no compassion for the 152 people whose death sentences he refused to commute. One was Terry Washington, a mentally retarded man executed for murdering a restaurant manager. The jury was never told about Washington 's mental condition. Bush was unmoved. When Bush's Department of Justice recently convinced the Supreme Court to affirm the 33-month sentence of Victor Rita, a decorated war hero who was charged with the same crimes as Libby, Bush expressed no concern for Rita's family or future. And when his attorney general, Alberto Gonzales, argued just last month that the Justice Department would advocate legislation to make federal sentences longer, Bush was unconcerned about how those long prison sentences would impact the family and future of the prisoners. Yet Bush found Scooter Libby's sentence to be "excessive." But instead of reducing the prison sentence of this convicted felon, Bush let him off without a day in jail. By commuting Libby's sentence, Bush signaled his complicity in the obstruction of justice of which Libby was convicted. Bush and Cheney had initiated the smear campaign to discredit and punish Ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife, Valerie Plame, after Wilson publicly debunked the centerpiece of the administration's lies about WMD in Iraq . During Libby's trial, he subpoenaed Cheney and other top Bush officials to support his defense that he was the fall-guy for his superiors. But Libby ultimately backed down and presented almost no defense to the charges. The only logical explanation is that Bush promised Libby he would never see the inside of a prison cell. The quid pro quo: Libby keeps his mouth shut about Bush's and Cheney's involvement in the conspiracy. With the commutation, Bush made good on his promise. Why didn't Bush simply pardon Libby and wipe his record clean? Because then Libby would be precluded from claiming the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination in any future criminal or congressional proceeding, and he would be susceptible to depositions in the Wilson/Plame civil lawsuit. This calculated commutation preserves his appeal rights (and thus his Fifth Amendment claim). It is a continuation of the cover-up. James Madison warned, "if the President be connected, in any suspicious manner, with any person, and there be grounds to believe he will shelter him, the House of Representatives can impeach him; they can remove him if found guilty." Rep. John Conyers Jr. has scheduled a hearing next week to investigate "the use and misuse of presidential clemency power." Responding to the Libby commutation, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Bush "abandoned all sense of fairness when it comes to justice, he has failed to uphold the rule of law, and he has failed to hold his administration accountable." Maybe now they will put impeachment back on the table. Marjorie Cohn is a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and president of the National Lawyers Guild. Her new book, Cowboy Republic: Six Ways the Bush Gang Has Defied the Law, has just been published by PoliPointPress. Marjorie Cohn is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Marjorie Cohn ______________________________________________________________ The above is only one example of why GW deserves no respect whatsoever. He was fully devoid of compassion while a governor. His admin did not apply the same measure to a decorated hero as it did to his buddy. And yet somehow we are supposed to have respect for him because he holds an office that lets him get away with murder and plunder?! Anyway, I understood the point you were making. And I even sympathize with why the original comment rubbed you the wrong way. All I am saying, that rational reflection tells me not afford respect to those who consistently harm the country, no matter what position they hold.