Obama's legacy: unbridled power
At one point, not long ago--yesterday in fact, I thought Obama's legacy had deteriorated to such a low degree after endorsing the Mad Bomber and pushing to destroy national sovereignty (TPP), that his legacy would be simply "he was the first black president". But deeper thinkers have better understood the evil perpetuated by Obama and his co-dependents (both major political parties).
Although BooHoO simply refined an art form initiated by Dumbya and Darth Cheney, we should give the Chicagoan for Change credit for the mastery of the art form. The usurpation of power and its consolidation is a significant achievement. The coup d'etat begun by the Patriot Act has now been solidifying under OFBP (Our First Black President). Credit must be given to the Supremes who thought money was speech and corporations were people.
Besides what Victor Hanson eloquently demonstrated, several other incidents representing unbridled power have been exposed not commented upon in his essay.
The most recent episodes evinced by James I'm Not A Weasel Comey are failing to tell Congress whether the criminal investigation about Medusa's congressional perjury had begun--or even would begin. Even J. Edgar Hoover might have had trouble with that stunt. Of course we know about the July Surprise that "No Respectable Prosecuter" would recommend indicting HRC for multiple crimes (including treason). Naturally, Lying Loretta Lynch said that her meeting with Slick Willie on a government jet (which as happenstance would have it was parked next to Willie's airplane away from reporters--except one). Talk about collusion to obstruct justice! I am sorry, but when 18 year old kids smoking a joint can get life in prison and a war monger doesn't even get a slap on the wrist--I cannot call their organization anything other than the Department of Injustice.
Barack has hand-picked his successor (if she lives long enough) who, being very skilled in the art of dissembling will complete the collapse of Constitutional government with a compliant, do-nothing (except bicker) Congress.
One has to wonder why there are even two so-called political parties, besides those pesky "Third Parties". It's a bidding war, so obvious! If there was only one major party, then the competing politicians could not wrest as much money from their billionaire buddies--pay would go down. So, never mind the fact the each side of the duopoly blames the other for doing nothing, they will continue to siphon off wealth from their rich employers.
Does it now fail to declare the fact that having 8 Supremes, effectively neuters the high court from ruling on any divisive issue. But there are appellate courts, you might say? Many of the judges are conscientious and honest. True enough but they are powerless to do anything more about the law except as it applies to the jurisdiction of that particular court. National enforcement of a court ruling only occurs if the Supremes rules that such should be the law of the land.
Whichever way this election goes, the lemmings will not see how their failure to vote FOR someone, someone who has their interests at heart, affects them until they are going over the edge of the cliff.
This last statement leads to a deflection: I have great respect for the members of c99 as knowledgable Progressives. The dialogues here are invaluable for their breadth and sophistication. But we lefties are such a pitiful small number--how do we expose more people to our general precepts (I say general because we are all too independent to agree on everything--nor would I expect us to).
The Old Democratic Party of FDR, HST, and even LBJ was supposed to be party of ideals. In fact Republicans of that same era (until Nixon) had ideals. When I mention ideals, I mean policy--not squeezing more and more money out of donors. Sorry I can't remember the reference but an article says that we pick our policy beliefs and candidate preferences based 99% on emotion and 1% on intellect. We then rationalize our choices to be supported by "logic" after we make our emotional choices.
Just think about this a little. How did welfare destruction occur? Two words: Welfare Queens". How did Jeb Bush have his candidacy destroyed, despite all his initial advantage? Two words: "Low Energy". This is not to say elections can be won or lost based on two word phrases. Yet they can easily dislodge libraries of facts and figures from decision making by such basic emotional appeal. This is one of the differences between policy wonk Horrendous Hillary and master salesman Drumpf.
This failure by the left, eschewing emotion in favor of rationality in the promotion of our beliefs will always fail. It's a wonder that Perot or Nader ever got as far as they did--Nader is an intellectual but did run a somewhat emotional campaign. What got Nader his notoriety and fame? A book: "Unsafe at any speed". That title encapsulated the entire ideology of the treatise--which indeed was based on facts. But it's the emotional appeal that worked the magic.