here is my poli-poem take on cheney/ bush: Come the day…

COME THE DAY
>
That the government indicts itself under the RICO statutes,
the corrupt practices act that is used to corral an ongoing criminal
conspiracy that has committed an unending series of criminal acts.
>
Both the President and the Vice President do the honorable thing , using their shoe laces.
>
>As do the equivalents of Air-Marshall Goering, taking doses of rat poison,
the most easily obtainable, and bleed to death as they seek to atone for
the monstrosities they have committed. Various others charter a plane to Gitmo
and place themselves in the cells of Camp X-Ray.
>
>Karl Rove kills himself and his wife and his seven children and leaves his
diary to the National Archives, to be made public instant upon being copied.
>
The International Tribunals expresses its gratitude for being spared the
pro formas.
>
With honesty spreading like wildfire, other, older members of the conspiracy
fall in line. Jimmy Carter, Zigbiniev of Afghanistan, Hennery the K. of
Calcutta on the Hudson; they all seen the light - the hell fires waiting
for them: Billy Graham, yes, good old Billy, has convinced them that there is an whole endless eternity of fire and brimstone waiting just for them unless
they fess up, to gain a few years off, maybe some years in limbo for the
bargain that they are making now. Instead of an eternity of torture by some nasty Taliban.

Today the government indicted itself
Under the RICO statutes,
The corrupt practices act that is used to corral an ongoing criminal conspiracy that has committed a series of criminal acts.
Both the President and the Vice President did the honorable thing and hung themselves.

Come the gracious day.

[c] michael roloff 2007
http://www.roloff.freeservers.com

michael

a good link to a sharp analysis of the commutation: below a different take on the commutation than Gay Stolberg in Auntie's paper:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/03/washington/03bush.html


I myself would say that Bush's action calls for a somewhat more skeptical analysis than Stolberg and others provide, under the circumstances of the kind of conspiracy that gets you the noose at a Nuremberg tribunal, or life at the International Criminal court: an unprovoked act of war and conquest, exactly what Hitler did in invading Poland. Mr. Libby, who elicits no feelings of particular animus in me, is in a position to put a lot of people into jail for a very long time under American law, and will receive a fair advance for his book. Bush's action is fairly smart in halving the difference, since Libby's monetary penalty is meaningless under the circumstances, as is his "probation."

http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/editorials/144

How low must the gutter go?: I'm glad Mr. Roloff copyrighted his work since I wouldn't want any other human being on the planet to ever take credit for this spew of disgraceful venom.

It's sad that Crosscut allows a post calling for the death of children. Whether it's intended metaphorically or not (Yes...I know...Goebbels did it), expressing a consummation devoutly to be wished for the death of Karl Rove's family is ugly, hateful, and borders on the sociopathic.

I'm sure Mr. Roloff thinks himself oh so clever and witty; he must be amusing at parties where he impresses his friends with his blood lust. But there are many who find this treacle offensive in the extreme, contentions that it's protected by lofty notions of free speech aside.

Debate policy all you wish. Call into question the character of public leaders if you like, but glorying in fantasies of suicide by hanging and the murder of families sounds like something out of the mind of Idi Amin or Pol Pot. Were Mr. Roloff's homicidal rantings the subject of a school boy's essay, the building would be locked down, the SWAT team called, Roloff himself expelled, and miles of film would be shown at 11:00. If we condemn this behavior in children, why must we tolerate it in an alleged adult?

As an aside, the commutation of Scooter Libby's sentence - its severity making him the Jean Valjean of our time - is an act of justice. For a reasoned analysis of the travesty of the whole affair read Fred Thompson's courageous defense of Libby. And while he may not be the most popular guy in town, there are still some among us who respect Vice President Cheney for the courageous stands he's taken in defense of the safety and freedom of the United States.

Those who know me know that I take two things deadly serious: insults and attacks on those who defend us (I have two sons in the military, with the oldest now slogging through Eastern Afghanistan for a few weeks with elements of the 173rd Airborne) and harm or injury to children. Mr. Roloff goes two for two, and in so doing he's succeeded in raising my ire. Unlike him, however, I'm strictly calling him on what he wrote and how he thinks; I'll leave his punishment up to God. Suffice to say, I wouldn't care to be around when it comes.

The Piper

what a rinky dink: to have one's mother whisper in one's ear the roethke is!

Long way from home...: I'm a Seattle native, but maybe I've been away from home too long. I think everyone has the right to post whatever they feel free to write, but wow, I struggle to come to terms with both the poem above ... I agree that having people hanging themselves and killing their children is extreme...and the condemning letter from Mr. Scott. What surprises me in The Piper's position is simply that I thought it was finally pretty clear to all that Mr. Cheney and his ideological brethren have not defended the nation, rather they have made us all less safe not more safe. In the process they have spent the lives of many brave young people such as Mr. Scott's sons by sending them poorly equipped, sometimes inadequately trained, on military missions that were planned with what can only be understood as criminal negligence, all the while avoiding any possibility of accountability (here on earth), nevermind the transparency that is a founding principle of 'democracy'...If I shared Mr. Scott's worldview as regards moral judgements, I would be sure that it isn't only the political satirists that have something to be afraid of. Nevertheless, I respect both authors, I am just expressing the feeling that from here (currently the Netherlands) and now (I've been away 15 years or so), I was a little shocked to see such raw and emotional anger on the 'pages' of Crosscut. I'm feeling culture shocked and I didn't even come home.

DBremner doth protest too much, methinks!: While I appreciate DBremner joining me in expressing outrage and dismay over Roloff's vile screed, I must take issue with his assumptions.

Despite his protestations to the contrary, it's not, "finally pretty clear to all that Mr. Cheney and his ideological brethren have not defeneded the nation..." With respect, Mr. Bremner, The Piper (Scott is my first name, Piper my avocational appellation, and Piper Scott my moniker) to a great extent is an ideological brethren to Vice President Cheney.

I don't march lock-step with him or President Bush (there weren't enough boots on the ground at the beginning, nor was there a coherent after action strategy to deal with what should have been an obvious insurgency...more criticism if you want it), I still hold to the "Iraq is a just cause" notion.

As for my sons, they're there because they want to be there. My youngest son, Lance Corporal Tom, says, "Dad, there are two types of Marines: those who are in Iraq and those who want to be in Iraq." That he happens to be in Okinawa is beside the point. He goes where he's told to go and shoots at whom he's told to shoot.

My oldest, Staff Sergeant Mark, is in Afghanistan in his capacity as a reporter for Stars and Stripes, a daily newspaper read by the military community. He lobbied long and hard to get this assignment, and he's excited to go. It's his chance to put his own boots (albeit civvy boots since in his capacity as a reporter he has to go sans uniform, sans weapons) on the ground and in action with soldiers he respects. Sure, he could have stayed in Germany safe and secure, but he has too much self-respect and affection for the men and women on the front lines. To tell their story, he must be with them.

It wasn't enough that he spent a year in Baghdad and six-months in Kuwait pre-war, he believes that it's his job to be where the action is, not where it is not. Even before leaving last week for Afghanistan, he was planning a second trip. As both a soldier and a reporter, he's a good man!

Mr. Bremner is free, even from the Netherlands, to critique the war, its strategy, or Vice President Cheney. But he also needs to understand that there are still some among those of us here on the home front who disagree. And there are brave young men and women who not only disagree, but who VOLUNTARILY put their convictions on the line and in action.

And while Roloff's incitement to homicidal violence raised ire in me, my comments were neither raw nor emotionally angry. Quite the contrary. Instead, it appears that Mr. Bremner equates disagreement with conventional wisdom or his point of view with anger. Nope.

Both Roloff and Mr. Bremner are entitled to post what they will subject to Crosscut's standards. But their right to post doesn't exculpate or insulate them from a logical or critical response. Free speech and open and public debate presume freedom for all points of view and the obligation and responsibility to not only say what's on your mind, but also defend what you say. Nobody gets a pass "just 'cause."

As an aside...Mossback took umbrage with something I said several days ago and criticised me most roundly. What saved me from an even more severe riposte was my avocation and, per him, Crosscut's editorial standards. He's entitled to his opinion, and I'm entitled to mine.

The Piper