Gingrich at his demagogic worst, as usual

In case you missed it a few days ago, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich was on Face the Nation at his demagogic best following the Supreme Court decision last week that detainees at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, have rights under our Constitution.

For a quick refresher, here's a brief report on the Supreme Court ruling, via MSNBC...

Anyway, Gingrich really drank the Kool-Aid with his comments on FTN, specifically this passage:

GINGRICH: I will say, I think the recent Supreme Court decision to turn over to a local district judge decisions of national security and life and death that should be made by the President and the Congress is the most extraordinarily arrogant and destructive decision the Supreme Court has made in it's history.

REID: In it's history?

GINGRICH: In it's history. Worse than Dred Scott, for the following reason: The court has now knowingly stepped in, this morning's newspaper say, smugglers had actually gotten the design of a nuclear weapon, that we now have the evidence that people out there had a nuclear weapon design. And this court is saying that any random district judge, based on whatever their personal caprice is, whatever their personal ideological bias, can intervene with a terrorist in such a way.

Pretty amusing to hear Newt Gingrich talking about ideological bias.

Two things: 1. To say that this decision was worse than the Dred Scott case is quite possibly the dumbest thing to ever come out of this man's mouth. And that's saying something, because there's quite a bonehead buffet to choose from - Gingrich once publicly stated that the US ought to re-institute orphanages for unwanted children.

To compare this decision to arguably the worst decision in the Supreme Court's history - that Congress had no authority to outlaw slavery, is the height of stupidity and ignorance. But, these sorts of statements are the norm with Gingrich. No wonder the man's been married three times - he has the morals of a promiscuous rabbit, and the ethics of a corrupt politician. Oops.

There's lots of fear mongering going around surrounding the Supreme Court decision, but again the question is worth asking, What's so wrong with allowing these criminals a trial by jury?

And 2. I'd much rather have a court decide the merits of a charge against a terrorist than an ideological president with political ulterior motives, be it Democrat or Republican.

It's amazing to me that people like Gingrich think that our judicial system isn't the answer to dealing with terrorists. I much prefer these trials than the secret military tribunals that the Bush administration favors, which includes torture, trials without representation, and a suppression of basic human rights in some cases (and that's just what we know about).

As with so many political issues, Gingrich is on the wrong side of public opinion. But, that's nothing new to him. This guy's more often wrong than right. (Clinton Impeachment, drilling in ANWR, etc.) Even when he's right, he ends up being wrong. I remember the laughable Contract with America in 1994 - term limits were a provision in that contract, and the public wanted it. However, that was conveniently left behind when politicians realized it would end their feeding at the public trough.

Rove & Drudge are at it again

Well, Matt Drudge and Karl Rove are starting up their bullshit already. Must be an election year. Drudge is already parroting Rove's message leading into the primaries and this fall's white-hot Congressional elections.

A few days ago, Drudge's world-famous Website, The Drudge Report, ran this totally attractive picture of Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. Accompanying the picture was a story about how the Democrats are planning on taking over the House. The story droned on about all of the new legislation the Democrats will pass upon assuming power, as well as a planned investigation of President Bush.

First, the Republicans have done the same thing in the past - revealing what they will do when they were the minority party leading into elections. The best example of this is the 1994 Congressional elections, when the GOP released plans for their Contract With America before the election, when they were the minority party. I won't even get into a rant right now about how phoney the contract was - it's on the trashheap of history, right where it should be. But, the Dems revealing their plans is called having a plan, Matt and Karl. Duh. This is the Democratic party (I hope), presenting a cogent and cohesive plan to voters about what they plan to do when and if they assume power in one or both Houses of Congress.

Second, the President and his administration deserve investigating. I don't know about the "I" word - impeachment shouldn't be bandied about and taken lightly. If that's where it leads, fine, but I'm not ready to say that now. Impeachment should be the last possible resort - it shouldn't be used as a political club for partisan purposes around election time to investigate lesser offenses, such as oral sex.

This is vintage Karl Rove - attempting to scare the daylights out of the Republicans so they all come out and vote in order to keep the Democrats from taking power and destroying America. And I full expect the Republicans to come at the Democrats with everything they've got this time, because they really are in danger of losing the House AND Senate. Rove has made a sport out of dividing America, and he will have both guns blazing away. Anyone remember all of the terror alerts we were subjected to in the summer and fall of 2004? Funny how those alerts have disappeared. Maybe they are working on a new color chart. I think they should consult the J.Crew catalog. Imagine that - "Today, the government has announced that we all all safe - today's color is light aloe." Kind of has a nice ring to it, doesn't it? Anyway, I wouldn't at all be surprised if some of those terror alerts return this summer and fall. It certainly would be convenient, wouldn't it?

The script is familiar, but will the ending be the same? I'd like to think not - if the Democrats haven't learned their lesson by now, they never will. The ineptitude of the Republicans, to say nothing of their arrogance and corruption, has handed the Democrats a golden opportunity. If the Dems have any fight in them (for once),not only can they take back part or all of Congress, but they can actually change America for the better and reverse a number of disasterous courses that Bush and the Republican leadership have set us on these past six years: The War in Iraq, the environment, the deficit, stem cell research, abortion, the Supreme Court, the USA PATRIOT Act, border security, actually protecting our borders, etc. The list is long and downright depressing. It will be tough to undo many mistakes - it may take years on some and decades on others, but hopefully the journey will begin anew in November. If, and that's a big IF, the Democrats actually have a backbone this time to fight against Rove and his minions we have a real chance for change.

I for one can't wait to get out there and campaign and kick these corrupt bums out. It all starts here in Pennsylvania - I'm counting the days until Santorum can sit home and wonder how it all came apart. It's going to be a the long, hot summer of political discontent, but it should all be worth it come November.