Monday, December 15, 2008

Obama To Arrive in Washington by Train

He’s taking this whole Lincoln thing a bit far, don’t you think?

President-elect Barack Obama will kick off his inaugural celebration on Jan. 17 — the weekend before his swearing in as the country’s 44th president — by traveling on a train to the nation’s capital.

He and his family will start their daylong journey with an event in Philadelphia before boarding the train and picking up Vice President-elect Joe Biden and his family in Wilmington, Del. The president-elect and his group then will make a stop in Baltimore before making their way to Washington.

(11) Comments
Posted by Owen at 1742 hrs
Politics + Politics - General

  1. Maybe, but lets wait until he suspends Habeas Corpus or starts arresting reporters first. THEN, he’ll be like Lincoln. Or maybe he’ll pull an FDR and threaten news outlets. Oh wait, they already kiss his behind. No worries there.

    Posted by Billiam on December 16, 2008 at 1222 hrs


  2. The current president has already suspended habeas corpus, so that’s taken care of.

    Plus, I don’t understand the Lincoln connection to Philadelphia and Baltimore. I mean, I know Lincoln rode trains and all, seeing as how they were one of the forms of transportation back then, but if we’re talking about taking things a bit too far, I’d say it’s the reach for a daily Obama snark. If he does something stupid, by all means, nail him, but this is quite a reach.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 16, 2008 at 1251 hrs


  3. APC, when did Bush suspend HC for an American citizen? The only example that might come close is Jose’ Pedilla.

    Posted by Billiam on December 17, 2008 at 1544 hrs


  4. Billiam, the Military Commissions Act effectively allows the president to declare anyone, including US citizens, to be enemy combatants, and therefore able to be held indefinitely without charges.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 17, 2008 at 1612 hrs


  5. I understand that. Yet, my question remains. Has he used them. There’s a difference between having a power and using it.

    Posted by Billiam on December 17, 2008 at 1650 hrs


  6. I don’t know if he has or not. I’d argue that its potential use is just as damaging to the rule of law as its actual use. In other words, just the threat that someone can merely say you did something and have you put away with no recourse is corrosive to everything we stand for as a nation. It completely stands on its head the notion that we are a “nation of laws and not of men.” Whether or not he’s used it is immaterial, to my way of thinking. I don’t hate the MCA because George W. Bush would be the one making the determination, although I have to admit he’s one of the last people in the world I’d want making that decision. I hate the MCA because that decision should never be in the hands of a single person. Never. Habeas Corpus. Produce the body. Show me your evidence or let me go.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 17, 2008 at 1713 hrs


  7. Moot point.  The Boumediene decision earlier this year shot down the MCA.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 17, 2008 at 1915 hrs


  8. Not so moot to the people still languishing without having charges filed or evidence presented.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 18, 2008 at 1107 hrs


  9. When are one of your lefty readers going to point out the implications to Global warming by using a train to transport less than 100 people for over 3 days?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 18, 2008 at 1408 hrs


  10. APC, in the potential for misuse, we are certainly in agreeement. As to being a Nation of Laws, we buried that decades ago. Now it’s about nothing more than power and control.

    Posted by Billiam on December 18, 2008 at 2024 hrs


  11. You may be right, Billiam. I remember thinking at the time that it was a good thing that Ford pardoned Nixon, that maybe it was indeed best to to put the whole thing behind us. Now, I’m not so sure.

    When people see the highest officials getting away with crimes, cynicism naturally sets in. If Nixon goes to jail, do we have Iran-Contra, Monicagate, and the various crimes of the Bush administration?

    I’d like to think it’s maybe in the ground, but not covered up yet. Of course, I am, as Molly Ivins used to say, optimistic to the point of idiocy.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 18, 2008 at 2100 hrs


Commenting is not available in this channel entry.