If you want to see how democracy dies when a leader can fire the Supreme Court, read this article on what is going on in Pakistan under Musharraf - judges being barred from going to court unless they pledge "loyalty" to the "President" even when its to give him a Constitutionally-barred third term.
Reading it reminded me of Tom DeLay - and his war on our courts and judges. Fortunately under our system he did not have the power to fire any judges, or the same thing would have happened. That is what makes our system so great - petty politicians have a tough time making it entirely one-sided.
It is in the U.S. interest that Musharraf lose his election to someone like Ms. Bhutto - not that we should interfere with the voter choice, but we should make sure the process is as open as possible. Without it, democracy dies and extremism will be the result. Our President should insist on "No rigged elections" if he is to represent the true values of this democracy.
So what if Bhutto is elected instead of Musharraf? She's a moderate. I can't believe our national reporters go to Pakistan, like the one I saw on Channel 8, and come back with the idea that Musharraf is the only choice. It shows how little our media know about the place, and the consequences of what is going on.
If Tom DeLay was still in power -- with his animosity towards our own judges -- I wonder if he'd be applauding Musharraf's firing of the Pakistan Supreme Court judges (not to mention throwing lawyers in jail for protesting the abuse of the justice system)?
If he did, it would show our leadership is going down the wrong trail. If not, then why hasn't he publicly made a strong statement deploring Musharraf's abuse of Pakistan's judges and democratic system? Why hasn't our leadership done the same?
I wonder how those running to take DeLay's seat in CD22 (now held by Nick Lampson) feel on this vital issue involving our national security? Is it OK to game the system to stay in power? What would YOU do about nuclear Pakistan's slide towards dictatorship?