Another Obama attack on civil liberties

Obama's DOJ is now appealing a ruling that 3rd country nationals who are transported to Bagram airport in Afghanistan can file habeus corpus.

On June 17, 2008, Obama said without qualification that the prisoners at Guantanomo DID have the right to file habeus corpus peitions.

So why is Bagram different from Guantanomo?

Combine this with the FISA vote, the recent claim of sovereign immunity and state secrets in the telecom eavesdropping case and one can reasonbly conclude that this President doesn't believe in civil liberties or the Bill of Rights.

Add that to Larry Summer's unmitigated determination to bail out his friends, the bankers, at the expense of the taxpayers; the preclusion of a single payer health reform; the apparent dropping of the public health plan option; the refusal to pursue war crimes trials; the failure to end don't ask don't tell; the lack of administration support for card check; and I'm being to regret working and voting for this guy.

Tags: Bagram, civil liberties, Guantanomo, obama (all tags)



no words to describe this diary

its insulting actually.

by sepulvedaj3 2009-04-13 08:22PM | 0 recs
EFF bringing up a lot of issues w/Obama
for example.. ma-doj-worse-than-bush
by architek 2009-04-15 05:02AM | 0 recs
this video was made for you.

by canadian gal 2009-04-13 09:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Weren't you done with this administration

Yup and they keep re-enforcing that judgment. It's really depressing.

by martinlomasney 2009-04-13 09:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Another Obama attack on civil liberties

Hey, the guy says he worked for and voted for Obama.  I say we listen to what he has to say.

Just kidding.

You worked for him and you thought that single payer and war crimes tribunals were on the table?  Neither one of those things are going to happen through voting alone - welcome to the real world.

by Jess81 2009-04-14 02:15AM | 0 recs
Re: Another Obama attack on civil liberties

And how did this diary wind up on the rec list with no recs?

by Jess81 2009-04-14 02:15AM | 0 recs
Re: Another Obama attack on civil liberties

When I click on this later today, I hope to see the message:

"I can't seem to find that...."

by QTG 2009-04-14 02:39AM | 0 recs
Maybe your new home should be Talk Left

You don't look like you are ready for the Confluence...

At least, not yet.

As someone said, if you thought War Crimes Tribunals and Single Payer was on the table, you were watching a different election then we were.

I agree with you on Larry, he is an abomination.

But, they rest of your rant, nah. Things are in play, let them play out, before we abandon Obama and go Puma.

by WashStateBlue 2009-04-14 05:02AM | 0 recs
Do you think

McCain would have been any better on civil liberties? Leaving aside the wildly progressive budget, Ledbetter, DOMA, etc.

It's important to remember that our electoral process doesn't allow us an infinite range of choices. The whole point is to pick the best option, given the alternatives.

If you think McCain was a better alternative, you really should have supported him. If you think Hillary was a better alternative, that choice was no longer available in the it's back to McCain or Obama.

I suspect McCain would have been less Progressive.

by Neef 2009-04-14 07:45AM | 0 recs
Re: Another Obama attack on civil liberties

lulz.  campaign for Kucinich next time.  see where that lands you.  in the interim, try to enjoy the measured and true progress you seem so desperate to ignore.

by fogiv 2009-04-14 12:40PM | 0 recs
The point is if the civil liberty and other

policy choices that Obama is making are indistinguishable from McCain's (and in the areas listed in my diary, so far they are) then it made no difference whether McCain or Obama won. If Thane (he late of Merrill and rumored to have been McCain's choice for Treasury) and Summers pursue the same policy, if Holder pursues the same policies as the Bush DOJ, the election was an irrelevancy.

A prior generation made a decision that elections didn't matter because the policies would basically be the same no matter whether a D or an R was beside the name.  Or as Seinfeld observed in another context, "We're just cheering for laundry."  So far on the issues listed in my original diary, Obama is proving these cynics right.

Other than the competitive rooting interest, which can be entertaining, if this keeps up our two years spent campaigning for Obama would have been better spent on our stamp collection or our bucket list.

by martinlomasney 2009-04-14 06:26PM | 0 recs
The counterargument

is that unless all his policy choices are indistinguishable from McCain's, his election did in fact make a difference. Frankly, he could differ on even a single issue and he would be a better choice. He differs on many issues.

You are arguing that the degree of difference is not 100%, so it's equivalent to 0%. That is an untenable position unless you're a single-issue voter, and he and McCain share a position on your issue.

Again, it's patently obvious that the budget alone differs wildly from what McCain would have proposed. There is also little doubt that the stimulus, under McCain, would have been smaller and composed of tax cuts - if it existed at all.

It is simply an illogical stance to pretend that overlap equals equivalence.

by Neef 2009-04-15 04:02AM | 0 recs
One has to wonder how different the two parties ar

One has to wonder how different the two parties are these days..

Or if we have a democracy in fact and not in fiction.

If Obama campaigns on one position and then in actually represents another.

by architek 2009-04-15 05:05AM | 0 recs
Two or Fewer Parties

I believe you mean in fiction and not fact... but more to the point... you might look for a speech (possibly) made by Noam Chomsky (sp?) recently about thought control in a democracy (I think I snagged it from iTunes but not sure).

by RecoveringRepublican 2009-04-16 12:39AM | 0 recs

Sorry - the above should read "speech (possibly an essay too)..."

by RecoveringRepublican 2009-04-16 12:40AM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads