The Obama Thread Options

[Homer]

Just imagine if any other country abducted a ship and took prisoners in international waters.

Obama is a sad joke who serves his house masters' that own him.



http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/norther...and/8131851.stm

"Campaigner tells of Israel arrest Veteran Northern Ireland human rights campaigner Mairead Maguire has been speaking about her arrest by Israeli special forces.

Ms Maguire was detained on Tuesday with a group of campaigners, including ex-US congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, onboard a boat bringing aid to Gaza.

"Specially trained Israeli forces, complete with balaclavas and guns, came onboard our ship," she said.

"They took our ship from Gazan waters to Ashdod completely against our will."

[Homer]

"Change we can believe in."



http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/07/03/2616020.htm

"Intervention the 'wrong policy' Ms Joya says she is disappointed in the United States' involvement in Afghanistan. She says her country needs to find its own way to democracy without military intervention.

"Everyone is always talking about what would happen if these troops leave us - a civil war will happen in Afghanistan - but nobody is talking about the civil war of today," she said.

"Unfortunately Australia has followed the wrong policy of the US, which is a mockery of democracy and mockery of the war on terror, and it is quite a war crime that they are doing there.

"We are between two powerful enemies. From the ground, the Taliban and the northern allies are continuing to commit crimes and fascism against women and men in our country.

"From the sky these occupational forces are bombing and killing the civilians."

She says she wants people to stand up to their governments against the "wrong policy" of military intervention in Afghanistan.

"These countries are wasting their money and blood in Afghanistan and I, on behalf on my people, pay my condolences to those people who lost their sons, their loves, their husbands in Afghanistan and have been killed," she said.

"They should raise their voices against the wrong policy of their governments.""

[Homer]

"Yes, we can't."

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/200908...ere_with_obama/

"The American empire has not altered under Barack Obama. It kills as brutally and indiscriminately in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan as it did under George W. Bush. It steals from the U.S. treasury to enrich the corporate elite as rapaciously. It will not give us universal health care, abolish the Bush secrecy laws, end torture or “extraordinary rendition,” restore habeas corpus or halt the warrantless wiretapping and monitoring of citizens. It will not push through significant environmental reform, regulate Wall Street or end our relationship with private contractors that provide mercenary armies to fight our imperial wars and produce useless and costly weapons systems..."

[Homer]

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/09/05-5

"Eight months into it, it now seems pretty clear that the Obama administration is finished...

Obama was complete fool if he ever believed for a moment that his campfire kumbaya act was going to bring the right along behind him. Even s'mores wouldn't have helped. These foaming-at-the-mouth lunatics have completely lost all sense and proportion, and were bound to viscerally hate any president left of Cheney, let alone some black guy in their white house. Meanwhile, centrist voters in this country seem pretty much only to care about taxes and spending, and so he's lost them, too, without the slightest rhetorical fight in his own defense. And he's blown off a solid progressive base by spitting in their eyes at every imaginable opportunity, beginning with the formation of his cabinet, ranging through every policy decision from civil rights to civil liberties to foreign policy to healthcare, and culminating with his choice not to even mobilize his email database in support of his policies..."

[Homer]

Charlie Sheen has written an open letter to Obama.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/twenty-minutes...-president.html

"I recently had the pleasure of sitting down with our 44^th President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, while he was out promoting his health care reform initiative. I requested 30 minutes given the scope and detail of my inquiry; they said I could have 20. Twenty minutes, 1200 seconds, not a lot of time to question the President about one of the most important events in our nation’s history. The following is a transcript of our remarkable discussion..."

[zvs]

In SALON today...

Barack Obama's thinly veiled plans to strip rights from detainees by imprisoning them at Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan instead of Guantanamo is "the biggest sham in American politics," the prominent liberal columnist Glenn Greenwald writes at Salon. The Department of Justice filed court documents Monday that argue that the detainees at Bagram have zero constitutional rights, not even the right to habeas corpus. The move reveals the duplicity in Obama's decision to close Guantanamo and his praise of the 2008 Supreme Court decision that returned certain constitutional rights to Gitmo prisoners, Greenwald says. "Obama apparently sees 'our core values' as nothing more than an absurd shell game," Greenwald writes, "where the U.S. Government can evade the limits of the Constitution by simply moving the locale of its due-process-free detention system." Closing Guantanamo, "only to re-create its core tyrannies in Bagram ... is worse than useless: it's actively misleading."

(from Slate.com aggregator abstract)

I've never, ever felt any joy over a politician, but with Obama, I thought maybe, just maybe there is a chance someone will do a little bit of something. Now I knew full well he wasn't gonna go in, throw politics to the wind and revolutionize America, but I thought he at least had the most integrity I'd seen so far.

I've been enduring the Glenn Beck-influenced tirades of my parents everytime I visit them, trying to counter them with a bit of a voice of reason. At the same time, I've been watching the health care promises my country so desperately needs being whittled, and whittled, and whittled. How many decades are we going to spend convincing ourselves that insurance companies can be made to be responsible?

Nonetheless, when Obama won the election, I rejoiced. I rejoiced because I thought, at the very least, my pet cause, my heart's true desire - the unquestioned, uncompromised liberty of mankind - would finally be upheld, and that the years of disgusting and illegal oppression instituted on Americans and foreigners alike by George W. Bush were finally over.

One of Obama's first actions was to close Guantanamo. "He's the real thing," I said to myself. "He's no joke. FINALLY."

And now this. Well, the Harvard Constitutional Law professor, the Incarnation of Hope Itself, is just another f****** blind American idiot who doesn't believe in justice, freedom, rights or humanity. And certainly not the law or the constitution.

I've had it.

[zvs]

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/200...ment/index.html

It is true that the federal government embraces redistributive policies and that middle-class income is seized in order that "someone else benefits." But so obviously, that "someone else" who is benefiting is not the poor and lower classes -- who continue to get poorer as the numbers living below the poverty line expand and the rich-poor gap grows in the U.S. to unprecedented proportions. The "someone else" that is benefiting from Washington policies are -- as usual -- the super-rich, the tiny number of huge corporations which literally own and control the Government.

[amberline]

I vote Other because I'm accross the Atlantic and am re: Mr Obama. Perhaps I shouldn't be -- since the world seems to be getting smaller -- but right now I can't be bothered by what I have absolutely no influence over.
(Was this las sentence good English?)

[zvs]

(Was this las sentence good English?)

Sure! Might raise the eyebrow of an appellate judge or particularly picky college professor due to that preposition at the end, but it's perfectly in line with common speech.

[Sita]

I've never, ever felt any joy over a politician, but with Obama, I thought maybe, just maybe there is a chance someone will do a little bit of something. Now I knew full well he wasn't gonna go in, throw politics to the wind and revolutionize America, but I thought he at least had the most integrity I'd seen so far.
[snip]
I've had it.

I knew you'd all be let down. I voted for Cynthia McKinney, a black woman socialist on the Green Party ticket. I knew she'd not have a chance, but wanted to register that I want REAL reforms. Bring on the revolution.

[Kalisurfer]

The news of the Bhagram prison camp is a letdown, but overall, I think President Obama is doing a lot better in setting an agenda that takes us away from the Bush/Cheney policies of the previous 8 years. I have to wonder just what one person can do in the position of the Presidency, when an active agenda started immediately after his election to discredit, marginalize and put brakes on the high support he received from Independents and the working middle class. The Conservative right, the Republican Party in league with Fox TV, conservative radio and neocon print editors (Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, Will, Krauthammer), started a campaign of disinformation filled with scare tactics to counter any proposal or idea offered by the Obama administration or the Democratic party.

Backed by the economic meltdown and the lose of jobs, the Right has whipped up its base of followers and the negative approach has seeped into the mainstream of belief. The blame for everything wrong in society is now put on Obama, and any attempt by his behalf to solve problems is called socialism and communism, for now any government involvement in anything is considered a bad thing, though in the Bush/Cheney years, it was considered legit and patriotic to support.

Obama is trying to play the middle ground, losing support from the left of his party and though he has asked for partisan involvement, he gets no support or votes from Republicans who vote as a block to negate anything positive attributed to his agenda, hoping the political losses and continuing deterioration of jobs and economic uncertainty will mean they take back political power in the next set of elections.

It has gotten to the point that even a talk by the President to School Children to study hard and stay in school is considered a socialist indoctrination of kids!

Here is a list of accomplishments in Obama’s first 6 months.

1. Passing the "largest" economic stimulus bill in American history.

2. Ordering the closing of Guantanamo Bay military detention facility and abolishing "enhanced interrogation techniques."

3. Setting a fixed timetable for withdrawing U.S. combat forces from Iraq.

4. "Returning science to its rightful place" by lifting the Bush restrictions on federally funded embryonic stem cell research.

5. Signing laws to expand children's health insurance (financed by a 61-cent per pack increase in the federal cigarette tax the adviser did not tout).

6. Signing a law meant to improve the ability of women who allege pay discrimination to sue their employer.

7. Diminishing the role of lobbyists in the White House, though not ending it like I and many others would love to see.

8. "Forge a meaningful statement from the United Nations" criticizing North Korea's launch of a ballistic missile.

9. Lifting travel and remittance restrictions for Cuban Americans who seek to travel more frequently to the island and send more US currency to their immediate family.

I do think that Barack Obama is leading in a rational intelligent manner, giving one the feeling that finally adults are in charge instead of the unbelievable immature characters of the last 8 years. It seems like huge challenges are finally being met head on with large amounts of moderation, honesty, and candor, containing efforts that that seem beyond politics and go to the very structure of how the country is run and operated. This is scaring the Right and the corporations that have its monetary tentacles in the pockets of both parties, which is why the witch-hunt to discredit him seems so big from the Right at the moment, on top of being heavily criticized by the Left too. I think he is fighting the haunting memory of the reactionary decades from Reagan to Bush II, when every form of unreason turned the United States into a surreal circus of corporate sponsorship that declared war on working class people, not to mention the self-indulgent view of itself as the last remaining world superpower.

Obama is not a radical, he is still beholden to many groups backed by big money, for at the moment, it’s the only way to become an elected leader. But, he is trying to make change in environmental, economic and social policy that was neglected for 8 years. Just look at Health Care, he originally wanted a Public Option, something his own party has not even considered, so how in the hell can one guy without the support of his own party make the world change in only 6 months, especially with the enormous challenges and problems he was left to address and fix?

[Sita]

Obama is not a radical, he is still beholden to many groups backed by big money, for at the moment, it’s the only way to become an elected leader.
[snip]
how in the hell can one guy without the support of his own party make the world change in only 6 months, especially with the enormous challenges and problems he was left to address and fix?

I hear your hope and pain, and you've rationally presented how the right is pulling out the stops to block him. I just hope he can do "enough" so that there isn't a reactionary swing to the right. That's my worry.

[Kalisurfer]

I hear your hope and pain, and you've rationally presented how the right is pulling out the stops to block him. I just hope he can do "enough" so that there isn't a reactionary swing to the right. That's my worry.

Sita, I like your combining of the words "Hope" and "Pain" in expressing what it may feel like to still support Obama.

Perhaps it's time for a new Obama Poster to signify these words?

[zvs]

I agree, Kali, that the Glenn Beck-inspired movements currently happening in America are saddening and ridiculous.

Seeing throngs and throngs of people protesting their own right to have affordable health care is absolutely astounding, and could not happen if not for people like Beck playing off the most exaggerated, reactionary sentiments and fears. (Declaration of interest: I really hate Glenn Beck.) Matter of fact, Beck's "9/12 Movement" was inspired by W. Cleon Sousken, one of the progenitors of unfounded anti-communist/socialist rabble-rousing.

I truly don't think a lot of these people would feel the way they do if they weren't manipulated by people like that. What really strikes me as bizarre is that these people on the right want to create such horrible fears about "big government" - well then, where is the protest when the government attempts to pass legislation regarding personal matters? Why don't these "don't tread on me" people get absolutely infuriated by the mere suggestion that homosexuals would not be allowed to marry? The anger only comes when it's not in conflict with other prejudices; in fact, the anger is nothing more than an extension of those prejudices.

We may observe that these grassroots citizen uprisings did not occur during the Bush years. While Bush was busy expanding government power to a level previously unfathomed in the USA, everybody stayed home and didn't worry about it. Now that a "liberal" is in office, suddenly he is an evil tyrant. They happened with Clinton, too - just not with Bush, who was the most dangerous of them all. It's all about blind loyalty and prejudices, it has nothing to do with truth or values or anything so noble.

So when government wants to use power to help people, it's evil. When it uses it to take away civil liberties, break international laws and legislate personal issues, it's not so bad.

Now with all due respect, I must dissent:

Here is a list of accomplishments in Obama’s first 6 months.

1. Passing the "largest" economic stimulus bill in American history.

2. Ordering the closing of Guantanamo Bay military detention facility and abolishing "enhanced interrogation techniques."

I am really not impressed by the "economic stimulus" bill. Have you seen the results? I see no changes in the economy or job market. All I see is banks raking in million dollar bonuses for their CEO's again. The very banks that caused the economic crash! I see the stimulus bill as nothing more than a reward to the banks, a big, brazen donation to corporate interests. Is this Reaganomics? Am I supposed to believe that all the money those banks got is actually going to trickle down to me?

As for Guantanamo, oh yes, I swooned when he did that --- unfortunately, he's actively encouraging (1) the same exact thing at Bagram; (2) the continued illegal abduction of foreign nationals; (3) torture as a means of interrogation; (4) prison terms without charges or trial, and even the right to "preventively detain" people (!!!); (5) the denial of the right of the detainees to challenge their incarceration on its merits in court; and (6) the right of the government to withhold information that would bring war criminals to justice. Not only do these continue the most disgusting innovations of Bush and Cheney, but they actually add new provisions. In a recent court case, a federal judge specifically asked the DOJ lawyer if the new administration had instituted any changes in policy. The lawyer responded that the administration had actively reviewed the matter and chosen to take this course.

"Enhanced interrogation" is still going on, and Obama and his team refuse to investigate or hold accountable those who propagate and carry it out. Meanwhile, innocent detainees (28 out of 33 constitutional challenges from Guantanamo were found to lack sufficient evidence to even keep them behind bars) are literally dying as a result - whether by suicide, or by the severity of the physical torment. He's backed away from any meaningful health care reform, and has paid unimaginable sums of money to everybody but the people who need it. He speaks a lot of pretty words, yes, but I'm sorry - he is nothing more than another tyrant to me at this point; he has the power to "change" things and has chosen not to. I realize not everything can be done in a day, but to close one illegal prison and then defend the continuing of its policies elsewhere is duplicitous - and criminal.

[Kalisurfer]

So when government wants to use power to help people, it's evil. When it uses it to take away civil liberties, break international laws and legislate personal issues, it's not so bad.

I can see why this was chosen as one of the best memorable quotes from GR! Hits the nail on the head by all means concerning how government can be seen and judged. The Right has a knack of reinterpreting and redefining the needs of the people and somehow making it seem unpalatable to the very people it would be beneficial to. Most of the people protesting against Obama and his health care proposals come from the working and middle class, the same people hurt by the current system of health care for profit that we have. How it can be presented as evil, containing death panels and forced care with no choice of doctors and abortions on every street corner is pretty amazing. There do exist a lot of fearful paranoid people in the present economy, and the Right is taking advantage of that.

When Obama was running for president, there were people at the McCain/Palin rallies calling Obama a socialist, not a born citizen and a front for some international cabal who wanted to take over the country and should be put to death. This far Right wing base was already there, so using it as a foundation, some Rightist are using it to form discontent with those who are fearful of any change to the current system as it is. Not so sure the left and center has challenged that very effectively, for one would think it would not be too hard to get hundreds of thousands of people to march on Washington who have been hurt by having no health insurance or too little of anything that is meaningful and affordable.

Now with all due respect, I must dissent:

Here is a list of accomplishments in Obama’s first 6 months.

1. Passing the "largest" economic stimulus bill in American history.

2. Ordering the closing of Guantanamo Bay military detention facility and abolishing "enhanced interrogation techniques."

I am really not impressed by the "economic stimulus" bill. Have you seen the results? I see no changes in the economy or job market. All I see is banks raking in million dollar bonuses for their CEO's again. The very banks that caused the economic crash! I see the stimulus bill as nothing more than a reward to the banks, a big, brazen donation to corporate interests. Is this Reaganomics? Am I supposed to believe that all the money those banks got is actually going to trickle down to me?

Disagreeing is great and food for thought, and dissent is what this forum was built on.

I don't like the fact that billions of dollars went unaccounted for by just giving it away to banks, finance and insurance companies. That economic stimulus bill was passed way too fast, but it seems like no one could agree what was best to do, be it from the right or left, the markets were falling and banks were close to being run on by people who wanted their cash immediately. A financial crash was close at hand and the stimulus, though wasteful, did save many financial institutions from closing. I grew up hearing from my grandparents the result of a Depression, and indeed we did not experience one. I'm not smart enough to know what the best solution could have been, but doing nothing or letting everything come crashing down would of not seemed prudent either. If indeed the Obama administration put more stipulations and regulations into place concerning the bailouts and just how much executives could make, like I think they should of, I can't imagine how much more Socialist and evil they would of been portrayed by those that want to see them fail?

I do see good results of the bailout of GM and Chrysler. Many of my friends and family have kept their jobs because of it, and that's not a bad thing, just as long at they keep creating fuel efficient and well designed cars that people want to buy going forward. I can't imagine how much more depressed the industrial Midwest could be without the automotive industry there to help support the local economy, for the trickle down effect of that industry failing effects millions of other workers who work indirectly for the auto industry and the transportation and retail that depends on the workers spending their money in the communities they live.

The whole economic mess came about by government not doing its regulatory job, and no one was keeping an eye for abuses by those in financial power. I do think that the Obama administration has put more checks and balances into the system, more eyes watching those in charge of banking, insurance and finances. I am amazed that the tea-baggers and rightist just do not see this historic pattern and still say we have too much government. It's not a perfect system, and profit and greed are unfortunately linked in the human psyche with immediate and substantial rewards that contain power in the system we live in, so there are always people willing to abuse the system to get their quick monetary rewards, but at least we should fight for a government that checks that tendency to cheat and profit and not give industry and capital the power to be the government, which is what Bush/Cheny years and the current Republican party (and some Democrats too) seems to be all about.

As for Guantanamo, oh yes, I swooned when he did that --- unfortunately, he's actively encouraging (1) the same exact thing at Bagram; (2) the continued illegal abduction of foreign nationals; (3) torture as a means of interrogation; (4) prison terms without charges or trial, and even the right to "preventively detain" people (!!!); (5) the denial of the right of the detainees to challenge their incarceration on its merits in court; and (6) the right of the government to withhold information that would bring war criminals to justice. Not only do these continue the most disgusting innovations of Bush and Cheney, but they actually add new provisions. In a recent court case, a federal judge specifically asked the DOJ lawyer if the new administration had instituted any changes in policy. The lawyer responded that the administration had actively reviewed the matter and chosen to take this course.

"Enhanced interrogation" is still going on, and Obama and his team refuse to investigate or hold accountable those who propagate and carry it out. Meanwhile, innocent detainees (28 out of 33 constitutional challenges from Guantanamo were found to lack sufficient evidence to even keep them behind bars) are literally dying as a result - whether by suicide, or by the severity of the physical torment. He's backed away from any meaningful health care reform, and has paid unimaginable sums of money to everybody but the people who need it. He speaks a lot of pretty words, yes, but I'm sorry - he is nothing more than another tyrant to me at this point; he has the power to "change" things and has chosen not to. I realize not everything can be done in a day, but to close one illegal prison and then defend the continuing of its policies elsewhere is duplicitous - and criminal.

I'm against the Bagram prison and enhanced interrogation, and all that it implies, and it is a huge disappointment. This is where we as citizens have to inform the government that we disagree with this decision and are looking for alternative ideas. If we use one issue to abandon Obama at this time, then the Right wins, hands down. They want Obama supporters to be disappointed and dissatisfied, perhaps to come to their side or to sit out future elections. As much as I disagree with this Obama position, I sure do not want to see the Right and the Republicans back in power, deregulating government and giving corporations a free hand in doing whatever it needs to do to increase its power over that of the everyday person/worker, the economic collapse and government bailout is mostly due to what that ideology produces. Sad to say, even though I thought Obama would be vastly different and still hold out the possibility that it can be so, I usually vote Democratic as the lesser of two evils, not as the answer or salvation to the nations problems.

When it comes to the environment, social programs, equality and human rights, the Democrats usually have championed those causes, and I still feel that the Obama administration has started to make dramatic changes in these categories, reversing much of what Bush/Cheny did to harm and put into the hands of private corporations, even if one counts the Afghanistan war and the Bagram prisons decisions as a set back. I can't imagine what strange horrors in terms of the economy and foreign policy we would have already experienced if indeed McCain/Palin had won.

If anything, we need new political parties and less influence of money in politics, but how to make those systemic changes take place is beyond my ability to even imagine. Politics in general makes my head hurt, surprised I have written as much as I have concerning it, but when I see Obama so disparaged by the right, it's hard to see it also happening now by his supporters too, not so much that disagreement, frustration and dissatisfaction exists, for that is healthy and good and needs to be expressed, it's when I hear past supporters reject him in only 9 months, it just seems premature...and if we do throw him out with the bath water just for one reason, then what is the alternative and who gains by it?

[Dhyana]

I'm against the Bagram prison and enhanced interrogation, and all that it implies, and it is a huge disappointment. This is where we as citizens have to inform the government that we disagree with this decision and are looking for alternative ideas. If we use one issue to abandon Obama at this time, then the Right wins, hands down.

I couldn't agree more.

I do not know more about the background of this decision than what the news cover. I know Obama was hoping some of the Guantanamo detainees could be shifted to Europe in cooperation with U.S. friendly governments, and kept in custody there. But no one wanted to. Perhaps it is as simple as there existing some evidence about the detainees indeed posing a big risk. Maybe the intelligence is far from enough for a court case but strong enough to make releasing them equal to putting the country at risk? Who knows? Obama seems to be a pragmatist, I am sure he would close Guantanamo and let the detainees go if he saw a doable, prudent way of doing it.

Sometimes, when you inherit a mess, it turns out that earlier moves made by your predecessors permanently close off the most proper straightforward ways of dealing with the mess.

Incidentally, there was a Swedish citizen among the Guantanamo detainees, Mehdi Ghezali. A young guy whose only crime, as far as one could tell, was his presence in suspicious ways, in a network of Muslims connected to the "bad guys" and staying for some shady reasons in the areas in Afghanistan / Pakistan thought to be Al-Quaida strongholds. In other words, being at a wrong place, wrong time and having no convincing explanation for it. Mehdi Ghezali got released and sent back to Sweden a while ago, after a lot of diplomatic work, pressures on the US government, etc. The Swedes, who were outraged about his fate, greeted him warmly, he gave some press conferences about Guantanamo and so on.

Now, a few weeks ago, the same man got caught and detained again in the same area. Again he seems to have no good explanation for what he was doing there.

[zvs]

Maybe the intelligence is far from enough for a court case but strong enough to make releasing them equal to putting the country at risk? Who knows?

That's exactly the justification, but without strong evidence. The judges ruled in 28 out of 33 petitions that there wasn't sufficient evidence to hold them (what to speak of putting them on trial). And yet the U.S. government says because they're dangerous, they have to remain incarcerated, even without evidence.

The problem with this is that they refuse to put them on trial, refuse to give them due process, refuse to do anything but let them languish. So we'll never actually know if they are "dangerous." We just know that the government said they are. And that's simply not a good enough reason to support the limitless detention of possibly innocent people.

Now they're even talking about "preventive detention" - Holding people who haven't even made a move, to keep them even having the opportunity.

If these things happened on American soil, there would probably be a full-scale armed revolution. But because they happen to "others" - foreigners, Muslims, "terrorists," people we don't have to see or think about - then it's justified because it keeps us "safe." Nevermind that the fact that we're doing these things is making us look more evil than we ever did previously in the eyes of those who would want to punish and hurt us. Nevermind the safety risk that poses.

If the government wants to keep us safe and bring terrorists to justice, then they need to bring these people over, and put them on trial in front of a jury. If they're found guilty, then they get sentenced. If they're found not guilty, we let them go. That's what we're supposed to be doing and if America wants to keep up any pretenses of being a just and civil nation, it has to start abiding by these fundamental rules.

Also, when the President of the United States takes his Oath of Office, he swears to uphold the Constitution. Not to keep us safe at all costs, including by breaking the law. The constitution guarantees a right to speedy trial by a jury of peers, a right to confront witnesses and evidence, a prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, a prohibition against unreasonable search and seizure, and much more. Without these liberties, we are just another renegade country that does not respect the liberty fundamental to human existence, and without adherence to our own codes, we are just a giant sham.

Or maybe we can alleviate our hypocrisy by achieving consistency. Maybe we can lock up everybody who's ever appeared suspicious, refuse to present evidence against them, refuse to put them in a court room, refuse to tell them when they're getting out (if at all), coerce them into making false confessions, and physically, mentally and emotionally torture them to the point of potential suicide or homicide. Then people can see at home what this country does when no one can look - and decide whether or not they still think it's "necessary," what to speak of just.

[zvs]

I can see why this was chosen as one of the best memorable quotes from GR!

I hadn't even noticed. I'm honored! Thank you, Dhyana.

Kali:

I really appreciate your views and how well you express them, and I'm glad we can agree to disagree on certain points. Your story about the stimulus bill certainly puts a new perspective on it - a human one. It's easy for me, or anybody, to see the abstractions, and not perceive that some real good has come about.

That said, it's still depressing watching many of the makers of our current woes reaping the rewards. It would have been nice to see every working American get a little stimulus check (like even Bush managed to do a few years back) instead of watching a few insular banks get propped up by the government. I had forgotten about the auto industry phase of it, though; the jobs that were saved in that measure are certainly valuable.

If we use one issue to abandon Obama at this time, then the Right wins, hands down. They want Obama supporters to be disappointed and dissatisfied, perhaps to come to their side or to sit out future elections. As much as I disagree with this Obama position, I sure do not want to see the Right and the Republicans back in power, deregulating government and giving corporations a free hand in doing whatever it needs to do to increase its power over that of the everyday person/worker, the economic collapse and government bailout is mostly due to what that ideology produces.

I have mixed feelings about this passage, mainly because I feel cognitive dissonance when I think of lending support to any "group" or aligning myself with them. Most of my beliefs are on the "left" side of things I guess (LGBT rights, uncompromised civil liberties, economic assistance for the displaced, health care reform, environmental progress, anti-war, etc.) but I do not consider myself a liberal or a democrat. Some of my core beliefs are actually from the "right" (gasp! I support gun owners' rights!). I wish more people simply stood for what I think most reasonable folks believe is right, which is peace, equality and freedom. To say being against war and for constitutional rights is "liberal" is to say conservatives don't believe in peace or freedom. That'd be a depressing reality, but maybe it's true. I sure hope not. I just believe in examining every issue from scratch and seeing where it falls in terms of supporting the underlying truths that I feel are most important in life.

I would gladly vote for a republican if I thought (s)he was the greatest representative of those truths and values. I actually think I might have ended up voting for Ron Paul, though he obviously had no chance. The libertarians, from where I stand, have the greatest record on supporting human freedom and dignity, but I do take issue with the "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" economic theory that simply does not work in a society where the playing field is not equal for all individuals.

That's what's really depressing me right now: In this past election, I voted entirely for democrats because I believed that they were coming in like a wrecking ball of change, to topple and overturn the past eight insane years. Now most of what I see is Obama's administration carrying on the same crap, and the democratic congress basically saying, "OK, cool, go ahead." As one Mr. Lydon said, "Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?"

If anything, we need new political parties and less influence of money in politics, but how to make those systemic changes take place is beyond my ability to even imagine. Politics in general makes my head hurt, surprised I have written as much as I have concerning it, but when I see Obama so disparaged by the right, it's hard to see it also happening now by his supporters too, not so much that disagreement, frustration and dissatisfaction exists, for that is healthy and good and needs to be expressed, it's when I hear past supporters reject him in only 9 months, it just seems premature...and if we do throw him out with the bath water just for one reason, then what is the alternative and who gains by it?

I don't think there will ever be a real change in this area. We are so entrenched in left-right politics that everything, literally everything, must be examined according to the two parties. A true independent (as I consider myself) makes heads spin. All media reporting falls along political lines. It's terrible. Any upstart third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seven thousandth party gets laughed at and makes no headway, and steals important votes away from another candidate who might have been the better choice. I don't see it ever changing, honestly, unless there is a wide-spread revolution of consciousness in America where people decide to start following their hearts and making their own unique decisions as to what they believe. Forgive me for my cynicism in not being able to foresee that day's arrival.

I wouldn't say that I've "rejected" Obama because I don't really have the choice: He's in office for a few more years, here, regardless of my feelings. Come the next election, if I truly believe Obama has shown himself to be the best choice, then I'll vote for him again. You're right: The only thing that could make this bad situation worse is becoming a reactionary.

[Homer]

In my opinion, Obama has shown himself to be negligent in his executive powers by not engaging Congress in impeaching Bush and Cheney. Unless and until this procedure is enacted the crimes of these two and their cohorts are being endorsed by the current Obama administration and by Congress. The proclamation from Obama that he is more concerned with the future rather than the past ignores the reality of history repeating itself without circumspection and proper legal recourse.

Clinton was impeached for relatively minor indiscretions and Nixon was forced out of office because of the famous Watergate scandal. The website democrats.com lists ten excellent reasons for instigating the process of impeachment:

"1. Violating the United Nations Charter by launching an illegal "War of Aggression" against Iraq without cause, using fraud to sell the war to Congress and the public, misusing government funds to begin bombing without Congressional authorization, and subjecting our military personnel to unnecessary harm, debilitating injuries, and deaths.

2. Violating U.S. and international law by authorizing the torture of thousands of captives, resulting in dozens of deaths, and keeping prisoners hidden from the International Committee of the Red Cross.

3. Violating the Constitution by arbitrarily detaining Americans, legal residents, and non-Americans, without due process, without charge, and without access to counsel.

4. Violating the Geneva Conventions by targeting civilians, journalists, hospitals, and ambulances, and using illegal weapons, including white phosphorous, depleted uranium, and a new type of napalm.

5. Violating U.S. law and the Constitution through widespread wiretapping of the phone calls and emails of Americans without a warrant.

6. Violating the Constitution by using "signing statements" to defy hundreds of laws passed by Congress.

7. Violating U.S. and state law by obstructing honest elections in 2000, 2002, 2004, and 2006.

8. Violating U.S. law by using paid propaganda and disinformation, selectively and misleadingly leaking classified information, and exposing the identity of a covert CIA operative working on sensitive WMD proliferation for political retribution.

9. Subverting the Constitution and abusing Presidential power by asserting a "Unitary Executive Theory" giving unlimited powers to the President, by obstructing efforts by Congress and the Courts to review and restrict Presidential actions, and by promoting and signing legislation negating the Bill of Rights and the Writ of Habeas Corpus.

10. Gross negligence in failing to assist New Orleans residents after Hurricane Katrina, in ignoring urgent warnings of an Al Qaeda attack prior to Sept. 11, 2001, and in increasing air pollution causing global warming."

It is also my opinion that giving billions of dollars to corrupt financial institutions that have not been held responsible or accountable for their deliberate and greedy manipulation of our monetary system is reason enough to believe that Obama is complicit.

Goldman Sachs is reportedly giving out 14 Billion in bonuses after receiving 12 Billion in the bailout fund:

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/jun2009/bonu-j25.shtml


"...Record bank bonuses are the inevitable and desired outcome of Obama's policy. The administration has repeatedly rejected caps on executive pay and has done everything in its power to ensure that the major banks are made "whole." Coming one week after Obama unveiled his new bank regulation plan, the promise of bigger-than-ever bonuses reveals the reality behind the administration's rhetoric: nothing will be done to rein in the financial elite.

Of all the banking giants, Goldman Sachs is perhaps the most closely tied to the White House and federal regulators. The list of former Goldman Sachs employees holding top positions in the Obama administration includes:

• Mark Patterson, a former Goldman Sachs lobbyist, who is the chief of staff to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner (himself the former president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York).

• Reuben Jeffery III, former managing partner at Goldman Sachs, who holds the post of undersecretary of state for economic, business, and agricultural affairs.

• Neel Kashkari, former Goldman Sachs vice president, who is the assistant secretary of the treasury for financial stability, responsible for administering the TARP funds.

• Dianna Farrell, former financial analyst at Goldman Sachs, who serves as deputy director of the National Economic Council.

Henry Paulson, the Bush administration's treasury secretary, who authored the TARP program and oversaw the AIG bailout, was the CEO of Goldman before taking the Treasury post. Between Paulson and Robert Rubin, who served under Clinton, the office of treasury secretary has been occupied by a former Goldman Sachs executive more than half the time since 1995.

The record bonuses come at a time when conditions of life for ordinary people are worse than at any time since the Great Depression. The official unemployment rate hit 9.4 percent last month, and the real unemployment rate—including those involuntarily working part-time and those who have given up looking for a job—is 16.4 percent. The number of mass layoffs in May was the highest on record.

Those who remain employed have seen their wages fall precipitously. One survey of company executives found that half planned to cut or freeze workers' pay. USA Today reported June 12 that pay cuts, reduced hours, furloughs and involuntary part-time work have driven the working class back to conditions not seen since the 1930s..."

Obama's obvious gift for inspirational speech making seems to fail in the translation to reality.

Several other of my personal observations make me an Obama doubter; chief among them being his escalation of the foolish war in Afghanistan. I am 100% certain that history will judge this war to be absurd in purpose and criminal in fact.

[ePiTau]

Google seems to promote Republican shit, or?
Got this on this GR page: