Friendly Fire at the White House (Obama meets with his critics on the left)

[sabra]

Source: Newsweek

Fending off criticism from human rights and civil rights groups at a private White House meeting Wednesday, a frustrated President Obama complained about the "mess" he'd been left by his predecessor.

The exchange came during an hour and fifteen minute "off the record" session in the White House cabinet room that highlighted growing tensions between the president and his liberal base. While the White House session was billed as an effort by the president to listen to his critics on the left, some of them left disappointed.

According to three sources who attended the meeting, Obama reiterated his intention to retain a version of the military tribunal system established to try terror detainees and said his administration will likely end up adopting some form of 'indefinite detention' policy to justify holding some selected suspects without trial. Still, Obama brusquely rejected suggestions by some of those present that, in doing so, he was adopting key tenets of Bush era policies considered unacceptable by his liberal supporters.

...

The sources, all of whom asked not to be identified because of the White House insistence that the meeting was private, also said Attorney General Eric Holder sat by silently while the president curtly dismissed the idea that his Justice Department should criminally prosecute at least one Bush administration official for torture, if only as a symbolic move to demonstrate that actions such as waterboarding will never be tolerated again.

While declining to talk about any of the specific back and forth, American Civil Liberties Union executive director Anthony Romero told Newsweek he was not happy by much of what he heard during the meeting. Obama showed a "remarkable command" of the issues, Romero said. But, he added, "it is disappointing that he appears poised to continue with many of the Bush policies that have ended in failure. If he goes down that track, President Obama will find himself in the same legal morass that swallowed up George Bush."

Read more: http://www.newsweek.com/id/198706

[Robbien]

1. Torture is therefore an acceptable method for Americans to use

Anyone who tortures in our name is not punished, therefore it is okay.

[gratuitous]

2. I'm glad the president is meeting with progressives

But the message needs to get through the White House bubble: Either we address our country's war crimes and crimes against humanity, or someone else will. And those someone elses might decide to play prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner all in one grotesque action. But if you don't mind the innocent dying and paying for the crimes of the guilty, then by all means, "curtly dismiss" the idea that our outlaw government not be prosecuted.

[The Hope Mobile]

84. Get the message through.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5697718&mesg_id=5697718

Comments: 202-456-1111
Switchboard: 202-456-1414
FAX: [phone]
TTY/TDD

Comments: 202-456-6213
Visitors Office: 202-456-2121

[choie]

3. Obama will be adopting "indefinite detention"????

I'm going to be sick. What the hell happens to detainees who are, in fact, innocent? They will just be locked away for the rest of their lives? This is vile and shameful.

[Texas Lurker]

13. Indefinite Detention

If/when Bush had proposed the same thing, we would call him a
Nazi! There is no way to explain this away.

[The Hope Mobile]

89. It was equally wrong then!! Our guy allowing it does make him culpable.

We didn't initiate it but we need to prosecute!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5697718&mesg_id=5697718

[AnneD]

24. Bush is stupid, Cheney is paranoid.....

I expected infinite detention from them. Obama is black and has a Harvard law degree. He should know better. What if MLK faced infinite detention in Memphis. Bush played fast and loose with the definition of terrorist and now Obama is playing fast and loose with habeas corpus. I too want to :puke:

Instead of restoring the Constitution, he wants to finish the shred job Bush started. Disgusting, just plain disgusting. Makes one want to not go so peacefully.

[RufusTFirefly]

34. Torture and isolation have probably made most of them nuts by now

... making it difficult to definitively prove their innocence.

That's the beauty of it.

I grieve for my country

[The Hope Mobile]

88. Say something/do something!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5697718&mesg_id=5697718

[saigon68]

126. I realy don't know what to say

[BonnieJW]

4. It seems they "got to him."

Why would he declare his repudiation of torture during his campagin, only to "curtly dismiss" any suggestion that those who committed the torture be prosecuted? Why would he advocate universal healthcare only to not even give it a place at the discussion table? Clearly, the fix is in. Kucinich in 2012?

[Zhade]

57. Or, simpler, he just lied to us - and as desperate as we were, we fell for it.

NT!

[Critters2]

68. It must be a cold day in hell!

I'm agreeing with Zhade! :hi:

When you're right, you're right!

[Zhade]

109. I wish I wasn't, believe me.

: (

[The Hope Mobile]

5. I wonder if average Americans would take Kucinich more seriously now or

where we might be if Edwards hadn't screwed up so royally? Maybe Dean would consider running again? I believe that most of the country is further left than Obama is right now.

[peace13]

9. Obama is not left at all.

He is what he is and he will pay the price.

Edited to add that I love Dennis. He has spoken the truth all along!

[The Hope Mobile]

12. I agree. I think average Americans are starting to get disgruntled.

Is he just naive or is he playing their game? I think DK and Dean would be honest and get things back on track but we really can't wait until 2012. This country's been through enough.

We can't keep bailing out banks and not homeowners.
We can't keep covering up Bushco's crimes.
We can't keep allowing people to lose jobs, their homes, and their health.
We can't allow the CIA to be run by Bushies.
We can't allow the EPA to be run by Bushies.

WTF? I was livid when congress caved (and I suspect a lot of it was blackmail . . . and greed). Is Obama being blackmailed too? Is he just as corrupt as the rest of them? WTF? Seriously. WTF?

They say absolute power corrupts absolutely . . . I had higher hopes than that for Obama.

[Dinger]

17. I Had Higher Hope For Him Too

To say I am disappointed is an understatement.

[The Hope Mobile]

85. Say something!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5697718&mesg_id=5697718

[Imagevision]

143. Higher hope? - me too, he backs Bush against Plame incident!?!!

[No Elephants]

74. Yes, we can!

[Fiendish Thingy]

16. DK in 2012! n/t

[goclark]

52. I love DK but as much as I do, don't think it can happen

[The Hope Mobile]

82. We need to start communicating this to the WH

Comments: 202-456-1111
Switchboard: 202-456-1414
FAX: [phone]
TTY/TDD

Comments: 202-456-6213
Visitors Office: 202-456-2121

[demgurl]

86. I disagree.

Today I wrote a Newspaper from Spain and told them how I appreciate them investigating and to please not stop. If enough of us do this they will have no choice but to investigate. They will not listen to calls to the White House but they will listen if enough of us write to foreign newspapers stating how disgusted we are.

[The Hope Mobile]

92. I like both ideas!

But I do believe we need to inundate Obama and the White House with perspectives other than Rahm's and corporations!

[demgurl]

99. Sorry, you are quite right.

There is no reason why we can not do both and I would encourage everyone to do so. Acting is better than sitting on your hands. I will call tomorrow.

[The Hope Mobile]

100. You rock!!

[demgurl]

142. No more than you, my friend.

[fascisthunter]

6. have fun getting re-elected

[The Hope Mobile]

90. Agreed!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5697718&mesg_id=5697718

[salguine]

7. The article states, "If he goes down that track, President Obama

will find himself in the same legal morass that swallowed up George Bush."

Pardon me for wondering this, but precisely what legal morass "swallowed up" George Bush? The little rat-fuck walked away scot-free. Excuse me!?

[glitch]

26. No statute of limitations on war crimes. Bush'll be hiding in Dallas for the rest of his life.

Not that he would mind. A pariah in the world.

Surely Obama would want something better for himself and his family? I think he's listening to the wrong people, or worse, "pooling ignorance".

[Zhade]

59. Yep -- walked with the aid of the Dems, and now Obama.

NT!

[No Elephants]

69. Thanks to Pres. Obama, no legal morass whatever swallowed up Pres. Bush. (I had the same reaction.)

[peace13]

8. Hello Spain, it is time to take on America and our immoral ways!

Obama will find that he has joined the * ranks and will be held accountable as well. He's innocent you say? Well he can get in line like the rest of them.

[Mr. Sparkle]

10. is the honeymoon over? It is beginning to feel like that way to me.

He is turning into a new bill Clinton when we need a New Roosevelt

[No Elephants]

73. A new Bill Clinton and a new George Bush. Barack Hussein Obushton.

[Aslanspal]

11. bush really is a destroyer

will he destroy this president as well...he destroyed others...and the son of jezebel(biblical cursing)seems to have a demon angel on his shoulder to prevent any consequences...what a cancer the last 8 years of bush and we now have cheney out their being the opposition reminding us of the last 8 years. Ladies and gentlemen america needs a couch on how and why we elected these people into office and never do it again....such a deep..deep..deep mess that it is pulling at this President.

[No Elephants]

75. This President is responsible for his own actions.

[Aslanspal]

122. No...No...No....Past invades the present No Underpants

Of course it impacts this President are you deaf and blind No Underpants ;)

[Bluenorthwest]

14. We see the stories of abuse all over the nation

Teachers abusing disabled kids one day. Cops beating the crap out of people the next. What has been done to our culture with this torture program will not be made to vanish by 'looking forward'.

[arikara]

36. Cops (some) have been torturing and killing people

with tasers for years now. Infiltrating peace marches trying to start riots. Generally running around like thugs. And getting away with it.

[The Hope Mobile]

93. So true!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5697718&mesg_id=5697718

[Mithreal]

15. "mess" he'd been left by his predecessor. Just sweep it under the rug. nt

[The Hope Mobile]

83. Say something!!

White house contacts!

Comments: 202-456-1111
Switchboard: 202-456-1414
FAX: [phone]
TTY/TDD

Comments: 202-456-6213
Visitors Office: 202-456-2121

[Mithreal]

97. Oh I did send a lengthy email to the White House this very morning.

I have called and emailed other days as well.

[The Hope Mobile]

98. Awesome!!! I haven't had any luck getting emails through recently

without getting some form letter back so I'm faxing now.

[corpseratemedia]

125. Magically the mess doesn't seem to go away!

It keeps festering and growing. I guess Obama ended up wanting to be the fall guy.

[NoodleyAppendage]

18. Where's the "Change," Obama? Oh, that's right Rahm's telling you it's not popular to be principled.

How about you rid yourself of that scumbag "Iago" and actually carry out the real change you touted in the election? Otherwise, you DO NOT GET MY VOTE IN 2012.

J

[Dinger]

20. Same Here (nt)

[glitch]

28. Iago really is a perfect name for Rahm, but that means Obama is Othello. God I hope not. nt

[jsamuel]

19. sad

[The Hope Mobile]

81. Very!

Almost as infuriating are the people who say we shouldn't do anything about this. We MUST communicate our frustration with this "change".

Comments: 202-456-1111
Switchboard: 202-456-1414
FAX: [phone]
TTY/TDD

Comments: 202-456-6213
Visitors Office: 202-456-2121

[Terran]

21. He "curtly dismissed"...?

the idea of even one torture prosecution? I thought that was being left up to Holder (i.e., the rule of law). I'd really like to hear even one concrete reason he might provide as justification for this dismissal.

[avaistheone1]

25. This is not Obama's first dismissal.

Obama dismissed single-payer health advocates and has not allowed them a seat at the table in the development of our country's so called health reform.

There seems to be a pattern of dismissal developing which is very disappointing coming from a Democratic president. That isn't the way Obama said he would handle issues on the campaign trail.

[Terran]

30. My particular problem with this statement

is that's is very much at odds with what he said in his speech today, about letting the DOJ pursue possible legal issues around torture. Is he going to let this happen or isn't he?

[The Hope Mobile]

94. We absolutely NEED to pursue this. Its sounding like he's saying no.

I'm hoping that's not the case.

[bottomtheweaver]

22. So prosecutions are off the table.

Where have I heard that one before?

[The Hope Mobile]

23. Do we need a real third party? The "Integrity Party" maybe?

This is lunacy. The last straw was this "credit card reform" which was a complete joke. If you're robbing us blind already it really doesn't matter if you give us 45 days till you take even more. We just don't have it. Then what? Debtors' prison?

[No Elephants]

77. We definitely need a third party, but Dems and Repubs joined forces to make a strong showing

by a third party almost impossible. Nader has challenged some of those laws, but I did not pay attention at the time because I was so furious with him about Florida 2000. Now, I'm starting to agree with him.

Amyway, we need to make sure the playing field is level for third parties, not only for the big two.

BTW, some people say we have only one party now. And I feel that way, that there is less and less difference between them.

[The Hope Mobile]

79. I'm afraid that's becoming a reality. They should get honest and just call it

the Corporatist Party and give us the chance to all get out while we can. But who will be the worker bees? Maybe when things are totally automated they can let us go and be honest about the true agenda?

[dreamnightwind]

102. It is indeed

time for an actual opposition party. I like Democratic Socialists, and we could use many of the well-tested models from Europe as a guide. We currently have some bizarre form of socialism for the rich, and the ravages of unchecked capitalism for the rest of us. Time to reverse this. Socialism for the poor, or really for everyone. Rebuild the social safety nets. Redistribute the top-heavy wealth in this country. Europe does pretty well, by most measures, and their quality of life is generally much higher than ours.

And it's way past time to reel in the military. Massive expenditures, and the interests it serves are those of global capital, not the people.

[The Hope Mobile]

120. The scandinavian model is looking really good right now.

And consistently those countries report the highest level of satisfaction as you said.

[primavera]

141. What, we can only have three?

I figure we'd need at least six.

[lostnotforgotten]

27. Well It Looks More And More Like Mr. "O" Is A Closet Conservative After All

eom

[Bette Noir]

29. Dear Mr. President,

You will never win over the hard right. Every time you attempt to win them over, you lose support on the left. We elected you, but don't make the mistake of taking our support for granted.

[The Hope Mobile]

112. Beautiful! nt

[NJmaverick]

31. I am hopeful that Obama is smart enough to see the far left

is no better a guide than the far right was for George Bush. Keep using common sense and good moral principles President Obama, it would serve you far better than any ideology (not that he really needs me to tell him this, as he is smarter than I am).

[RufusTFirefly]

35. Since when was opposing torture and indefinite detention "far left"?

Has our moral compass gone completely haywire?

[avaistheone1]

38. I think it got busted.

[NJmaverick]

40. You need more practice

thinking that is, and perhaps listening. You should review Obama's speech from today.

[NJmaverick]

39. The only thing busted is your fact checker

Obama STOPPED the torture as soon as he got into office.

As for detention, perhaps you can explain what to do with an explosives expert that openly states he is going to do everything in his power to destroy the United States? I know that is asking you to think, rather than blindly follow ideology, but give it a try.

[RufusTFirefly]

41. Obama left wiggle room for torture

Human Rights Group: Obama left wiggle room for torture.

Of course, the previous president stated repeatedly and emphatically that "America doesn't torture." But that was Bush, of course, and we know that Obama would never reverse himself or go back on his word.

As for your use of an anecdote to justify indefinite detention, sadly, I think it speaks for itself.

[avaistheone1]

44. Indeed it does.

[NJmaverick]

49. Got it wrong again, keep practicing that thinking

[NJmaverick]

48. lol! that came from Obama's speech

however since an intelligent individual was talking instead of some wild eyed radical, you couldn't bother to listen. It explains your rather distorted and faulty view of the world and further demostrates my assertion that it's a bad idea to follow the far left.

[magellan]

95. Try him and put him in prison?

Or maybe that's too far-fetched. After all, we've never had to deal with people who like to blow things up in the US before.

:sarcasm:

[NJmaverick]

107. Try him for what exactly?

are you familar with the laws? There is no law against people in other nations issuing threats. You really need to think things through, before responding.

[magellan]

121. Thought crimes, apparently

"There is no law against people in other nations issuing threats."

That's right. So why are you arguing for preventive detention?

[primavera]

135. In a country which observes the rule of law...

... if you can't make a case against the person that will stand up in court, you let that person go. Do you imagine that there aren't rapists and murderers that aren't set free every day because there's insufficient proof to try them, or because the legal system doesn't have an appropriate charge with which to try him/her? It happens every day of the week, with full knowledge that the person being released may very well be a dangerous criminal and may go out and harm someone. Yet that outcome is the lesser evil when compared to a state apparatus that can simply imprison without due process anyone it happens to think may be guilty of something.

[rhett o rick]

148. You put him on trial. Produce your evidence. How hard is that? nm

[Critters2]

117. Or not doing so a "moral principle"? nt

[NoodleyAppendage]

45. "Far left" = Upholding the rule of law and the Constitution??? WTF???

I wonder where we would be as a country if the Founding Fathers used pragmatism as their guide for our system of government. The Constitution and Bill of Rights were NOT pragmatic at the time...hell, they led and were the principles behind a friggin' revolution.

Being smart is not necessarily what we need. We need someone with spine and stalwart idealism to return the country to the RULE OF LAW.

J

[NJmaverick]

50. You better learn your American history

you don't have a clue as to what the Founding Father did. Your post is further proof of my assertion that it's a very bad idea to listen to the far left.

[avaistheone1]

53. Founding Father says torture is BAD - George Washington: No Torture on My Watch

“Should any American soldier be so base and infamous as to injure any . . . I do most earnestly enjoin you to bring him to such severe and exemplary punishment as the enormity of the crime may require. Should it extend to death itself, it will not be disproportional to its guilt at such a time and in such a cause… for by such conduct they bring shame, disgrace and ruin to themselves and their country.” - George Washington, charge to the Northern Expeditionary Force, Sept. 14, 1775
http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2007/12/24/george-washington-no-torture-on-my-watch/


Seems it is you who have no clue about what the Founding Father of Them All had to say about torture.

[Zhade]

60. You just fucking OWNED that poster. Good job.

NT!

[avaistheone1]

62. ^5

Thanks.

[NJmaverick]

106. the sad truth distorting echo chamber of the far left

and why it's best they stay confined to the internet, where they can do little harm.

[NJmaverick]

105. Only in the fantasy world of the far left

in the real world, you guys have put on a perfect demonostration why Obama is smart not to listen to far left wingers.

[Zhade]

111. Like I said, OWNED. Eat it, failure.

NT!

[NJmaverick]

113. yes I am well aware of your delusion

it's why you are ill suited to advise the President.

[corpseratemedia]

127. people who object to "indefinite detention" without public trial = "far left"= "communists," right?

people who want the rule of law (war criminals prosecuted) = "far left" = "communists"

so 1950's-80's republican talk

[arikara]

130. Just what IS a "far left winger"?

pray tell?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

133. Anything this side of Ben Nelson.

[fascisthunter]

145. .

:thumbsup:

[EFerrari]

64. Correct. Well done. n/t

[NJmaverick]

104. correct but it had nothing to do with the discussion

then again you don't seem to care about facts. Which is why it's best Obama doesn't listen to you.

[EFerrari]

128. So your problem with history lessons is that you can't process them?

[RufusH]

78. OH SNAP!!

:patriot:

[NJmaverick]

103. lol! you like intelletually dishonest strawman arguments?

I will keep that in mind.

[RufusH]

119. How odd.

[NJmaverick]

101. Yes, but contrary to your wild cliams to the contrary

they were quite pragmatic. Although I should point out your just engaged in an intellectual dishonest strawman argument as I never said the FFs supported terror. Then again Obama doesn't allow torture either. wait... why am I wasting time with you, you clearly have a Bush like disdain for facts.

[The Hope Mobile]

110. Perfection!! nt

[namahage]

137. Not so fast. You might want to check why there's an ellipsis where it is.

Here's the actual letter.

Camp at Cambridge, September 14, 1775.

Sir: You are intrusted with a Command of the utmost Consequence sequence to the Interest and Liberties of America. Upon your Conduct and Courage and that of the Officers and Soldiers detached on this Expedition, not only the Success of the present Enterprize, and your own Honour, but the Safety and Welfare of the Whole Continent may depend. I charge you, therefore, and the Officers and Soldiers, under your Command, as you value your own Safety and Honour and the Favour and Esteem of your Country, that you consider yourselves, as marching, not through an Enemy's Country; but that of our Friends and Brethren, for such the Inhabitants of Canada, and the Indian Nations have approved themselves in this unhappy Contest between Great Britain and America. That you check by every Motive of Duty and Fear of Punishment, every Attempt to plunder or insult any of the Inhabitants of Canada. Should any American Soldier be so base and infamous as to injure any Canadian or Indian, in his Person or Property, I do most earnestly enjoin you to bring him to such severe and exemplary Punishment as the Enormity of the Crime may require. Should it extend to Death itself it will not be disproportional to its Guilt at such a Time and in such a Cause: But I hope and trust, that the brave Men who have voluntarily engaged in this Expedition, will be governed by far different Views. that Order, Discipline and Regularity of Behaviour will be as conspicuous, as their Courage and Valour. I also give it in Charge to you to avoid all Disrespect to or Contempt of the Religion of the Country and its Ceremonies. Prudence, Policy, and a true Christian Spirit, will lead us to look with Compassion upon their Errors without insulting them. While we are contending for our own Liberty, we should be very cautious of violating the Rights of Conscience in others, ever considering that God alone is the Judge of the Hearts of Men, and to him only in this Case, they are answerable. Upon the whole, Sir, I beg you to inculcate upon the Officers and Soldiers, the Necessity of preserving the strictest Order during their March through Canada; to represent to them the Shame, Disgrace and Ruin to themselves and Country, if they should by their Conduct, turn the Hearts of our Brethren in Canada against us. And on the other Hand, the Honours and Rewards which await them, if by their Prudence and good Behaviour, they conciliate the Affections of the Canadians and Indians, to the great Interests of America, and convert those favorable Dispositions they have shewn into a lasting Union and Affection. Thus wishing you and the Officers and Soldiers under your Command, all Honour, Safety and Success, I remain Sir, etc.

Washington was giving orders to march into Quebec, and was basically telling Benedict Arnold not to piss off the locals, since Washington's army had no quarrel with them. He did not want innocent bystanders paying the price of a war between Great Britain and America.

Great quote...but to twist it into a statement by Washington on torture is disingenuous.

[fascisthunter]

146. America's Anti-Torture Tradition

by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

It is nice that the Bush administration has finally been pressured into backing a ban on cruel and inhumane treatment of prisoners. But what remains shocking about this embarrassing and distasteful national debate is that we had to have it at all. This administration's newfound enthusiasm for torture has not only damaged our international reputation, it has shattered one of our proudest American traditions.

Every schoolchild knows that Gen. George Washington made extraordinary efforts to protect America's civilian population from the ravages of war. Fewer Americans know that Revolutionary War leaders, including Washington and the Continental Congress, considered the decent treatment of enemy combatants to be one of the principal strategic preoccupations of the American Revolution.

"In 1776," wrote historian David Hackett Fischer in "Washington's Crossing," "American leaders believed it was not enough to win the war. They also had to win in a way that was consistent with the values of their society and the principles of their cause. One of their greatest achievements … was to manage the war in a manner that was true to the expanding humanitarian ideals of the American Revolution."

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1217-30.htm

[NoodleyAppendage]

115. Actually. I know plenty about the events and persons associated with the American Revolution.

Please tell me how our assertion of the need for a representational democracy would have survived the British system if we compromised on our ideals.

J

[NJmaverick]

116. You need to make a case that the founding fathers were not pragmatic

that they were idealists that did not make practical considerations. Please use specific examples. I grow weary of the intellectually dishonest debate tactics used by the ideologs on this thread. You make the point you back up with fact and reason. Don't expect me to do that for you.

[NoodleyAppendage]

123. I didn't say they didn't practice pragmatism...only that they did not allow it on the major points.

Franklin and Adams were pragmatic, for certain, but it was Jefferson's insistence and idealism that led to our current representational system. Thomas Payne and the more strident fueled the fire set by Jefferson and gave the citizenry the backbone to fight and die for a democratic ideal against the monarchy. It was inherently illogical to think that the colonies had a chance against Britain, but that didn't stop us and with the help of German mercenaries and the French navy we won. Pragmatism would have suggested that we settled with Britain for lesser because of the apparent political and warfare-related costs.

[NJmaverick]

132. No you are parsing words and playing with symantics

The founding fathers, as Obama has done today, practiced pragmatism. If they followed your strict idealism there never would have been a revolt, since there was no legal justification for one.

[Binka]

124. Ideologs? WTF? If your gonna make rabid assertions please learn to spell

I grow weary of the intellectually challenged spouting BS.IDEOLOGS? Are they something like Lincoln logs? LOL!! Sorry dude, we don't expect you to do much of anything.

[NJmaverick]

131. You lost so you change the subject

so typical:eyes: and so explains why you have such messed up views

[primavera]

134. Were you not making the point that critics of torture constitute the "far left"?

It seems like the ball's in your court to back up that claim and, reading through your posts, all I'm seeing are repetitive accusations of intellectual dishonesty, but I haven't found any posts yet which explain why you think that criticizing torture is such an extremist position. :shrug:

[NJmaverick]

136. My point is that Obama stopped the torture

and those that say he is continuing are blinded to that fact by their far left ideology.

[primavera]

138. But that's not what Obama's being criticized for

You offered your initial point in response to an article about a group of human rights advocates who, as far as we know, may have included conservatives - while a favorite of liberals, human rights is not an exclusively liberal province; there are conservatives as well who work for and support human rights causes - and who were criticizing Obama for reopening military tribunals, entertaining plans for indefinite, preventive detention, and refusing to prosecute those who committed torture under the Bushista junta. Those are all valid criticisms, none of which allege that Obama himself is endorsing the use of torture. So how is it relevant that Obama stopped torture under his administration? Has anyone said otherwise? Are you suggesting that, because he is not using torture himself, that alone places him beyond any reproach?

[NJmaverick]

139. There are at least a half dozen posters on this thread alone

that have tried to claim Obama is guilty of allowing torture. Presumably these posters share the same far left leanings as the people Obama met with.

[primavera]

140. Why is that presumable?

To the best of my knowledge, the people on this thread have no relationship to the representatives from human rights organizations who met with Obama. And, as far as the article states, none of those representatives claimed that Obama was allowing torture. Do you know something different than what the article indicates?

[rhett o rick]

149. you say half a dozen posters on this thread claim the Pres is "allowing torture".

Please help me out and point them out. I must have missed them. I see complaints about indefinite detention. Is that what you are talking about?

[rhett o rick]

150. "the Founding Father"? who are you refering to mr. I know all about American

History? the Founding Father?

[The Hope Mobile]

108. Spot on! nt

[Name removed]

63. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rhett o rick]

147. So you support torture? Is that what you are saying? Just what is the far left saying

that you disagree with?

[Wizard777]

32. Ahhh the poor guy. Perhaps he should have went to the circus first.

Try cleaning up some real Elephant turds before he got to the metaphorical ones in the White House. The question is the same. What to do with all the turds? But the answer is a lil different. You have to prosecute these turds before you can toss them in the shit can where they belong. End of problem.

[LuckyLib]

33. Who was there? Any specifics on individuals or groups?

[xchrom]

37. i guess it's gonna come down to the next election cycle.nt

[autorank]

42. As Vincent Bugliosi said recently

Michael Collins: What would you say to the president if you had the opportunity?

Vincent Bugliosi: If I were to speak to President Obama, I would inform him of one thing and advise him of a couple of other things. I’d inform him, and I guess this sounds a little sarcastic, but I would inform him that when he talks about only looking forward and not backwards, I agree that most of his efforts have to be towards the future. I’m not quarreling with him on that, but you can’t forget the past.

When he says that he intends to give Bush a free pass simply because whatever crime Bush may have committed was in the past, I would inform him of something he already knows: that all criminal prosecutions, without exception and by definition, have to deal, obviously, with past criminal behavior. Obviously we cannot prosecute someone for a crime that they may commit in the future.

And if we prosecute for even petty theft in America, what do we do with Bush, who I’m very convinced took this nation to war under false pretenses and has caused incalculable death, horror, and suffering?

I would advise him of two things, kind of using his words against him. If indeed Obama’s sole emphasis seems to be the future, I don't think anything could improve our image around the world more, restore our credibility more than prosecuting George Bush for his monumental crimes. We would be telling the world’s people that what George Bush did in taking this nation to war on a lie against a sovereign nation like Iraq, without any provocation whatsoever, was not the real America. That was only George Bush’s America. The real America would never do something like that. And then in the real America, no man is so high he is above the law, and even presidents have to be accountable for their crimes. So talking about the future, using President Obama’s own emphasis, I think it would be very advisable to bring Bush to justice if, in fact, he’s guilty, as I say he is.

Talking about the future, if we want to deter future presidents from taking this nation to another war under false pretenses, some president in the future that gets a funny thought, I think that deterrence would increase immeasurably if he knew what America did to George Bush, put him on trial for murder, and if he was convicted, of course, the punishment would either be life imprisonment or the imposition of the death penalty.

[autorank]

43. Bugliosi on Holder & Obama

MC: Ultimately, isn’t it the responsibility of the attorney general to determine the crimes that are investigated and what aren’t? For example, if Obama called up Holder and said, “Lay off any prosecutions against the Bush crew,” Holder may take that advice or he may not. But wouldn’t he have to ignore the request?

VB: Well, there’s no question that independent of Obama, Holder has the authority to bring criminal charges against Bush, no question about it. There’s also no question that each of the 93 U.S. attorneys around the country have the power and the authority to do so, but let’s jump from there to reality. The reality is if there’s some U.S. attorney in Chicago that wants to do it, it’s possible, but he’s not going to do it without checking with his boss. You don't take on the biggest most important murder case in American history without letting your boss know about it, you know -- that is, not if you want to remain a U.S. attorney; and likewise with Holder. He has the authority and he has the power to completely ignore Obama, but the reality is what do you do? If Obama indicated that he was opposed to it, it would take quite a man to overrule the president. http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0904/S00097.htm

[Blue_Tires]

46. i'm curious to know who/what groups he met with...

[ProudDad]

47. Sorry, MLK would be all over Obama's cowardice

like he was on Lyndon Johnson's. (referring to your tag cartoon -- the terrorist fist bump)

Obama is obeying the orders of his corporate capitalist masters...and the programming of his Harvard training...

Doesn't disappoint me though, I expected it...




Same old shit, different container...

[EFerrari]

65. Yes, Martin would have been all over him.

It takes no guts to stand up to your enemies. It takes guts to stand up to your friends, look them in the eye and tell them they are wrong.

[The Hope Mobile]

87. That's what we need!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5697718&mesg_id=5697718

[Winterblues]

51. President Obama will find himself in the same legal morass that swallowed up George Bush."

What legal morass is that? I doubt there will be any legal anything for anyone in the Bush* Cabal..

[Vidar]

54. Obama is the bag man for Bush's 750 billion dollar bribe to Wall Street.

[Zhade]

55. Oh, well, fuck him then. Not getting my vote again.

I won't enable someone who lied to me. Ever.

[DebbieCDC]

56. I am totally sick to hear this

I had such high hopes for Obama. Well, fool me once.

As Jonathan Turley said on Rachel last week "the biggest bait and switch in history".

He'll be a one-term president and the pukes will be back in 2012.

[dana_b]

144. hadn't heard the bait & switch comment

sounds pretty accurate to me.

[underpants]

58. The O man knows what he is doing

:patriot:

[Zhade]

61. What does it feel like to be so slavishly delusional?

I have no frame of reference for your baffling support of criminality like indefinite detention without charge.

[FrenchieCat]

66. Probably feels the same as being anti-whatever, just cause one can.

50 Gitmo detainees cleared for transfer
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3888012

I see you in that thread.
You may not know it yet,
but in the end,
justice will be served as well as possible
under fucked up, and I mean fucked up circumstances.

Mark my words.

By then, you will have moved on to some other
disappointment though.
But I mean, why not? :shrug:

[EFerrari]

67. That doesn't even make sense. n/t

[underpants]

71. So the young bull says to his father....

hey look at all those cows! let's run down there and f*#& one"

Dad says-let's walk down and f*#& them all

---

Health care, chief

Obama has a huge change to make this year (that everyone agrees has to be made) and he knows that that "far left" (whatever that means) will be on board with him and he needs to bring as many people with him as possible. They got an audience and yes you can say that this is on par with Bush having some preachers in and giving them ink pens so they can go back to their flock and talk about being in the Oval Office but more accurately they will be on board with him because we all know it has to be done.

[Critters2]

72. If by "what he's doing" you mean selling out Democratic principles. nt

[underpants]

76. No I mean governing

we haven't seen it in a while
it takes some getting used to

[choie]

91. oh I see...

he has to continue to fuck the constitution in order to get health care legislation through...

[Critters2]

114. Actually, it looks a helluva lot like what we've been seeing.

And I do not want to get used to it!!

[The Hope Mobile]

80. Let the WH know!

Comments: 202-456-1111
Switchboard: 202-456-1414
FAX: [phone]
TTY/TDD

Comments: 202-456-6213
Visitors Office: 202-456-2121

[Critters2]

70. Electing a centrist corporatist president, and expecting him to be a leftie.

At least I get to say "I told you so". For what that's worth.

[Generator]

96. I will say this for him

He listens and he is unbelievably smart. So he better keep listening because some of us are not giving up on this. It's just that simple. I joined Amnesty International and the ACLU because of Obama not because of Bush. ( I was a member years ago and let it lapse). I knew it was almost entirely hopeless with the Bush/Cheney's of the world.

But Obama is going to have to keep listening. Because my effort and money are going to these groups, and the pressure needs to be kept up.

[Critters2]

118. Meeting with and listening to are two different things. nt

[mvd]

129. All I will say is that I'm glad he took them seriously

Liberals would have never had a meeting under Bush.