jcd11235 0
Recommended Posts
[Reply] don't follow Feinstein, as she represents neither me nor my state.
She's the head of the Senate Intelligence Committee. The one respknsible for the "check and balance" thingy. A well-known liberal. And someone who defends the administration's actions as necessary for security.
[Reply]I haven't seen any evidence (real evidence, not your typical twisted logic) suggesting President Obama opposes civil rights
Hmmm. So monitoring private phone records without notice or the opportunity to object because security requires it is something toy view as consistent with civil rights?
How about the civil rights of Tsarnaev? Not mirandized. Told he could not have a lawyer. The interrogation didn't stop until a federal magistrate went in person to put an end to it.
The rights of detainees in gitmo? Gitmo is still open, right?
The assassination of people in foreign lands?
How about his refusal to do anything about DADT or DOMA until the courts require him to act?
His policy proposals to end the privacy protections of HIPAA?
Back in 2010, even the executive director of the ACLU said that Obama "disgusted" him. Because Obama took all of Bush's fucked up police-state bullshit and ratified and institutionalized it. The Security and Surveillance State that Dubya and the Republicans in Congress got off the ground has found a true friend, advocate in Obama and the Democrats in Congress. The Security State vision of Bush is being normalized, legitimized and expanded by the President and members of both sides of Congress.
The President took the reins from Bush and expanded on Bush's ideals. Obama was only able to do so because of the hypocritical acquiescence of liberals who would not speak against him. After four years, we are now seeing the reality hit. Even Chris Matthews is fed up. Obama used his charm and rhetoric to appear so very reasonable and conscientious about it. The facade need not be carried on. He need not be elected again.
So Bush went to the Middle east and Afghanistan/Pakistan and kidnapped large numbers of people to hold without habeas corpus at Gitmo. Obama just kills them with drones (and whomever is around them).
Bush - set up military tribunals for foreign terrorists. Obama - expanded it to include American citizens on American soil who may be terrorists.
Civil rights, you say? How about those?
My wife is hotter than your wife.
kallend 2,146
lawrocket[Reply]Provide a link to any post where I have stated that government invasion of privacy without a warrant is OK. Just one will do.
You haven what you have done is create a post called "hypocrites"
Well, they ARE hypocrites. They applauded when the Act was passed and reauthorized, and now they don't like the consequences and try to blame someone that wasn't even in Congress in 2001.
I was against it in 2001, I was against it in 2008, and am against it in 2013.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
DanG 1
QuoteThe rights of detainees in gitmo? Gitmo is still open, right?
Was it Obama who blocked bringing Gitmo detainees to US soil for trial? No, it was Congress. (BTW, I'm pretty disgusted to Gitmo is still open, but if you think the "liberals" are the driving force keeping it open, you are deluded)
QuoteThe assassination of people in foreign lands?
People get killed when we're at war. That's got nothing to do with civil rights.
QuoteHow about his refusal to do anything about DADT or DOMA until the courts require him to act?
Huh? Congress repealed DADT, Obama signed the repeal. Obama stopped enforcing DOMA against the protestation of Congressional Republicans.
QuoteBush - set up military tribunals for foreign terrorists. Obama - expanded it to include American citizens on American soil who may be terrorists.
Was it Obama calling for Tsarnaev to be sent to Gitmo and treated as an enemy combatant? No, it was Senate Republicans.
- Dan G
We still do.
So neither the President nor Feinstein nor Holder are liberals?
I don't follow Feinstein, as she represents neither me nor my state. I haven't seen any evidence (real evidence, not your typical twisted logic) suggesting President Obama opposes civil rights. Similarly, with Holder.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites