redneckgaijin ([info]redneckgaijin) wrote,

Someone tell me why I voted for the man...

... oh, that's right, because I was deluded and stupid, that's why.

Quoting from (this might seem a pattern) Andrew Sullivan's Daily Dish:


Jawad was ordered released from the Gitmo torture compound yesterday after years of abuse, cruelty, sadism and torture authorized by the president of the United States, George W. Bush. Staggeringly, the Obama administration is resisting his release and threatening a criminal charge.

That's why we supported Obama, right?


Reading the NYT article Sullivan linked to in the quote, the following become clear:

(1) Barack Obama believes that the Constitutional protection against double jeopardy (being tried twice for the same act) is a dead letter;

(2) Barack Obama believes that the President has the right to imprison indefinitely anyone, any time, for any reason;

(3) Any objections Barack Obama has to torture and evidence extracted thereby is strictly practical, not moral; and

(4) Barack Obama believes the President has the right to defy the rulings of judges from the bench.

We've replaced one elected king with another, haven't we? 'Cause I sure don't see the rule of law in this.

  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 5 comments

[info]nancylebov

July 31 2009, 16:53:16 UTC 2 years ago

I did have some hopes, but mostly I voted for him because I was pretty sure Republicans would initiate new disasters. There was a chance that a Democrat would be politics as usual.

[info]scarfman

July 31 2009, 21:50:44 UTC 2 years ago

You keep printing these stories like you're surprised, when you're the one I quote when I say the libertarians warned us in 2006 that the Democrats are every bit as interested in the powers given themselves by the Bush administration as the Republicans are, for when it's their turn in power. These events aren't telling us anything new; they're just saying Obama isn't, after all, running the country himself any more than Bush was. Whether this surprises him or not (I like to think it does [just as I liked to think his election was going to make a difference]), the result is the same. "This is how democracy dies."

[info]redneckgaijin

July 31 2009, 23:33:03 UTC 2 years ago

When I wrote that in 2006 I had in mind, very specifically, Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi, neither of whom ever saw a government power they didn't covet. I had hoped, based on Obama's "Change" rhetoric, that he would be different. What I'm discovering is that not only isn't he different, in a few cases he's turning out to be a Bush third term- not in economics or healthcare, but in military affairs, rule-of-law affairs, and above all checks-and-balances affairs, just as bad as his immediate predecessor.

[info]scarfman

August 1 2009, 02:06:50 UTC 2 years ago

I see. I may be wrong, but I remember that you spoke of Democrats generally.

[info]kyllein

August 1 2009, 21:47:25 UTC 2 years ago

Well...

We went down the "path" when we changed from a republic into a democracy; to put things bluntly.
That's the glory and the horror of our sort of Government: We get the government and the leaders we deserve, not the ones we want. Barring a massive change in things, it's only going to get worse; and we the people are the responsible parties.
Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Facebook Twitter More login options
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…