Naomi Wolf: 'Obama can lock any US citizen up without trial'

[jakeXT]

Run time: 11:55 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLSeD19m3UE   Posted on YouTube: July 14, 2009 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: July 14, 2009 By DU Member: jakeXT Views on DU: 7496

 


I haven't read her books, but I have the feeling she doesn't get what fascism is.
By saying it started with Bush, she is ignoring tendencies like Rex 84 with Reagan for example.

[winyanstaz]

1. If it was wrong for Bush....

It is just as wrong for President Obama. He is supposed to be the good guy isn't he?

[atreides1]

3. Define "good guy"?

Thanks.

[Tim01]

4. Careful what you say, wouldn't want the govt to make you dissappear.

j/k


Sort of.

[struggle4progress]

84. Overblown noise like this is divisive. Let me know when Obama starts locking folk up without trial

[mmonk]

2. She knows what she is talking about.

Try watching the movie End of America or read the book.

[defendandprotect]

5. This is an OBAMA issue receiving way too little criticism . . .!!!

[defendandprotect]

6. Now, how can a thread like this have only 5 "Recs" -- what insanity is ruling here?

Meanwhile, I do agree that fascism has always been in play --
that's what Kings/Queens and Palace Rule were about and they simply
morph from one identity to another -- today they use corporations/corporatism.

But there is always right-wing political violence -- and it's been very active
and clear here in America over the last 50 years.

Yes, this didn't start with Bush -- the JFK assassination gave them entrance and
LBJ proceeded with his own war on lies and funding cronies - Brown & Root.
Nixon began to openly set the stage and used government to wield political power
for himself and the right-wing. Nixon armed right-wing Fundie Israel thereby
burying peace-loving Israel and gave imperialistic America a foothold in the ME.
By backing Israel's increasing aggressions, army Israel, financing Israel's military
ambitions we are where we are now.

Naomi Wolf and Naomi Klein are more than correct in their warnings to us all!!

And, this is GLOBAL FASCISM, folks . . .

[cascadiance]

12. The problem without seeing total # of recs is that it might be getting a lot of "unrecs" too...

from those that don't want to see Obama scrutinized for this sort of action as well. So in a way I'm happy to see it have the votes it does have, even if it's not hugely rec'd as I'd hope it to be.

Just hope we see the day soon where all on DU see the need to stay principled even when viewing those that we view as helping our side and to hold them to account when they are still a part of the problem, or not are doing enough within their power to fix the system properly.

[defendandprotect]

18. Granted, the videos may not get great play . . I know I count on the recaps cause . . .

I don't have time to watch them unless it's one of those videos where something really
has to be seen and the text alone won't do it.

Both of these women -- Naomi Klein and Naomi Wolf -- are sound the alarms as loudly as
they should be sounded. And what they are saying just cannot be walked away from or
filed away for another time.

[OwnedByFerrets]

39. They are two Sirens of Truth

[FLAprogressive]

52. and threads like these are exactly what the "unrec" feature was created for

A few GD:P True Believers are tired of what they perceive as a lack of faith....

[ThomCat]

62. I think you're right. I think the admins wanted a way to sanitize what

gets onto the greatest page, and that includes keeping critiques of Obama off the greatest page.

The Unrec feature lets the Obamatons bury critiques without actually disputing any of it. It hasn't worked as well as I think they would have liked.

But, now that the actual number of recommendations is hidden, they can arbitrarily change the rec number and unlink the recommendations from the greatest page and nobody's going to know about it to complain.

[Why Syzygy]

76. Well, if thems the rules, I now understand the game. nt

[defendandprotect]

100. The administration . . .

Or the DLC'ers here ...?

Or DLC money here. . . ?

Hard to know and rarely see questions raised about that!

[biermeister]

17. kicked! meet the new boss, same as the old boss nt.

[babylonsister]

7. Does she mention who Obama has locked up w/o trial

(Gitmo detainees don't count-they were already locked up)?

[ThomCat]

9. Of course the count. He's the one still locking them up.

:wtf:

How can they "not count" when he's he President of the United States and they are being held without charges, without access to exculpatory evidence, without consistent or confidential access to attorneys, without access to fair trails or real courts, and they are being held by the United States Military?

BTW: It has been posted here several times that the Prison at Bagram is being expanded, and that is where a lot of people are being transferred. Sources seem to disagree about whether it is run by the military or the CIA, but either way it is run by the US. So I would say look there first. Have you heard of any charges being filed against any of the people being held there?

Or what about the people in the other CIA prisons that are mentioned pretty regularly in the press outside of the US. There was a prison in Poland that was uncovered last year as a CIA prison by civil rights groups that tracked CIA rendition flights. The US has yet to even admit that it even exists or that we are holding anyone there, so all the prisoners there are ghost prisoners with no charges and no rights.

[babylonsister]

13. Sorry, I've no intention of blaming Obama for jailing these

people. He's said he's going to close Gitmo so we'll see if that happens. As for other prisons, I just don't know. And 'sources disagreeing' aren't exactly helpful, because they might be trying to push their own agenda.

This woman seems to want to blame this admin for the sins of the last, when I think they're totally different.

[MessiahRp]

20. As long as Obama talks about indefinite detentions and refuses to release the Gitmo prisoners

He will continue to own the blame that should have only been directed towards Bush. He is continuing the policy, the same way he is continuing illegal wiretapping, the same way he is continuing (and advancing) state secrecy... if he doesn't want to be blamed he needs to do the right thing and release these prisoners. If they're really so guilty then try them and give them access to evidence to defend themselves.

This detaining someone because of what they might do is the worst legal argument ever made and it makes Obama look like some dictator or something. Democracies don't act this way.

Rp

[defendandprotect]

102. The real CHANGE we're getting is a reversal on openness and

the ending of the wars --

Dems keeping the wars going and re-funding them for more than two years is

immoral and insane -- bankrupting the Treasury!

Are we supposed to be happy that GOP had their eyes on 100 year war --

and we might see Obama get us out in the next 5 years or so . .. ??

Not me!

[ThomCat]

23. You're the one pushing an agenda.

:P

Trying to find out why the CIA or our Military have prisons, and where, and who's in them is an "agenda" you distrust? Really? And you're admitting that publicly?

"This woman" isn't trying to blame Obama for Bush's sins. She's blaming Obama for embracing and keeping the mechanisms of authoritarian power that Bush built, even though Obama campaigned to dismantle this stuff. She's blaming Obama for hiding evidence of crimes for political reasons, instead of respecting and re-introducing the rule of law. She's blaming him for building up secret prisons instead of emptying them.

None of those are Bush's sins. Those are all things Obama is doing. You're making excuses, insisting again and again and again on trying to deflect everything away from Obama just because you insist on finding him innocent and adorable ahead of time, and insist on ignoring everything to the contrary.

Being in love with someone's charisma, falling for a cult of personality is how countries get into really bad positions, and people wonder later "why didn't I see it coming?" It's not because it was hidden. It's because people wore blinders and refused to see.

[babylonsister]

27. Wrong. I'm giving him time, unlike you. And I've been

critical, though not as much as many people. I cannot equate this president with the last, thankfully.

We shall see.

[ThomCat]

29. Give him lots of time. Give him his entire term.

And then at the very end you can finally start looking around and trying to see what the hell he's been doing. :)

In the meantime, many of us realize that presidents hit the ground running, and the work they do from day 1 is important and affects everyone. The stuff a president does early also lays the foundation for what they can do later.

So if you wait until the end of the term to judge anything, by then it's too late.

Did you wait until the end of Bush's term to judge him too? Did you give him lots of time? :P

[babylonsister]

32. You don't think Obama has hit the ground running?

Compare what he's done since January 09 to any other president in your memory, and get back to me.

[ThomCat]

33. Even Carter did more in his first 100 days.

Obama has been busy, but he hasn't accomplished much. That wouldn't worry me if he was TRYING to accomplish the right things. But there is no real world evidence that he's even TRYING to pursue progressive goals.

This idea that he's a progressive president is mostly just PR and spin. The actual Progressive parts of his budget are a small tiny fraction of the discretionary budget. And the obvious progressive things he could be doing, he's Not!

His proposals have all been very business friendly. None of them, NOT ONE, challenges businesses to live up to progressive standards. He backed down on campaign talk about environmental standards. He backed down about challenging and rewriting free trade agreements. He backed down about immediately closing Guantanamo and setting a timetable for getting us out of Iraq (not they will happen whenever they happen, if they happen). He has backed down on stimulus efforts that benefit Main Street as well as Wall Street.

If Obama was working toward progressive causes we'd all give him as much time as it takes. But we're waiting and waiting and waiting for him to START even talking about taking progressive stands or to START pushing progressive policies. How long do we have to wait for him to stop kissing big business and Start being progressive? How long does that take?

[babylonsister]

34. OK, whatever, Carter accomplished more! I give. You aren't willing

to see my pov, and I think yours is dumb. Que sera sera.

I'm agreeing to disagree. Peace.

[ThomCat]

36. Your point of view isn't based on facts.

You haven't been able to provide any. Your point of view is based on faith and hope and fantasy.

It would be nice to sit back and wait for the Obama miracle to happen and make everything all better, but in the real world we need to watch our politicians and keep an eye on them and push them to do what we think needs to be done. Because if we don't, the lobbyists already are.

But be happy with your point of view. Ignorance is bliss. Enjoy your bliss. You've worked hard for it.

[FLAprogressive]

50. "Your point of view is based on faith and hope and fantasy."

Pretty much.

It amazes me that most of the replies to posts questioning policy repeat the same "he's only had X months, you have to have faith"

it's almost religious with some. One person even admonished themselves for "losing faith".

[ThomCat]

53. It absolutely is religious thinking.

:(

It could understand it if it was just people who have no background in any other type of thought. After all, if religious thinking is all they know that that's what we should expect.

But there are some people caught up in this who should know how to think critically. These are people who have backgrounds that teach logical and scientific thinking where you are trained to pay attention to what is really there not what you want to be there. When even these people are getting caught up in the cult of personality it's pretty damned scary.

[FLAprogressive]

56. I hate to say it but some DUers are proving the RW right that some people see him as a messiah

some of the adoration and blind faith shown by certain people is truly disturbing.

[jefferson_dem]

60. "I hate to say it but some DUers are proving the RW right..."

Uh huh. Eventually, they all expose their true leanings...

Hannity uses your talking points every day. "The Annointed One"..."The Messiah"... Russ would be proud of you.

[ThomCat]

63. So your only defense of any idea is to smear people as right wingers?

:eyes:

Do you ever have anything intelligent to say? You're drivel is boring.

[FLAprogressive]

67. it's their only defense. Have you noticed the favorite retort is "Freeper!"??

[jefferson_dem]

69. What's to defend?

The poster parrots right-wing smears on the Democratic Underground. Sorry my "call out" offends you so.

[FLAprogressive]

71. except my statement has nothing to do with Obama himself....only the insane people who refuse to

allow anyone to question his judgment or hold him accountable....things needed in a healthy republic

uhoh...I said "republic"....must mean I'm a freeper! :eyes:

[jefferson_dem]

74. I did not accuse you of being a freeper.

The nature of your posts in this thread suggest you share a common goal and method with them, however.

Keep digging.

[Solomon]

80. Sorry but you are the one who started with the smearing.

Anybody with a different view you label as a "worshiper", "fantasizer", "like religion". You started it.

[ThomCat]

121. What else would you call people who constantly cheer photo ops

and ignore real policy, who constantly make excuses for what's really happening because they just really like the guy. Anything he does is acceptable just because he did it, even though those same people would have screamed like hell if Bush had done the same things. Worshipers is a very accurate description of the way he's treated by many here.

It is like religion. That's not a smear, it's a description. If people don't like it, then stop adoring the man and start treating him like any other politician.

[Why Syzygy]

68. Yes, it is. nt

[Stand and Fight]

113. Cult of Personality maybe? n/t

[Stand and Fight]

112. You're agreeing to disagree?

You're only doing that because you haven't a leg to stand on! :P

[Why Syzygy]

66. Some people are satisfied to keep munching on HOPE.

Hope was for BEFORE he was elected. The hope being that once in office he would DO.
I would like to hear someone name ONE thing he has accomplished which was HOPED for.

[trthnd4jstc]

81. Obama is a centrist, and not a progressive. Us true leftists voted for the lesser of 2 evils. nt

[defendandprotect]

106. Actually, Obama is on the right . . . . our measurements are all skewed . .

[AtheistCrusader]

94. The President does not NEED 'time'.

Are you friggin' kidding me? This is an area the President has the power to act pretty much unilaterally. Just like the Bush Admin set these camps up with lightning speed, Obama COULD tear them down.

He's not. I don't think it's unreasonable to air the fact I am disgruntled about it, and clearly others are too.

[defendandprotect]

103. Pelosi confirmed in '06 they were elected to END THE WARS . . .

that was more than two years ago --

Obviously, you're not concerned with the ending of the wars --

which, btw, are also bankrupting our Treasury!

[Stand and Fight]

111. Giving him time?

Good God! Let me play devil's advocate here...

He's been in office nearly as long as Bush was in office when 9/11 happened. The fact that Bush's administration failed to prevent 9/11 puts the blame on them. The fact that Obama has CONTINUED these damnable policies places the blame for them continuing -- nearly SEVEN months later -- squarely on him. The fact that there are STILL people being held prisoner in American "detention centers" without a trial and indefinitely falls squarely on the shoulders of Barack Obama. He can change it. He chooes not to. That's not bias, that's objectivity. No one gets a pass when the facts come into play.

[defendandprotect]

101. "This woman" . . . ??? Obama also said he was going to end the wars -- !!!

[cui bono]

107. They're not totally different if they are continued.

And Obama has not changed them. In fact, he's made a couple things worse than BushCo.

He's a huge disappointment so far and that's why we need to hold his feet to the fire instead of this bs about how we should just sit here quietly, or praising him, because we know not what he has in mind, because he is the master of chess and any other bullshit excuses given on this board by those who can't bear any criticism of their hero. It's quite sickening really, and hugely disappointing.

[roguevalley]

16. as long as its possible, someone will use it. he needs to kill the bad

shit and he isn't. that is a stain on him.

[ThomCat]

8. I hope all the Obama cheerleaders watch this.

How can you be so in love with a president who is refusing to give up the Unconstitutional powers Bush gave himself?

How can you be so in love with a president who will not condemn and dismantle the mechanisms and privileges for spying on Americans, detaining people without charges, military tribunals (and all that entails) instead of the real rule of law, etc.

How can you not be disgusted by Obama retaining for himself (and future presidents) the powers that could lead us out of democracy and into a more authoritarian government?

How can you not be disgusted by Obama withholding and hiding proof of our military and CIA and government contractors systematically raping and torturing civilians?

Where is the President who campaigned as a scholar on Constitutional Law who would first and foremost uphold the Constitution, restore the rule of law, and who promised to undo all of Bush's arrogant and extra-legal arrangements?

I had so much hope when he was first elected, and I have been repeatedly disappointed to such as extent that I am outraged, and I can't understand how so many people are so blinded by his charisma that his real actions don't seem to register. :(

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ThomCat]

21. That's an intelligent response.

:eyes:

[Amos Moses]

42. You've got that patriotism in ya.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuHhi3njriw

[OwnedByFerrets]

40. Great post!!

And besides all those things you listed, personally I haven't seen one thing that has been for the middle class american. Its all been for big business or for wall st.

[Why Syzygy]

70. You're right.

Someone in another forum said he has the corporations SCARED! :rofl: I had to laugh.
What in hell fire do they have to be SCARED about?

[FLAprogressive]

73. Their view of him is distanced from reality.....

....in their world:

Obama is a progressive who is anti-war & anti-corporate. You often hear "he's up against a lot" by people who actually think he's fighting the system in some way.

[Why Syzygy]

75. If he were the man we wanted him to be,

he wouldn't even have the cabinet he has. He would be "up against" his own CHOICES!

[OwnedByFerrets]

85. A progressive?? Give me a break. Dennis Kucinich is a

progressive. Not to, President Obama.

[FLAprogressive]

45. +1

[polmaven]

87. I am at work, and unable

to watch the video. The headline on the post, though, says the president is able to hold US citizens without trial. Many of the replies I am seeing refer to GITMO. The GITMO prisoners, (while I agree they should not be held indefinitely without trial, nor held after a finding of not guilty) are not US citizens. What am I missing?

[Stand and Fight]

114. NOT AMERICANS!

Tell me you're kidding!

No where in our Constitution are rights limited exclusively to citizens of the United States. Get a fucking grip.

[polmaven]

118. Get the f-ing grip yourself, please!

Read my POST! The HEADLINE said American CITIZENS!!!!!!!

My post also said I DISAGREE with the indefinite detention of anyone.

Did I use too many multi-syllable words for you?

[Stand and Fight]

123. Actually, not at all...

All of your sentences are fairly elementary and not the least bit complex. :P

[ThomCat]

122. Two american citizens were held under Bush

and Obama has refused to terminate the policies and the Unitary Executive privilages that supposedly allowed and justified that. So it's still an option on the table for the President. The issue is WHY Obama feels the need to retain the power to detain American Citizens without charges when he campaigned on restoring the rule of law.

What is the purpose of retaining dictator powers if not to make sure they remain available for use? And why would Obama want that power to remain available?

[Politicalboi]

10. Has she been asleep these past 8 years?

I believe President Obama is going to restore the Constitution like he said during the campaign. I wish they would get to it. Although I have less fear of myself being locked up under Obama rather than Bush.

[ThomCat]

11. Obviously she has not. She has been one of the most awake people

in the US. You should read some of her writing from the past 8 years.

Her entire point is that despite all of Obama's promises about undoing the damage of the Bush years, he has done nothing to undo Bush's power-grabs, and has instead embraced a bunch of those power grabs.

Your faith in Obama is merely faith. Pay attention to her research and her warnings. She's paying much closer attention than you are.

[dolphindance]

14. I trust this nation's stewardship under Obama.

If you don't, then I guess it's going to be an excruciating 4+ years for you.

I wish I could unrec. a thread multiple times so I could bury your hate for our President.

[ThomCat]

22. Why do you trust him? What has he done to earn it since he took office?

I would think that any American who has actually read the Constitution and Bill of rights would be distrustful of these things Obama is doing.

So far I see a lot of blind trust, a lot of blind faith, but it's all blind.

[dolphindance]

24. He's black. I'm black. He's the first black President.

And I want to see him succeed. So I'm not so quick to give up on him when I see the gargantuan task before him.

His success means a LOT for race relations.

Maybe you're not black, so this impact is lost on you. I'm sure this is the case.

Besides, I've seen what he is made of through the election and the first six months. He doesn't make a bold move until he has all the information. And if something seems "wrong" to you, it's because you don't have all the facts -- yet.

Eventually, he is going to prove everyone wrong. Just as he always does.

[ThomCat]

25. I'm gay and disabled

and I don't care if the president is the Queen of New York and parapalegic, I wouldn't go giving the President of the United States credit that isn't deserved. It is far too important a position to judge based on anything other than what the person in office is doing.

In the election, running for office, I would have agreed with you. Electing the first black president was monumentally important. But then again, electing the first woman president would have been too. So either way we would have made history.

But once the election is over all of that is moot. After the election all that matters in a President is what is that president doing.

If you really think that Obama has all the information and nobody else can judge him because nobody knows what he's doing then my question to you is, did you give Bush and prior presidents that same leeway? Did you assume that only They had all the information while they were in office?

The actions of Presidents get dissected in more detail than anything else on earth. There is a massive amount of information out there on every political issue, and a huge amount of it is about what the President has done, is doing or will do. Do you really think that suddenly everything political is happening behind a veil?

You claim that Obama always proves everyone wrong. When? About what? I'd love to see that analysis. :P

[mmonk]

78. .

:rofl:

You're absolutely right. Trust is earned, not granted because he belongs to a certain race, group, or party. Actions, not words determine what someone is doing.

[ChiciB1]

99. I'm A White Woman Who Doesn't CARE If A Person Is Purple, Has Four Arms,

six eyes and walks on his/her hind legs! I bought a LOT of memorabilia BECAUSE Obama IS the FIRST BLACK person to EVER be elected here in America! My grandkids will inherit the "stuff" and be thankful! But for me, once Obama became the POTUS it stopped being about his RACE!!!

I Voted For This Man, But This Man Isn't Who I Voted For... The Change I See Is The Change In Him!

I've made this same comment several times here at DU, and if that makes me a "bitter whiner" then I'll wear the moniker or any name calling for what it is and consider WHO it came from for future reference.

The Health Care Bill ISN'T done yet, but I MUST say that from what I've seen since he took office that I have been disappointed several, several times. It's NOT about HOW LONG he's been in office, it's about what he's doing right now and some decisions that have ALREADY been made that worry me.

Are those decisions going to be reversed?? Some decisions are the VERY SAME ones from BFEE!!

And YES, I do want him to succeed, but if what I'm seeing now continues I may have a difficult time defending him or even voting for him in 2012!

JMHO!

[dolphindance]

117. You don't care because you are white and used to seeing Presidents who look like you.

So you have no idea how an Obama Presidency feels to a person of color.

Therefore, you quickly dismantle his plans before they come to fruition and cast aspersions upon him.

[Name removed]

120. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

124. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ChiciB1]

125. And ONE MORE THING!! I'm On Disability Myself Due To TWO

car accidents that have left me with many back & neck problems... so am I a MINORITY too????

[musette_sf]

126. way to disrupt a discussion with BS

[balantz]

26. That's understandable and all, but this is about politics, not what ethnicity the president is.

America needs to have their president engage in a fight against fascism, not continue it in any way whatsoever.

[Why Syzygy]

72. As long as he embraces Bush's policies,

which he is, he isn't doing any of us any favors, including Blacks! The first Black President and he just keeps doing what the Redneck did? hmm. Not good for you, I would think.

[dolphindance]

90. He aint "embracing" shit. He's analyzing the situation and doing what's best for the country.

Leave your rhetoric at the door.

[Why Syzygy]

98. Well . if you're going to

lie to yourself, there's nothing more to say.

[lumberjack_jeff]

97. *Facepalm* n/t

[Autumn]

105. That is amazing

so white people should trust white politicians? Would you trust Steele? I like Bill Clinton but as a politician he wasn't too trustworthy. Bush certainly wasn't. You are right though, President Obama proved me wrong. I never thought he would keep bush's secrecy and the powers he claimed but he seems to be ,I never thought he would vote for FISA but he did. I never thought he would appoint the same people who got us into the financial mess to oversee it but he did. No lobbyist in his administration, but there are. I just hope he doesn't always prove me wrong.

[babylonsister]

28. First hundred days:

I'm waiting for the list of the next 100.

Lots of imbedded links in this for more in-depth info...

http://pr.thinkprogress.org/2009/04/pr20090429/index.html

Obama's 100 Days Of Progress


Today marks 100 days since President Obama took office. Yesterday, The Progress Report examined how conservatives chose to spend their first 100 days. Today, we highlight the accomplishments of the Obama administration.

President Barack Obama took the oath of office on Jan. 21, 2009, with two broad mandates bestowed upon him by the American people: repair the mess that President Bush and his administration left behind after eight disastrous years in office, and enact a bold, progressive agenda that includes fixing our nation's health care system and seriously addressing global climate change. Obama went to work right away, pushing the "biggest, boldest countercyclical fiscal stimulus in American history" through Congress -- a $787 billion dollar measure that not only creates jobs but also provides investments in energy, transportation, education and health care. Obama also announced his intention to shift focus and resources away from Bush's misbegotten adventure in Iraq and refocus on Afghanistan, where the security situation is worse than it has been since the start of the U.S.-led war there in October 2001. Now, a series of recent public opinion polls shows that the American public not only overwhelmingly approves of the job Obama is doing as president, but they also believe the nation is heading in the right direction -- "the first time in years the nation has held such an optimistic view of its future." For example, a new ABC News/Washington Post poll found that 50 percent of Americans now say the country is on the right track (48 percent say the wrong track), compared with just 13 percent who had the same feeling last October (85 percent said the U.S. was heading in the wrong direction at that time). Indeed, in his first 100 days in office, Obama has received the support of the American public to implement the progressive agenda he campaigned on.

BREAK FROM BUSH: Shortly after taking office, Obama worked quickly to repair the damage done under Bush and has, in total, issued 29 executive decisions reversing Bush administration policy. On his first day as president, Obama signed an executive order mandating the closure of the Guantanamo Bay terror detainee prison camp within one year. The next day, he ordered military leaders to establish a plan for a responsible withdrawal from Iraq,and he signed executive orders ending CIA secret prisons and ending torture by requiring that all interrogations abide by the Army Field Manual. Obama put these first actions as president in simple terms. "We intend to win this fight" against terrorists, he said. But "we are going to win it on our own terms." On the domestic front, Obama reversed Bush's restrictions on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research in March, asserting that his administration would "make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology." In London at the G20 Summit and in other European capitals earlier this month, Obama reassured America's friends and allies that the United States would reengage the world as an equal partner. "We're starting to see some restoration of America's standing in the world," Obama said in London. " It is "very important for us to be able to forge partnerships as opposed to dictating solutions." As far as "dictating solutions," Obama also ditched Bush's "with us or against us" foreign policy mindset in dealing with America's allies and adversaries. Indicating his sincerity in reaching out to the Muslim world, Obama granted his first television interview as president to Dubai-based Al-Arabiya. "My job to the Muslim world is to communicate that the Americans are not your enemy," Obama said, adding, "We are offering a hand of friendship." Most significantly, Obama also opened the door to direct dialogue with Iran last month, sending the government and its people a "groundbreaking" "special message" on Nowruz, the start of the Persian New Year, in which he said the U.S. is seeking "engagement" with Iran "that is honest and grounded in mutual respect."

A PROGRESSIVE AGENDA: On Jan. 29, Obama signed his first major piece of legislation, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, an equal pay law making it easier for workers -- most of whom are women -- to initiate pay discrimination lawsuits. "We are upholding one of this nation's first principles: that we are all created equal and each deserve a chance to pursue our own version of happiness," Obama said at the bill's signing ceremony. Six days later, Obama signed a bill expanding publicly funded health insurance for children, known as SCHIP, legislation Bush had vetoed twice despite strong bipartisan support in Congress. The bill reduces the number of uninsured children by about half over the next four years and will "boost the number covered by the program to 11 million." "In a decent society, there are certain obligations that are not subject to trade offs or negotiation -- health care for our children is one of those obligations," Obama said. And just last week, the President signed a $5.7 billion national service bill championed by Sens. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and Orrin Hatch (R-UT) that "triples the size of the AmeriCorps service program over the next eight years and expands ways for students to earn money for college."

THE NEXT 100 DAYS AND BEYOND: Obama and Congress have yet to finalize legislation that would fully accomplish health care reform and solve our climate crisis, but these two major issues remain on the front-burner and have received significant attention in the administration's first 100 days. The economic recovery bill passed earlier this year contained key health care provisions that lead the way toward reform, including $19 billion for health care information technology to implement electronic health records and an agency to "conduct and support research that would assess the benefits of competing treatments," both of which aim to reduce future overall costs. Moreover, Obama's budget creates a "reserve fund" as a down payment to reform the health care system. The stimulus bill also provided a boost to a green economy. In what The New York Times called "the biggest energy bill in history," the Recovery Act provides $91 billion for clean energy investments. In a further indication that addressing climate change is a top priority for the Obama administration, the Environmental Protection Agency confirmed this month that greenhouse gas pollution endangers the health and welfare of the American public. The move finally complies with the Supreme Court's 2007 ruling -- ignored by Bush -- that such emissions should be regulated by the federal government under the Clean Air Act. Obama's budget contains key energy provisions that also aim to limit greenhouse gases and build a clean-energy economy, such as a mandatory cap on carbon emissions which is expected to raise hundreds of billions of dollars over the next ten years that will go toward clean energy development and tax credits for working Americans.

[ThomCat]

30. That's propaganda.

What messes of Bush's has he fixed or repaired? Name one? He has embraced most of Bush's stimulus agenda, and his unitary executive powers, and legal agenda for hiding the crimes of the CIA and military.

How has he enacted anything bold or progressive regarding healthcare. He isn't writing the legislation, and he isn't even pushing Bauccus or the lobbyists particularly hard to get progressive goals into the legislation. He's no LBJ or FDR when it comes to getting his way.

His fiscal stimulous package acquired debt at a rate faster than Bush ever dreamed, and gave all the money to wall street, expecting it to somehow trickle down to main street. But it didn't. It's Trickle Down Economics from Reaganomics delivered to us by a Democrat, and you're cheering this?

There is no evidence that it created even a single job. Our economy is still LOSING jobs. Not creating them.

Obama has announced a lot of intentions to move away from Bush's priorities, but we're still in Iraq and Afghanistan, and spending more money there than ever. So when do those expectations become something real?

Other than funding some green initiatives, with trivial amounts of money, especially compared to the billions he's throwing at banks and insurance companies, where is this bold progressive agenda? Where are these bold successes from his first 100 days? So far all we have is bold photo ops.

Come on, you need to have something better than this. This could have been written by Obama's press secretary.

[babylonsister]

31. Prove it. It is not, you're just frustrated because I'm not agreeing, and

neither is Think Progress. And you have a hard-on for this admin, truth be told. Do you think we'd be better off with McCain, or think we were better off with idiot son? Who do you think would solve all your/our problems immediately?

[ThomCat]

35. Of course we would NOT be better off with a Republican.

But that's like saying 0% is worse that 5%. I'd like a President who can at least get his ass up to 25% progressive. Is that too much to ask? He's a very centrist democrat, who's style is all about compromising with everyone. Unfortunately, he's compromising with everyone Except the left.

We had far too much triangulating and moving to the right with Clinton. Now, after we've been dragged so far to the right already, do we really want to applaud a president who is going to compromise some more and bring us even further to the right by doing it?

Can't we finally get someone who is going to strongly pull us to the left? With a stimulus program that Isn't trickle down economics? With environmental policies that aren't "recommended standards" and cap and trade where companies buy their way to polluting as much as they want? With a peace plan that isn't more war and more secret prisons and hidden evidence of war crimes?

That's really sick to bring up Republicans as the only alternative. You're a democrat. How about supporting a real democrat with real democratic policies, instead of one who is embracing so many of Bush's policies. In half of what Obama is doing it's as if Bush never left. So which one of us is supporting the Republican?

[babylonsister]

37. WHO would get elected that you're so supportive of? nt

[ThomCat]

38. If people in our party were willing to hold Obama accountable

it would still be HIM, but he'd be pressured to actually have a progressive agenda instead of a corporate centrist one.

The core of the problem is that he has cheerleaders, but not a lot of people in our part holding his feet to the fire. He is amazingly popular, but the only pressure on him is from the right. So he's compromising to the right, giving in to lobbyist.

The problem isn't WHO is our president, it's WHAT he's doing. And the reason he's doing it is because so many people are in love with his image and personality but not paying attention to his policies.

If his fan base was paying attention to what he's doing, letting him know, and calling him on it I guarantee he would be moving to the left and keeping more of his campaign promises.

[babylonsister]

43. Gotcha, no one but him, but the improved version. Good luck!

I already like him, so it'd be a no-brainer. :D

[balantz]

41. Your persistent points and arguments are excellent. Thanks. n/t

[jefferson_dem]

51. Oh please. So now anyone who supports Obama is not supporting a "real" Democrat?

Sorry to disrupt your fantasy play but President Obama is the same guy who ran as Candidate Obama - a pragmatic progressive.

If you were expecting single-payer, tax hikes, and a "Department of Peace" right out of the gate, you weren't paying attention last year.

If you think his actual policy agenda is simply watered-down Boosh-Lite, you're not paying attention now.

[ThomCat]

58. I'm paying plenty of attention.

I'm not so sure about you given your misreadings of my posts. I wasn't expecting anything right out of the gate except the start of policy, some foundation to build upon that shows he's really a progressive.

Calling him a progressive doesn't make it so when his policies show that he isn't. Reality trumps PR. Unless, of course, your idea of pragmatic progressive is someone who abandons progressive ideas every time he's challenged by big business to do so. :eyes:

As for Bush-lite, there is a long list at this point of Bush policies he is embracing and continuing, even though he campaigned against many of them. How do you characterize that?

[FLAprogressive]

59. "pragmatic" is often a term to describe "pro-business" Dems

the DLC and the MSM like to use it to describe Dems who are pro-corporate.

[ThomCat]

64. Yes, because it is "pragmatic" give lobbyists whatever they want

in exchange for all those campaign contributions. :(

[bugisbug]

93. Me, too.

Thanks for you thoughtful posts!

And I'm glad to know that I'm hateful, faithless, and reactionary - hell, throw in unpatriotic and freeperish, too - for wanting to hold elected officials accountable and for questioning authority. At least I know I'm in good company!

;)

[FLAprogressive]

46. oh please....everyone who has half a brain knows that torture has NOT ended.

it's just called "enhanced interrogation" now.

[Name removed]

91. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ThomCat]

119. Who said anything about believing anything just because Dennis

Kucinich said something? Where the hell are you getting that from? Or why are you just making shit up?

Insulting other DUers, calling people out, is against the rules here. Go read them.

[lumberjack_jeff]

96. Ever seen Farenheit 9-11?

You just quoted Brittney Spears. I'm getting the whole gum-chewing visual.

[defendandprotect]

104. Criticism is not "hatred" -- and if you want to preserve freedom ...

and the Constitution "trust" isn't the way to go -- constant vigilance is.

[cui bono]

110. And I wish I could rec it multiple times to undo the unrecs by you blind loyalists.

Who refuse to look at the reality of what he is doing and not the idea of what you think he might do, or that he promised he would do (which he has yet to do, inexplicably.)

[Stand and Fight]

115. "...so I could bury your hate for our president"?

That's about as idiotic a statement as I've ever read on FreeRepublic or here... DUmmies indeed. :eyes:

The president is not above reproach or criticism. :wtf:

[Reform]

19. New regime still with a scent of old

Naomi pretty much sums it up, listen we cant just sit on out hands in regards to civil liberties.
Bush owned 911 and that happened in September and September of the first year of O's administration is coming very soon now, this is his administration running things now and he is not doing much to fix Americans loss of freedoms.
Just look at the terrorist watch list which restricts your right to travel and lots more, there's over one million Americans on it, many reporters are on it, there is a damn 8 year old child on it, all without a trial.Guilty until proven innocent is not freedom and is un constitutional.
He pushed for the continuation of fisa as of late, REFUSES to prosecute the Bush Administration, he is still for the patriot act, rendition, ect.
Might i note the patriot act was not designed to be used against Americans but it has been and still is.So when you hear policy being discussed about terrorism and terrorists keep in mind they could also be talking about you.
Trying to fix the economy is great but what is an economy without liberty? what good is money when you live in an ever growing police state?
Obama says to forget the past and look ahead, im sorry Mr.President its not that easy, in a way Americans are still living under the regime of the past 8 years, and your doing little to protect them of it.
He knows what is going on he was a constitutional professor.
I'm not here to bash the president im just stating whats in my heart and if this offends you then good, i know where you stand on these issues.

[Bushknew]

44. K&R

[McCamy Taylor]

47. Read Noam Chomsky "Watergate a Skeptical View" about how he predicted that

the "kinder, gentler" dems that followed folks like Dick Nixon would choose not to let go of the executive powers which the last administration has seized---and how this would set the stage for even worse presidents to come. Carter gave us Reagan. Clinton gave us Bush. Lord only knows what Obama will give us through his reluctance to give up any "just in case" power.

http://www.chomsky.info/articles/19730920.htm

[FLAprogressive]

48. it's gonna give us Palin. that's who it's gonna give us.

Obama has tried to please everyone (except people on the left) even though he'll NEVER get the right-wing vote.

[struggle4progress]

86. Palin won't ever be elected without massive fraud

[avaistheone1]

65. Damn good points.

[florida08]

79. I second that

damn good points.

[FLAprogressive]

49. oh and would you look at this....the amount of reccomends on this thread are dwindling

Golly, I wonder why? Could it be a certain group of people who are always devoted to spreading the "good news"?

[frog92969]

55. Yes, it's very dusty in here

with all the sweeping under the carpet.

Some people can't handle the truth.

K&R+

[FLAprogressive]

57. stop trying to hold him accountable and look at the puppies

[frog92969]

61. Ahhh puppies

And you know, Michelle has nice arms.
:crazy:

[unapatriciated]

83. Well here is a rec and kick...

for those of us who do support Obama, but also realize that it's our duty as citizens to let him know what we expect.
Blind faith is for religion not politics or a Democratic Society.
For those who say we were not listing during the campaign, they forget what I thought to be his biggest promise....To listen to us.
Most of us knew he was a centrist but he also promised to listen and expected us to stay involved in the process of running our country.
That is exactly what I intend to do. I want him to succeed not just go along to get along.

[jefferson_dem]

54. Wolf has come a long way since her "alpha male" and "earth tones" advice to Gore in 2000.

Seriously, she makes some pretty good points here though she trends toward knee-jerk hyperbole too often.

[Grinchie]

77. The appointment of Michael Taylor to the USDA should be proof enough that we are in trouble

And it you don't know who Michael Taylor is, then you've been asleep for the last 15 years.

When Jonathan Turley mentioned the growing cynicism of Obama and his actions by the American Public recently, that was an understatement.

People need to wake up soon.

[surfinshell]

89. ok, I've been asleep

this guy? Michael Taylor has had a long and distinguished career in public service. He began at the FDA in 1976 as a litigating attorney. He served as the FDA’s Deputy Commissioner for Policy from 1991 to 1994, overseeing FDA's policy development and rulemaking, including the implementation of the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act and issuance of new seafood safety rules.

what about him is bad?

[bugisbug]

92. The problem is the Revolving Door

between the food conglomerates and the regulatory agencies. It is the same crap that goes on with defense contractors and the Pentagon.

Check out this article for more information: http://www.smart-publications.com/nutrition/fda.php

Here's some of the info about Taylor from the article:

Michael Taylor, former legal advisor to the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s Bureau of Medical Devices and Bureau of Foods, later executive assistant to the Commissioner of the FDA,…still later a partner at the law firm of King & Spaulding where he supervised a nine-lawyer group whose clients included Monsanto Agricultural Company, … still later Deputy Commissioner for Policy at the United States Food and Drug Administration, … and later with the law firm of King & Spaulding … now head of the Washington, D.C. office of Monsanto Corporation.

And as though the FDA didn't already exhibit enough audacity it handed Michael Taylor the responsibility to make the decision as to whether or not rBGH-derived milk should be labeled. (At the time, Michael Taylor, who had previously worked as a lawyer for Monsanto, was executive assistant to the Commissioner of the FDA.)

In 1994, Taylor ended up writing the rBGH labeling guidelines that prohibit the dairy industry from stating that their products either contain or are free from rBGH. Even worse, to keep rBGH-milk from being "stigmatized" in the marketplace, the FDA ruled that the labels of non-rBGH products must state that there is no difference between rBGH and the natural hormone.8

According to journalist Jennifer Ferraro, "while working for Monsanto,Taylor had prepared a memo for the company as to whether or not it would be constitutional for states to erect labeling laws concerning rBGH dairy products. In other words, Taylor helped Monsanto figure out whether or not the corporation could sue states or companies that wanted to tell the public that their products were free of Monsanto's drug."

[Autumn]

108. So actually Taylor was a lobbyist? n/t

[bugisbug]

109. Yep, and a lawyer for Monsanto.

His revolving job experience goes like this: Counsel to the FDA - lawyer at King and Spaulding which represented Monsanto to Deputy Commissioner of Policy in the FDA in 1991 - the USDA in 1994 as a Food Safety and Inspection Administrator - King and Spaulding - Monsanto in 1998 as the Vice President for Public Policy where he was their chief lobbyist.

As Deputy Commissioner of the FDA, he worked to usher in the use of bovine growth hormone. As a lawyer for Monsanto, he helped to rewrite the regulations pertaining to the use of genetically modified foods,"adding the "substantial equivalence" measure which says if the nutrition measures are the same for the GMO as the natural food it is nobody's business what the chemical companies add." (quote from http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showConnection.php?id1=2590&id2=238).

PS: politicalfriendster.com is a great site to learn about the all-too-cozy connections in Washington.

[Autumn]

116. Thank you for the link

bookmarking it. So far very interesting.

[valerief]

82. Well, he can start with Dick Cheney. nt

[ucfacde]

95. Know Thy Enemy Combatant

The Bush administration decides who gets due process

U.S. Cites Al Qaeda in Plan to Destroy Brooklyn Bridge (Makes Good Story Front Page to Hell with the Truth.)

The truck driver, Iyman Faris, a 34-year-old naturalized American citizen from Kashmir living in Columbus, Ohio, was secretly arrested about three months ago. Mr. Faris agreed to plead guilty in May in closed proceedings before a federal judge in Virginia to charges that he had provided material support to terrorists, officials said today. He now faces 20 years in prison.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/20/national/20TERR.html

The Bush administration decides who gets due process

http://www.reason.com/news/show/35761.html

Threatened with being a enemy combatant he confessed to being a terrorist, this is just one story we know about, since the rest are held without trial, jury or representation, just gone.

The Bush Administration has screwed up so much with the band of republican followers that one administration will not be time to fix. He is working against the most uncouples bunch of bastards ever to rule since WWII.

[surfinshell]

88. funny I never heard

any conservative come out against Bush for being able to do the same thing... hypocrites.