1. Cozying up to the DLC during his term in the Illinois Senate and during his run for U.S. Senate.
Barack Obama will not be carrying the Democratic Leadership Council’s baggage in his race to become the second Black person to represent Illinois in the U.S. Senate. The state senator and professor of constitutional law has told The Black Commentator that he is acting to have his name stricken from the “New Democrats Directory,” a list of several hundred DLC-affiliated elected officials.
“I am not currently, nor have I ever been, a member of the DLC,” said Obama, in a statement that substantially reflects a telephone conversation with Associate Editor Bruce Dixon, this weekend. “It does appear that, without my knowledge, the DLC…listed me in their ‘New Democrat’ directory,” Obama continued. “Because I agree that such a directory implies membership, I will be calling the DLC to have my name removed, and appreciate your having brought this fact to my attention.”
http://www.blackcommentator.com/48/48_cover.html 2. Choosing Joe Lieberman as his mentor in the Senate.
New senators are "assigned" mentors, they do not get to "select" who they want. Which is why Ned Lamont endorsed Barack Obama and Joe Lieberman endorsed John McCain.3. Doing fund raising events over the last 3 years primarily for the most conservative blue dog members of the Senate rather than for progressives or home-state grass roots groups.
Obama did fund raising for those Democrats who were fighting to win in areas that were about defeating Republicans. That's how we came out of the 2006 election with a majority. It was those newly elected Democrats seats who previously had a Republican sitting in it that made the difference. That is why Obama supported them more than the "safe seat" Democrats.4. Speaking to the CFR and elsewhere about bombing Iran and keeping all options, including the nuclear option, on the table.
All viable candidates did this, including John Edwards! http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Edwards_Iran_must_know_world_wont_0123.htmlHowever, Obama didn't go as far as neither Edwards nor Clinton and AIPAC had a problem with it.http://www.forward.com/articles/12581/5. Choosing Zbigneiw Brzezinski as his top foreign policy adviser, and including Dennis Ross, Samantha Power and a host of other neo-con leaning aids on his foreign policy team.
You must not be very well informed. To consider Brzezinski (Carter admin Sec. of State), Ross, and Power (of all people) as Neo-con leanings shows that you haven't done your homework. There's nothing more that I can say about this issue.6. Abandoning and criticizing his fellow Illinois Senator Dick Durbin when Durbin courageously criticized conditions in U.S gulags at Guantanamo Bay on the Senate floor.
Obama Says Gitmo Facility Should CloseThe Democratic presidential hopeful pledged to work side-by-side with the rest of the world on issues like nuclear proliferation, poverty, economic development in Latin America and the violence in Darfur.
"While we're at it," he said, "we're going to close Guantanamo. And we're going to restore habeas corpus. ... We're going to lead by example _ by not just word but by deed. That's our vision for the future."
Habeas corpus is a tenet of the Constitution that protects people from unlawful imprisonment
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/24/AR2007062401046.html---------------
Human Rights Should Be Bigger than PoliticsSenator Barack Obama delivered this speech on the floor of the US Senate, in reaction to Senate passage of S. 3930, Military Commissions Act of 2006, which approved US torture of detainees and strips Constitutional rights away from detainees.
Senator Obama decries the placement of politics over human rights, and condemns S. 3930. He states, "This is not how a serious Administration would approach the problem of terrorism."
http://usliberals.about.com/od/extraordinaryspeeches/a/ObamaTorture.htmexcerpts from Obama's statement...
In the five years that the President's system of military tribunals has existed, not one terrorist has been tried. Not one has been convicted. And in the end, the Supreme Court of the United found the whole thing unconstitutional, which is why we're here today.
We could have fixed all of this in a way that allows us to detain and interrogate and try suspected terrorists while still protecting the accidentally accused from spending their lives locked away in Guantanamo Bay. Easily. This was not an either-or question.
Instead of allowing this President - or any President - to decide what does and does not constitute torture, we could have left the definition up to our own laws and to the Geneva Conventions, as we would have if we passed the bill that the Armed Services committee originally offered.
Instead of detainees arriving at Guantanamo and facing a Combatant Status Review Tribunal that allows them no real chance to prove their innocence with evidence or a lawyer, we could have developed a real military system of justice that would sort out the suspected terrorists from the accidentally accused.
And instead of not just suspending, but eliminating, the right of habeas corpus - the seven century-old right of individuals to challenge the terms of their own detention, we could have given the accused one chance - one single chance - to ask the government why they are being held and what they are being charged with.
http://usliberals.about.com/od/extraordinaryspeeches/a/ObamaTorture.htm http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9845595-7.html For one thing, under an Obama presidency, Americans will be able to leave behind the era of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and "wiretaps without warrants," he said. (He was referring to the lingering legal fallout over reports that the National Security Agency scooped up Americans' phone and Internet activities without court orders, ostensibly to monitor terrorist plots, in the years after the September 11 attacks.)
It's hardly a new stance for Obama, who has made similar statements in previous campaign speeches, but mention of the issue in a stump speech, alongside more frequently discussed topics like Iraq and education, may give some clue to his priorities.
In our own Technology Voters' Guide, when asked whether he supports shielding telecommunications and Internet companies from lawsuits accusing them of illegal spying, Obama gave us a one-word response: "No."
7. Refusing to call for full withdrawal from Iraq rather than simply a “reduction” of forces.
Sen. Obama (D-IL) writes in Foreign Affairs that the United States needs to move beyond Iraq and “refocus our attention on the broader Middle East.” One of the few presidential candidates who opposed the war (PDF) from the start, he says there is “no military solution” to the situation in Iraq. In January 2007, Obama proposed the Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007, which would reverse the troop surge and redeploy U.S. troops to Afghanistan and other locations in phases. He favors more funds for U.S. military equipment like night-vision goggles and reinforced Humvees, though his recent refusal to sign a war funding bill came under criticism from presidential aspirant John McCain (R-AZ), who, among other things, accused the senator of misspelling "flak jacket." Under Obama's plan, there may be a residual troop presence (NYT) in Iraq for security and training purposes. His bill has not yet been voted on.
In September 2007, Obama released his plan (PDF) to "responsibly end the war in Iraq," calling for a complete redeployment of U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of 2009, starting immediately. He also advocates a UN-led Iraqi constitutional convention in order to forge national reconciliation and to reach compromises on federalism, oil revenue sharing, and "de-Ba'athification." As president, Obama says he would establish an "international working group" to solve the Iraqi refugee crisis.
Obama opposes the establishment of permanent U.S. military bases (USA Today) in Iraq.
Obama opposes Defense Secretary Robert Gates' plan to "pause" U.S. troop withdrawal (CNN) from Iraq in July 2008. In February 2008, Obama said he "strongly" disagrees with Gates' proposal, and warned against waging "war without end in Iraq while ignoring mounting costs to our troops and their families, our security and our economy."
http://www.cfr.org/publication/14761/ 8. Voting for corporate sponsored “tort reform,” therefore making it more difficult for people to get redress in the courts for abuses.
His record on Tort Reform votes is mixed, at best. http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/article.pl?article_id=27120&postDate=2007-01-209. Voting to reauthorize the Constitution shredding Patriot Act.
Obama Joined A Filibuster To Block Bush's Version Of The Patriot Act
2005: Obama Voted to Block a Conference Report on President Bush's Preferred Version of the PATRIOT Act. In 2005, Obama voted to block a vote on final passage of the original version of the PATRIOT Act reauthorization bill, which was supported by President Bush and sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN). The bill made permanent 14 of the 16 provisions of the original Act, which was set to expire at the end of 2005. The two remaining provisions, which dealt with access to business records and "roving wiretaps," were both extended for four years.
The Final PATRIOT Act Conference Report Included Key Changes Based On a Bill Obama Cosponsored Almost a Year Earlier. In 2005, Obama cosponsored a bill, the Security and Freedom and Enhancement (SAFE) Act of 2005 (S. 737), which amended the PATRIOT Act to safeguard against privacy violations. The bill required added safeguards to the "roving wiretap" provisions of the PATRIOT Act, requiring that electronic surveillance warrants contain specific information about the identity of the target or the place being wiretapped, and requiring that surveillance of a place only be conducted when a suspect is present at that place. The bill also limited law enforcement's authority to delay notice of a search warrant to circumstances where issuing a warrant would endanger an individual's physical safety, result in an individual's flight from prosecution. The key changes made to the final conference report on the PATRIOT Act were based on provisions in the SAFE Act.
http://www.barackobama.com/factcheck/2008/01/05/fact_check_obamas_consistent_p_1.php 
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
