ACLU chief "disgusted" with Obama's policies on civil liberties and National Security

[Wandawilkerson]

"I'm going to start provocatively ... I'm disgusted with this president," Romero told the America's Future Now breakout session, according to blogger Marcy Wheeler of Firedoglake.com.

In an interview with POLITICO, Romero confirmed the gist of the quote, though he emphasized it wasn't intended as an ad hominem attack.

"I'm not disgusted at President Obama personally. It's President Obama's policies on civil liberties and national security issues I'm disgusted by. It's not a personal attack," Romero said."

...

"Asked why he's so animated now, Romero said: "It’s 18 months and, if not now, when? ... Guantanamo is still not closed. Military commissions are still a mess. The administration still uses state secrets to shield themselves from litigation. There's no prosecution for criminal acts of the Bush administration. Surveillance powers put in place under the Patriot Act have been renewed. If there has been change in the civil liberties context, I frankly don't see it."

link: http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshgerstein/0610/ACLU_chief_disgusted_with_Obama.html

[SidDithers]

1. According to Politico...nt

Sid

[Wandawilkerson]

And according to Firedoglake

And they quote him directly. Are they inventing the direct quote? Is Marcy Wheeler lying?

[liberation]

13. See, the problem here is that you are believing your lying eyes...

... common mistake.

[Wandawilkerson]

2. self-delete duplicate n/t

[JDPriestly]

128. Politico is not expressing its opinion, but rather it is repeating what Romero

said on behalf of the ACLU. That makes the AFL-CIO and the ACLU, both with big constituencies, constituencies that are important, even basic, in the Democratic Party, that are openly very critical of Obama.

Obama is a Schussnig. He is handing the old-time Democrats over to the wolves of the right.

Schussnig oversaw and permitted Hitler's takeover of Austria.

Schuschnigg joined the right-wing Christian Social Party and was elected to the Nationalrat in 1927. In 1932 Dollfuss appointed him his Minister of Justice and later Minister of Education. After Dollfuss was assassinated, Schuschnigg was appointed Chancellor and he continued to govern by dictate. His policies were not much different from the policies of his predecessor. He had to manage the economy of a near-bankrupt state, had to maintain law and order in a country which was forbidden by the terms of the 1919 Peace Agreement to maintain an army in excess of 30,000 men and at the same time had to cope with armed paramilitary forces in Austria, which owed their allegiance not to the state but to various rival political parties, and he also had to be mindful of the growing strength of the national-socialists (Nazis) within the country, who supported Hitler’s ambitions to absorb Austria into the Third Reich. His overriding political concern was how to preserve Austria’s independence within the borders imposed on it by the terms of the 1919 Peace Treaty. His policy of counterbalancing the German threat by aligning himself with Austria’s southern and eastern neighbours, Italy and Hungary, were doomed to failure after Hitler’s ascendance and the increasing military might of the Third Reich. He adopted a policy of appeasement toward Hitler. In July 1936 he signed the Austro-German Agreement, which, among other concessions, allowed the release of Nazis imprisoned in Austria and the inclusion of National Socialists in his Cabinet. <2> However, the National Socialists gained ground in Austria and relations between the two countries deteriorated further.

The Anschluss
On 12 February 1938, Schuschnigg met Hitler at Berchtesgaden in an attempt to smooth the worsening relations between their two countries. To Schuschnigg‘s surprise, Hitler presented him with a set of demands which, in manner and in terms, amounted to an ultimatum, effectively demanding the handing over of power to the Austrian National Socialists. The terms of the agreement, presented to Schuschnigg for immediate endorsement, stipulated the appointment of Seyss-Inquart as minister of security and Dr Hans Fischböck as minister of finance to prepare for economic union between Germany and Austria. A hundred officers were to be exchanged between the Austrian and the German armies. All imprisoned Nazis were to be amnestied and reinstated. In return Hitler would publicly reaffirm the treaty of 11 July 1936 and Austria’s national sovereignty. “The Fuhrer was abusive and threatening, and Schuschnigg was presented with far-reaching demands…” <3> According to Schuschnigg’s memoirs, he was coerced into signing the ‘Agreement’ before leaving Berchtesgaden. <4> The key clause in the memorandum was the appointment of the National Socialist Dr. Seyss-Inquart to the post of Minister of Public Security, with full and unlimited control of the police forces in Austria. The President, Dr. Wilhelm Miklas, was reluctant to endorse the Agreement but eventually he did so. Then he, Schuschnigg and a few key Cabinet members considered a number of options:
1. the Chancellor resign and the President call on a new Chancellor to form a Cabinet, which would be under no obligation to the commitments of Berchtesgaden.
2. The Berchtesgaden agreement be carried out under a newly appointed Chancellor.
3. The agreement be carried out and the Chancellor remain at his post.
In the event, they decided to go with the third option. <5>

On the following day, February 14, Schuschnigg reorganised his Cabinet on a broader basis and included representatives of all former and present political parties. Hitler immediately appointed a new Gauleiter for Austria, a Nazi Austrian army officer who had just been released from prison in accordance with the terms of the general amnesty stipulated by the Berchtesgaden agreement. <6>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_von_Schuschnigg

Obama has surrounded himself with DLCers who hate those who are slightly more liberal than they are. Obama has yet to apologize for the derogatory comments he has made about those in his party who stick to the traditional Democratic values. Obama is a Reagan Democrat. I'm so sorry I worked for him. Why bother?

[Jennicut]

3. ACLU also was in favor of "free speech" in campaigns.

And Gitmo not closing has to do with some cowardly people in Congress.

[Wandawilkerson]

5. In regard to the issues cited by Romero, do you take the ACLU position or the Obama position?

Do you like blocking lawsuits filed by torture victims based on bogus state secrets? Are you happy that Guantanamo is still open despite the promises?

[Jennicut]

10. Gitmo is not closing unless we have a place to put the people

who are awaiting trials. No one wants it in their backyard. And these people all need to be in trials, not held indefinitely. And no, I disagree with Obama on many things. But the ACLU is not some epitome of pureness either, unless they think Corps are people.

[G_j]

17. they could ship them to the Bagra 'secret prison'

nobody is planning on closing that one.
Out of sight, out of mind.

[Jennicut]

23. Many Senators would prefer that, actually.

[Drops_not_Dope]

125. Do you like blocking lawsuits filed by torture victims

well at least those torture victims can get a lawyer.

Which is unlike a certain American citizen I personally know.

[saracat]

72. But real "leadership " could take care of that problem. I find it really hypocritical when anything

some find praiseworthy is passed, some feel ALL credit goes to the President but when he doesn't do what is promised it is always the fault of Congress and he is somehow exonerated. This is becoming the "Not My fault " Administration. This is what happens when one over compromises and gives away the store.The President has nothing to bargain with.If he had ended the "bipartisanship" and rolling over earlier, we would be looking at a different picture. He forgot the "Big Stick" part of the equation.

[Bullet1987]

107. That's what I think

He's been entirely too quick to appease people.

[sui generis]

117. Leadership is and always has been the question

Obama seems to moderate more often than lead, and moderation is not leadership.

[xchrom]

4. Recommend. Nt

[bluestateguy]

6. The ACLU: proud defenders of...

Oliver North, the Illinois Nazis in Skokie, Rush Limbaugh and the Westboro Baptist Church.

Useful idiots.

[nichomachus]

7. I was wondering how long it would take to trash the ACLU

Good job. You've earned your keep today.

[AllentownJake]

9. Can we get a thread where the ACLU and Unions get trashed at once

That would be great!

[liberation]

18. Running 2 under the bus for the price of 1? Well that is change I believe in!

Plus is fiscally responsible, just like any self respecting neoliberal would like!

[Jennicut]

20. I am not a neoliberal.

I would love the war in Afghanistan and I don't.
I simply think the ACLU is allowed criticism too.

[liberation]

26. huh? come again?

[AllentownJake]

27. Of course it is

and it is allowed defenders, that being said, individual citizens have the right to free speech, no matter how vile their speech is.

[The Northerner]

106. +1

[laughingliberal]

29. ROFL!! Would save a lot of time! nt

[freddie mertz]

31. Seems to be a "hot new trend" among a certain breed of (so-called) Democrats.

As the administration and the party in general lurch ever-further to the right, many are happy to go along with them.

It's a pitiful comment on our times.

[AllentownJake]

34. This is what happens when the opposition party goes insane

and their "moderates" look for a new home.

[freddie mertz]

37. I think that's right.

So where do the old Democrats go then, Jake?

Have we still got a political home, or do we have to build a new one?

[AllentownJake]

41. I think we go into hiding like the Jedi

:rofl:

[freddie mertz]

42. That is just hilarious!

http://www.moviewallpaper.net/wpp/Samuel_L_Jackson_in_Star_Wars:_Episode_III_-_Revenge_of_the_Sith_Wallpaper_4_800.jpg

[AllentownJake]

43. I get to be Yoda

Claimed it...

[freddie mertz]

44. Then you would get to live too, at least till the earlier, better film cycle!

Although the last one wasn't ALL bad.

Of course, EMPIRE still represents the gold standard, and likely to remain so.

[kenfrequed]

120. So...

Because our politicians didn't fully renounce Bush and point out the absolute failures of his administration and contrast them with progressive values we sort of absorb the conservatives and lose? I'm totally puzzled.

At what point do we actually win? Maybe after the DLC breaks down and dissolves?

[freddie mertz]

38. Dupe.

The cat sat on the keyboard!

[pinboy3niner]

50. Or perhaps it was an Ewok

:rofl:

[freddie mertz]

58. Good Lord, I certainly hope not!

I would very much prefer a Wookie, though I am sure they would take up lot more room, and must eat quite a bit too!

[niceypoo]

119. The Democratic frog march to the right is the opposite of what the country needs

The next republican president is going to start from a very far right baseline because the current president is a Reagan Democrat.

[madrchsod]

45. you forgot the progressives and "far leftists"

[AllentownJake]

47. No that is every other

Leftist who have no position in government anywhere outside of a city council are to blame for everything wrong with this country.

[liberation]

92. Well, duh... if it weren't for those evil leftists that do not have any significant position of powe

why would staunch conservatives need to be elected to clean up the mess those phantom leftist manage to make whenever conservatives are in power?

[madfloridian]

46. lol

Yesterday someone called those of us who question policy "little bitches." The post is still standing.

[AllentownJake]

48. Shocking

:rofl:

[glitch]

49. Good - it stands as an indictment to the poster. Shows more about them than it does about us. nt

[freddie mertz]

60. Sexist and belittling to boot, eh?

Pretty typical of that sort of swill.

[liberation]

93. Well, two birds with one stone... that's pretty fiscally responsible

Ain't that one of the things neo-liberals are known for? At least they are being consistent... so they have that going for them.

[flyarm]

110. oh hell.."little bitches" is tame compared to what we over age 50 were called in the campaign.

I would wear "little bitches" as a badge of honor..compared to what I and others were called in Iowa and SC by the White Ipod Crew!

I heard names there flung that I hadn't heard since the early 60's!! "Little Bitches" is tame!!

[flyarm]

111. of course it is still standing..the grown ups don't alert on every post that doesn't agree with them

we let people have a voice..unless they get a serious case of laryngitis..


But the alertis-deletus flu is very prominent among those with thin skin! Those posts always stand...it is posts with knowledge and information to inform many that get the Alertis -deletus flu!

[snake in the grass]

57. Done!

Thanks for the suggestion. I'm betting this one won't last long.

[freddie mertz]

62. You bet correctly!

That was really fast, too.

[snake in the grass]

67. Like lightning!

Too bad; I kind of liked it. Maybe I should have used the 'sarcasm' tag, but I hate that thing. Sarcasm should stand alone without some sort of crutch, in my opinion, and if the post were actually read correctly that would have been the case. Guess I'll just have to work on my writing abilities. After all, could you imagine Mark Twain or Jonathan Swift using a 'sarcasm' tag for everything they wrote?

[freddie mertz]

68. Maybe if you called all of us "little bitches," it could have stayed open.

:toast:

[snake in the grass]

69. I'll keep that in mind.

Cheers back at you!

[bahrbearian]

105. That was good

[Bluenorthwest]

124. I too hate that 'sarcasm' tag...

it is hard to do satire on the internet. Really hard. And I thought you did a fine job, and actually noticed that you had the courage to go tag free, 'emoticon' free, and I liked that as well. It was funny, to the point, and yet, apparently, some do need the tags and emoticons.

[Dr.Phool]

66. I heard the ACLU is a union shop!

[AllentownJake]

8. Free speech sucks

The entire notion of free speech is that no one gets to decide whehter or not you agree with what is said or not, the right to say it. Oh fuck, why even bother anymore.

[Jennicut]

11. In these instances, you are correct.

But are corps people? Are they denied free speech?

[AllentownJake]

12. No they are not

Never said any organization was perfect.

[EFerrari]

14. Right, because people you don't like shouldn't have civil rights. n/t

[bluestateguy]

53. I would just appreciate it if the above mentioned clients of the ACLU would say thank you

Instead, after receiving the ACLU's services, they go right back to trashing the organization, calling them un-American and demanding that they be put in jail.

That's why the ACLU are useful idiots.

[AllentownJake]

54. You really don't understand this principle thing

It is doing the right thing despite the fact you might get spit upon for doing it.

[EFerrari]

55. I understand that. But you don't defend civil rights for the thank you.

You defend them because you might need them someday.

[liberation]

94. Come on civil rights for every American? Now you are being "unrealistic!"

[niceypoo]

121. The ACLU only concerns itself with the bill of rights

Believe it or not those rights also apply to vile republicans.

[Jokerman]

52. Does that make you a "useless idiot"?

[KansasVoter]

63. Wow, you are too dumb to be a liberal. You don't GET the purpose of the ACLU.

[Skittles]

75. another guy who just does not fucking get it

[Selatius]

76. The First Amendment applies to bastards and fools as much as it does to saints and saviors.

If you cannot understand that, you really don't understand why the ACLU would go to bat for them.

[Zix]

79. la la la...

dooby dooby do... diddle de dum...

[Smashcut]

80. Proud defenders of the Constitution, even when it's inconvenient.

They couldn't be farther from being idiots, although I'm not so sure about you.

[Tesha]

82. Rights are tricky in that way; everybody actually has them, whether you like...

those folks or not.

Tesha

[Bluebear]

85. Anything to comment on the policies or story, or just ACLU-bashing here?

[Greyhound]

86. I know that as a faithful supporter of the Democratic Party this is almost alien to you,

but those cases were taken because of these things called principles.

Now don't faint dead away...

Deep breaths...

They have to do with right and wrong, and have nothing to do with popularity, elections, or group affiliation.

Are you ready for another shock?

The Democratic Party used to have them itself.

[GOTV]

102. Civil rights aren't just for people you like ...

... if you can't stand that other people have rights as well maybe this is not the country for you.

[Chef Eric]

104. What is your point? That freedom of speech shouldn't be for everybody? nt

[amb123]

108. And don't forget their support for Citizen's United vs FEC in the Supreme Court.

That's why I stopped supporting the ACLU.

:grr:

[truth2power]

112. Oh fer god's sake...It's called the American CIVIL LIBERTIES Union..

I think Rush Limbaugh is a worthless waste of oxygen. Likewise all those other vermin mentioned above. But the right to civil liberties should make no distinction as to the worthiness of the person so involved.

As it protects one, it protects us all. In my view, that's a triumph of integrity over expediency.

The converse of that is shown by AG Eric Holder asserting that KSM would be convicted and that even if he were to be found not guilty, he wouldn't be released. That's one of the more appalling statements, in terms of civil liberties, that I've heard from this administration. :banghead:

[niceypoo]

118. All in the context of protecting the bill of rights

[Lerkfish]

15. "If there has been change in the civil liberties context, I frankly don't see it."

exactly.

[G_j]

21. I dare the ACLU detractors in this thread

to show us where there has been "change in the civil liberties context."
we're all ears...

[liberation]

24. Oh, please don't dare them. It is waaay too early for the harvest of red herring that will ensue!

Plus with the gulf being what it is now, the fish smell will be topped off with a nice whiff of sweet crude oil...


I still remember all the creative explanations people came up for his FISA vote, they have been upping the ante ever since.

[freddie mertz]

35. i predict crickets. nt.

[QC]

16. Romero never really loved him!

:cry:

[nichomachus]

19. Maybe he had a reason -- not everyone was busy waving the pompoms

[liberation]

22. He wants human rights? What is next a pony?

We'll be conducting those show trials as soon as we have gathered enough evidence against the accused via torture. There is nothing in the US constitution about cruel punishment nor speedy trials. These ACLU hippies are being unrealistic as usual.

[Freddie Stubbs]

25. Has the ACLU ever been happy with a President?

[AllentownJake]

28. Given our Presidents in my lifetime

I sure as hell hope not.

[laughingliberal]

39. That was my thought. Who was the last President who gave them reason to be happy?

That said, Would PALIN be better???? :sarcasm:

[pinboy3niner]

51. Under Palin, ACLU would BE in Guantanamo! nt

[freddie mertz]

65. LOL! nt.

[ProudDad]

126. There haven't been ANY pResidents who gave a crap about Civil Liberties while in office...

That's why the ACLU is so vital...

And why it's among the VERY few organizations I'll join and financially support...

They are consistent -- every right is for every body or they won't exist...

[freddie mertz]

30. It is not the ACLU's JOB to be "happy." It is to advocate for for civil liberties.

REGARDLESS of which party is in power.

Which is a good and useful thing.

[Freddie Stubbs]

33. I'm not saying that it is their job.

Just commenting that this is about as surprising as a sunny day in Southern California.

[freddie mertz]

36. Maybe if the admin. had made some real progress in civil liberties...

They would be happier with him.

[Bluebear]

84. That killed that exchange.

[Moochy]

115. Unsuprising...

Just like the tone of every one of your pro-status quo,pro centrist and principle-free post.

[Wandawilkerson]

40. Are you happy with torture victims having their lawsuits blocked

Based on bogus state secrets that are nothing but a tool to prevent torture information from being disclosed?

Prior to the 2008 elections, Did you think Guantanamo would be open at this point?

[readmoreoften]

98. Yes, they're just a bunch of impossible-to-please cranks.

:eyes:

[Moochy]

114. Leave Obama alone!!!

Mean old ACLU bastard people!

[QC]

131. They never really loved him!

:cry:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

32. So are a lot of people on the left.

[ProSense]

56. "I made the point that expectations were high "

"There was a discussion this morning, and there has been generally in progressive circles, about expectations that have not been met. I made the point that expectations were high because the president set expectations very high," Romero said.

Asked why he's so animated now, Romero said: "It’s 18 months and, if not now, when? ... Guantanamo is still not closed. Military commissions are still a mess. The administration still uses state secrets to shield themselves from litigation. There's no prosecution for criminal acts of the Bush administration. Surveillance powers put in place under the Patriot Act have been renewed. If there has been change in the civil liberties context, I frankly don't see it."

Yeah, only 18 months and he hasn't fixed everything.

[AllentownJake]

59. Thanks for chiming in

This thread was nothing without you.

[freddie mertz]

64. How long is too long? What is the sell-by date for civil liberties?

Just wondering how many months or years you think we should have to wait before speaking out.

[kenfrequed]

116. I was going to ask a similar question

But three or four people beat me to it.

[frylock]

73. he's only 36 months into his second term and he hasn't fixed everything..

*squawk*

[ProudDad]

127. No, he's 36 months into his 1st term

and he's done almost NOTHING...

Especially about anything that only takes his signature and some courage...

But he wasn't hired by corporate USAmerica to show courage, he was hired to preserve the status quo...

You're doing a hell of a job, Barry!

[Lerkfish]

77. well, considering that is roughly a third of his presidency...

when do you expect him to start ending torture and closing Gitmo?

at what point in his presidency are we allowed to ask that question? Halfway through? the last day?

[niceypoo]

123. But, but...

...he's still getting settled in Sparky.

[Smashcut]

What, no blue links?!

:rofl:

[Smashcut]

81. .

[Echo In Light]

61. K/R

[mzmolly]

70. Shame they supported the Corporate takeover of America.

I guess there is plenty of disgust to go around eh?

[ProudDad]

129. The ACLU's job is to defend rights...

"Section 203 of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 prohibits unions and corporations (both for-profit and non-profit) from engaging in “electioneering communications.” The legislative definition of an “electioneering communication” was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2003 and then substantially narrowed by the Supreme Court in 2007. In scheduling this case for reargument, the Court specifically requested briefs on whether section 203 should now be struck down as facially unconstitutional. The ACLU has consistently taken the position that section 203 is facially unconstitutional under the First Amendment because it permits the suppression of core political speech, and our amicus brief takes that position again."

(Do your fucking homework -- this took 20 seconds and one Google query! http://www.aclu.org/free-speech/citizens-united-v-federal-election-commission)

Within the context of the law, however wrongly decided, the ACLU was protecting "rights"...

They have consistently protected rights during their entire existence...

And they were also protecting UNION rights too, not just corporate "rights"...

If you want to get pissed at someone, piss on Barry Obama and the corporate funded Congress for not taking ANY ACTION about Citizens United -- oh, that's right, that's the opposite of their job description...

[mzmolly]

132. Ah "Dad"

1. Shove your misogynist attitude, coupled with verbal abuse up your "proud" a*s. And 2. Don't assume I haven't "googled" or read the ACLU's "rationale" for their support of the "Corporate takeover of America." If you think Unions can compete with large corporations like BP you haven't done YOUR homework.

[dorkulon]

71. K&R

People dissing the ACLU for picking on their new boyfriend should fuck off and join a fan club website.

[mmonk]

97. Great line. I concur.

[Skittles]

74. join the crowd

[chill_wind]

78. I was just revisitng the archives-- the GIGS of documentation on

detainee abuse, torture, war crimes, spying and secrecy.

the reams of FOIA documents and court actions over the years compiled for the world to know.

http://www.aclu.org/search/FOIA%20guantanamo?show_aff=1

If there is any one other single organization that has actively done more-- to collect, gather and preserve the record all in one place-- of the shredding of the Constitution and the Geneva Conventions protections against war crimes, I don't know of it.

[indepat]

83. The continuance/ratification of so many of junior's wholly corrupt far-RW PNAC

policies, actions, and initiatives is astoundingly mind-boggling and heartbreaking for those who yearned for, and fully expected, an expeditious return to the rule of law with flagrant lawbreakers being prosecuted and embedded RW ideologues being removed from government service. :P

[Bluebear]

87. Kick and shame on the ACLU bashers here.

[Stinky The Clown]

88. This story is suspect from the outset. It is being fired from the Propaganda Cannon, aka Politico.

[Bluebear]

89. Here's WSJ and Congress.org

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2010/06/10/alcus-romero-none-too-pleased-with-president-obama/

http://www.congress.org/news/2010/06/10/roundup_aclu_blasts_obama

[Stinky The Clown]

96. The WSJ article goes back to Politico

The Congress article is word for word the first paragraph of the WSJ article.

It always goes back to Politico.

[dorkulon]

122. So what, are you suggesting Romero didn't say those things?

Because if he did, what difference does it make where the report comes from. The story is true or it isn't.

[Dinger]

90. K & R For The Truth (nt)

[seaglass]

91. So am I. He has some time to turn it around before he loses my vote

but the clock is definitely ticking. I am not full of hope.

[Name removed]

95. Deleted sub-thread

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

[Wilms]

99. k

[Senator]

100. K&+R

[democrank]

101. K & R

Change, what change? Frankly, I don`t see it either.

[mikita]

103. k&r

[jefferson_dem]

109. I love the ACLU.

And the President.

Hmmm... Cognitive dissonance.

In the end, they are both doing their job. That makes me happy.

[ProudDad]

130. Yep, ACLU defends rights, Obama defends privilege... (n/t)

[defendandprotect]

113. knr

[pundaint]

133. Disgusted is an appropriate word.