Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The worst civil liberties president in US history?....
#21
deckeda wrote:
you, ...will be shown to be holding an exceedingly minority position .
Why do you think every dictator goes after total control of the media?
Why do you think Obama gutted and blocked all meaningful implementation of FOIA?
Why do you think Obama viciously hunting down the whistleblowers?
You are mistaking popularity for being right.

Just because you are an inmate in an insane asylum does not make you a Napoleon....
But it does explain your positions....
Reply
#22
Again .., wartime rules. Anyone who does not believe we are in a global war is sadly mistaken .
Reply
#23
Spock wrote:
Despite the good things that Obama has done...
"Despite good things"? It needs another thread, but if you look at any one of the "good things" closely, each one is a sellout, from Wall Street "reform" to universal "healthcare", just more lipstick on same pig.


Spock wrote: ...his record on civil liberties has been abysmal. I hope that he will have the courage to reverse some of the worse excesses in his second term but I'm not going to hold my breath.

You hope he will have courage?
Did you climb from under a rock?
Who was holding Obama back? and it was not Congress, most of the screws he tightened was done by executive fiat.

AND he did have a total control of Congress the first two years of his administration.

Keef wrote:
I dunno. If I buy a boxed TV from the back of a truck only to get home and find the box filled with bricks... I generally don't go back for seconds. Maybe I'm weird that way.

you, too, are going for your second load of bricks...
Reply
#24
Had the indicies been different, max would have retreated to his mancave and aimed his vitriol at that forum's habitués. Seems he needs another outlet.
Reply
#25
Anything on the subject, Roger, or the meds are interfering with coherent thinking, again?...
Reply
#26
Attacking the messengers is overtly closed minded in this case. Glenn Greenwald is one of the top writers in the world on human rights and constitutional law.

The facts are the facts, and it is only healthy to understand how these facts might impact the future of the nation, and the world.

Imagine that Obama's opening of this pandora's box is followed by the unfortunate election of a paranoid lunatic like Michelle Bachmann, or a religious crusader like Rick Santorum. Imagine what such an individual might do when given the power to track individual American citizens, or kill people at will using drones and black op militias.
Reply
#27
max wrote:
Actually it does, it creates two classes of abuse, temporary and permanent.
Lincoln, Wilson and Roosevelt are given some justification and placed in the first category.
Bush and Obama are placed in the latter, and Obama is rightfully classified as worse than Bush.
You need some serious blinders to avoid direct quotes describing Obama as being on top of the pile...
michaelb wrote:
You must be referring to some source other than the one you link. I don't see it reach a conclusion at all and ends with a question (it starts with questions and has questions in the middle). It mentions other people who may or may not make that claim, but makes no apparent effort to resolve the question. Is there some actual conclusion in there or quote from this author that I am missing?

Yes, starting with:
Ultimately, there are two critical factors that, for me at least, are highly influential if not decisive in determining the proper ranking. The first is the extent to which the civil liberties abuses are temporary or permanent. wrote:
Most of the contenders for worst civil liberties abuses were "justified" by traditional wars that had a finite end and thus dissipated once the wars were over. Lincoln's habeas suspension did not survive the end of the Civil War, nor did FDR's internment camps survive the end of World War II.
michaelb wrote:
How is anything Bush or Obama did worst then owning or condoning slavery? (the article of course includes this unanswered question).
It does ask, and answers it as well, by limiting discussion to Bill of Rights.
Also by putting the issue in the context of the era....
Reply
#28
mick e wrote:
Attacking the messengers is overtly closed minded in this case. Glenn Greenwald is one of the top writers in the world on human rights and constitutional law.

The facts are the facts, and it is only healthy to understand how these facts might impact the future of the nation, and the world.

Imagine that Obama's opening of this pandora's box is followed by the unfortunate election of a paranoid lunatic like Michelle Bachmann, or a religious crusader like Rick Santorum. Imagine what such an individual might do when given the power to track individual American citizens, or kill people at will using drones and black op militias.

Exactly....
Reply
#29
Hey max. you weren't here before the election and you won't be here after. GFY.
Reply
#30
RgrF wrote:
Hey max. you weren't here before the election and you won't be here after. GFY.
Is my very existence offending you, Roger?
Is the inconvenient reality conflicting with your sharia-according-to-Roger world?
Since when this has become your personal sandbox, Roger?....
You are a little late:....

max, Registered: 12/11/2005 06:47PM wrote:
RgrF Registered: 12/11/2005 11:55PM wrote:
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)