Posts: 4,019
Threads: 29
Joined: Feb 2024
Reputation:
0
max wrote:
[quote=max]
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....
Where is his ranking?
What abuses by Obama are we talking about here? Killing Osama Bin Ladin? Drone attacks? Some sort abuse of power in the US? Tell me about real actual impacts not some theoretical fear of how the US is becoming a fascist state.
To the extent I can even discern the articles point, FDR would have to be the worst on his metrics. He imprisoned thousands of US citizens without trial or legal justification; failed to intervene and stop the holocaust, and killed millions of innocent japanese civilians, including dropping two atomic bombs on them after they were willing to surrender just to prove a point to Russia.
Posts: 11,076
Threads: 820
Joined: Jul 2019
Reputation:
0
michaelb wrote: Where is his ranking?
Read the article, Obama is ranked as the worst...
Killing bin Laden, was not pertinent, a legitimate target, a real enemy, your strawman.
Did you just skip everything, it is all there, and we already covered most of the questions.
I thought you were serious. I made a serious response.
mick got it,
you can too.
Go read more than a paragraph....
Posts: 9,997
Threads: 464
Joined: Oct 2021
Reputation:
0
mick e wrote:
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.
VERY scary.
One reason that I reluctantly voted for Obama in the last national election was the hope that he -- as a former Constitutional law professor -- would reassert Constitutional limits upon executive and federal powers.
He has greatly disappointed me on that score and I'm of the opinion that some of his actions would warrant impeachment in other times.
But for another candidate to get my vote, s/he would have to be of higher character than Obama.
There's no such horse in this race.
Posts: 2,775
Threads: 90
Joined: Oct 2020
Reputation:
0
max wrote:
[quote=mick e]
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....
Max, Mick might "get it" but he isn't equating Obama with the likes of Bachmann or Santorum or perhaps even Romney (though he doesn't say that). In fact he seems to be saying the opposite: that Obama is not the kind of person who would "track individual American citizens, or kill people at will using drones and black op militias."
Hardly backing up your argument.
Posts: 11,076
Threads: 820
Joined: Jul 2019
Reputation:
0
No, nobody is saying that Obama personally is targeting your house, today
Neither did Bush.
But both SOBs broke the Constitution.
That is one point.
Obama promised to fix stuff broken by Bush.
Instead he came with a steamroller and backed up over it.
Then did it again.
That is the second.
While everybody else wielded a sledgehammer, the lying SOB rolled in with power equipment.
And now the next guy has all the tools to target your house
That is third...
Posts: 37,915
Threads: 4,149
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
Yes it's true that Bush enacted the worst bunch of crap laws imaginable in the wake of 911.
But let me ask this of those that disagree with the OP's premise that Obama is the worst civil liberties prez: what has O done to undo what Bush II started?
I can't think of one damn thing, but there are a few examples of O expanding some of those intrusions started by Bush.
So who will I vote for? Obama, of course...
this is f'ked up
Posts: 11,076
Threads: 820
Joined: Jul 2019
Reputation:
0
Thanks, hal.
Finally somebody with testicular fortitude.
No spins, no lying, no whitewashing, no prevarications,
plain honesty....
Posts: 4,749
Threads: 449
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation:
0
For the record, manlove - mick e is in full agreement with max on this issue.
One of the main reasons that he voted for Obama over Hillary was that he was promising to restore the constitutional protections that Bush had gutted. What ended up happening was shockingly brazen in that not only did he fail to overturn these unconstitutional programs - but he added scores of NEW violations to the tally.
It has been breathtaking to watch. mick e has always been a realist when it comes to politics, but he took Obama to be serious about these issues, and felt that he was genuinely interested in fulfilling these pledges.
Posts: 17,873
Threads: 325
Joined: Mar 2024
max wrote:
[quote=RgrF]
and to add a point: the worst US President with regard to civil liberties was and remains, Abraham Lincoln.
" Obama is sooooo like Lincoln" spin is not going to work. Total BS.
Lincoln had a real CIVIL war on his hands.
AND any suspension of civil rights was temporary.
At least the idiot Bush had 9/11 as an excuse.
Obama has none, just plain fascism.
For you, an avowed socialist, trying to justify it is plain hypocrisy....
You don't actually know what fascism is, do you?
You are complaining about totalitarianism, not fascism.
I'm actually sympathetic to a lot of your points on civil liberties, but this is Political Science 101. You aren't doing your argument very proud.
Posts: 2,775
Threads: 90
Joined: Oct 2020
Reputation:
0
Fair enough mick-e.
I just thought that you were implying that although Obama may have opened the box he wasn't actually insane enough -unlike Bachmann et al- to use it.
"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."
|
