In yet another slap at civil liberties and civil libertarians, President Barack Obama signed an executive order Monday that will resume military tribunal proceedings at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Obama has ordered the resumption of these trials — denounced both domestically and internationally as trumped up proceedings designed to make convictions easier by omitting core constitutional and procedural protections. Indeed, these tribunals are being heralded as guaranteeing swift punishment — an implied recognition that we could not convict some of these individuals in a fair federal trial.
It is a cynical calculation by the Administration that civil libertarians have no where to go in the next election — a calculation that has been reaffirmed by many liberals who complain about Obama’s anti-civil liberties policies but still say that they have to support him. This support is continuing despite Obama’s blocking of any prosecution for torture or investigation of alleged war crimes.
The Republicans have complimented Obama on his decision and drawn the fair and obvious conclusion that he has once again reaffirmed Bush’s policies. Rep. Peter King, the Republican chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, observed “the bottom line is that it affirms the Bush administration policy that our government has the right to detain dangerous terrorists until the cessation of hostilities.”
The Obama Administration’s position is perfectly incomprehensible. As with Bush, Obama will now choose Caesar-like between those who will receive a fair trial in federal court and those who are sent to military tribunals. The decision will be made on the need for the tribunals to secure conviction under “special” rules that deny the defendant core protections and rights.
Source: The Washington Post
Jonathan Turley
Most of those rallying in Madison are members of the “cult”.
This is from Michael Moore. It’s on the economy but it will help here as well: “So how do we get this? Well, we do it with a little bit of Egypt here, a little bit of Madison there. And let us pause for a moment and remember that it was a poor man with a fruit stand in Tunisia who gave his life so that the world might focus its attention on how a government run by billionaires for billionaires is an affront to freedom and morality and humanity.” (common dreams)
Bob,
I’ve been reading up on cults and cult brands. This phenomena has been studied. One of the best books on it is called: “Life Inc” I think you might like it. There’s only one way out of a cult and that’s through examining the facts and not quashing dissent,– the quiet voice of dissent insideoneself and the loud voices outside the cult.
Gyges: “Same reason why when the Raiders get a penalty it’s because they’re a bunch of lousy cheats, and when the Broncos do it’s because of an honest mistake.”
But nobody would watch a football game if both teams completely ignored some of the most fundamental rules.
Gyges: “Humans wrap a big part of their identity up in which tribe they belong to. Which is why I self identify as “guy who only does good stuff.” That way when I pull a No True Scottsman about someone in my tribe doing something bad, it’s actually true.”
How Kantian of you.
But this group reinforced dynamic of self-deception on issues supreme importance; there has to be some sociologist that’s researched this phenomena.
Blouise,I guess I will have to come to Ohio as it is a swing state or we could meet in New Mexico. I received an email about organizing there. We will figure out our garb later or we can wear what the other members of the cult are wearing. We didn’t win too many friends around here with our support of Pelosi, either. Back to Glee.
Buddha: “Urinal pucks, check.”
Yeah, he was throwing my line back at me.
Have you had a chance to think about what I wrote in that email? What is it that compels people to lies for truth whenever their world view requires just the least bit if critical analysis?
How is it that rock solid metaphysical certainties become ‘open for interpretation’ as soon as ‘the vision of the people’ comes into question? And why do normally intelligent people, capable of critical analysis, allow it to happen?
I just used C.E. 399 and the ‘conspiracy theorist’ accusation dodge as an example of the dynamic.
Do you see what I’m talking about here?
Jill: “I wonder why we are immediately bombarded by, “what if a Republican wins the presidential election” each and every time Obama does something completely illegal and depraved?”
Jill,
I’m truly trying to grasp the common denominator in this dynamic. It’s one thing to say that without a vision the people perish, but it’s quite another for the group to lie to itself en masse whenever the veracity of that vision comes into question.
The Republicans and Democrats are the bad and good cops for the corporate/military/industrial/financial complex. (we’ve come a long way since Eisenhower first used the phrasing)
One side wages cruel unnecessary war, condoning torture murder and other crimes of all sorts while pandering to the fundamentally superstitious, tribally xenophobic, authoritarian sheeple in their campaigns.
While the other side wages cruel unnecessary war, condoning torture murder and other crimes of all sorts while pandering to liberal social issues like women’s reproductive rights, amnesty and citizenship programs for immigrants without papers, bail outs for swamped mortgage holders instead of banks and quaint concepts like the rule of law in their campaigns.
Neither ever give the real goods to their bases. There is too much profit and too many votes in the social tension of the key base issues.
But, what to do?
SwM,
I don’t know … I’ve never belonged to a cult before … might be fun … can we wear funny looking hats?
Gyges,
Ok … I guess … but too complicated for me … binary frame and all
I’m not being a smartass … it really did just whoosh over my head.
Having gone through LBJ’s presidency … he pushed Civil Rights through while at the same time sending thousands and thousands of young black men to their deaths in Nam … and remembering that he won the election by promising not to escalate the war (as opposed to Goldwater who campaigned for war) … Presidents doing the exact opposite of what they promised is no big shock to me.
“As I pointed out in my first comment, at some point choosing the lesser of the two evils makes you responsible for that evil.” – Gyges March 8, 2011 at 3:11 pm
I support the policies, practices, and philosophies of the Democratic Party over those of the Republican Party and I want Democrats running the country through the Cabinet and appointed Department Heads. If that means I have to take Obama … then just like last time, I’ll have to take Obama.
Hold me responsible and judge away … I can handle it.
It looks like the group is fairly evenly divided between a third party and those that will stick with Obama. I will also say that calling those that disagree with you to be members of a “cult” is not advancing the discussion. Those tactics tend isolate rather than attract to one’s cause.
Hear, hear, Mike A.
Restore the rule of law or eventually there will be Hell to pay.
For what it’s worth, I’ll will not vote for Pres. Obama again regardless of what comes out of the Republican convention. Of course, I will not vote for a Republican either.
It is not about ideological purity. But as I’ve said before, the rule of law is all we have. I voted for Mr. Obama last time around because he promised to restore the rule of law and I believed him.
I’m familiar with the dismal history of third parties in this country. But perhaps it is time to revisit that possibility. After all, we have a population of 300 million and counting. There has to be substantial support for more than two viewpoints, or two parties with one viewpoint.
Let’s see . . .
Urinal pucks, check.
Abuse of power, check.
Narcissistic Personality Disorder the norm for pols, check.
Looks like ya’ll hit all the high spots in my absence today except for aiding and abetting treason after the fact.
Good show.
Anon Y sorry, I think you missed that reference.
Take a quick look for a historical perspective:
http://www.rbvincent.com/hplong.htm
Bob,
Same reason why when the Raiders get a penalty it’s because they’re a bunch of lousy cheats, and when the Broncos do it’s because of an honest mistake.
Humans wrap a big part of their identity up in which tribe they belong to. Which is why I self identify as “guy who only does good stuff.” That way when I pull a No True Scottsman about someone in my tribe doing something bad, it’s actually true.
SL I started out being for Edwards but he dropped out before my primary.
Mike S,
Your post is a prime example of why I started participating on this blog. Your opinions are well thoughtout, concise, and from the heart. Don’t sell yourself short – I, as well as others here I’m sure, get a lot out of your posts.
I agree that one needs to be a narcissistic sociopath, with the inherent belief that they know what is best for the country, to run for President (I certainly wouldn’t do it as I like to keep what little sanity I have left!). The Bush Cabal of Criminals set a dangerous precedent by forming policies that were clearly unconstitutional; Obama, by continuing the same policies, has set the precedent in stone. I thought he was ethical; I thought, considering his constitutional background, he viewed the Constitution as more than just a mere piece of paper. It would take a very strong individual to undo what Bush started and Obama is continuing; it would take a strong individual to take on members of both Administration’s and hold them accountable for this constitutional crisis. While I thought the strong individual would have been Obama, he has proven me wrong. Not only does it disappoint me, it downright pisses me off.
I can understand that what is said on the campaign trail and what the reality is once in office can be two entirely different things. But, that does not excuse the continuation of policies that are far more dangerous to us than if the policies were never formed to begin with. In my mind, the illegalities being perpetrated in this “war” are perfect recruiting tools for those who want to do us harm. Obama has consistently bent to the whims of the Republicans. All they need to do is threaten him, and he waffles. This is what leads me to believe that to some degree, this is pure politics on his part.
Great minds think alike – I voted for Edwards in the primary as well, and for the same exact reasons you did. His Two America’s theme was brilliant, and even more relevant today than two years ago. What a powerful message! Too bad he completely blew it.
As far as Obama … Will I vote for him in 2012? Like you, I will. It’s bad enough that the Republican’s control the House – I think it will be positively unbearable if they won the White House (if McCain/Palin won, we’d probably be in the midst of WWIII). It beyond sucks that we need to vote for the lesser of two evils, as opposed to voting for the best candidate. I’ve often thought of sitting elections out but I’m not going to cut my nose off to spite my face.
Bob Esq.
I believe the self lies stem in part from the fact that Obama is a cult brand. Cults are often strengthened when their leaders tell lies. As you know, the earth should have ended many times over by now. Yet, most times, when this obviously did not occur, people stuck by the cult leader who predicted earth’s demise. I believe we are dealing with extremely sophisticated propaganda. It works.
I wonder why we are immediately bombarded by, “what if a Republican wins the presidential election” each and every time Obama does something completely illegal and depraved? The connection between those thoughts is the result of propaganda not something built into reality. The proper connection between illegal/depraved actions and Obama is to oppose him for these actions.
Hey Gyges,
Here’s what a liberal friend of mine had to say when confronted with Obamas record for:
Supporting the Use of Torture and Extraordinary Rendition
Refusing to Close the Guantanamo Bay Detention Center
Resuming Military Tribunals
Continuing to Suspend Habeas Corpus without the existence of insurrection or rebellion
Defending Warrantless Wiretapping; 4th Amendment be damned
Issuing an Executive Order Authorizing Extrajudicial Execution of American Citizens
Etc., etc.
Liberal friend: “And yes, I *would* rather have an intelligent, centrist Democrat president using the Constitution as a urinal puck, than a developmentally disabled fake Republican (certainly a fake conservative) liar, war profiteer and mass murderer. (Given the validity of your constitutional complaints, I suppose that BHO is a murderer, but at least a much more selective one, and possibly in the cause of something marginally defensible, morally…like killing our enemies.)”
Slarti made a similar argument; didn’t he?
Got any books on the dynamic at work here? Why do people choose to lie to themselves when they make statements and adopt positions like the foregoing?