Simply delicious:
The Obama administration, siding with former President George W. Bush, is trying to kill a lawsuit that seeks to recover what could be millions of missing White House e-mails.
Two advocacy groups suing the Executive Office of the President say that large amounts of White House e-mail documenting Bush’s eight years in office may still be missing, and that the government must undertake an extensive recovery effort. They expressed disappointment that Obama’s Justice Department is continuing the Bush administration’s bid to get the lawsuits dismissed.
~~~“The new administration seems no more eager than the last” to deal with the issue, said Anne Weismann, chief counsel for Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, the other group that sued the EOP.
The Executive Office of the President includes the president’s immediate staff and many White House offices and agencies.
This comes on the heels of his agreement with Bush on terror detainee’s:
President Obama sided with the Bush administration Friday, saying detainees in Afghanistan have no constitutional rights.
Now, the question I have for our lefties, please explain why it is now okay for Obama to do what many of the left villified Bush over?
Can’t wait to hear the mental hoops they will jump through to explain this away.
Bush does it….bad. Obama does it….good.
Thy name is hypocrisy.
See author page
Nobody does it half as good as you
Baby you’re the best
AND he’s expanding the war against Pakistanis
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/21/washington/21policy.html?_r=1
Where are the moonbats? Could it possibly be that they’re not rising up to march for peace by the millions because….the rantings were just catalysts for Bush hate rather than against issues? If it was the issues, then where are they now?
He takes Bush’s position on warrantless wiretaps
He hires cronies for political appointments
He increases the deficit by a trillion or more (and that’s just his first month!)
He stops giving detainees trials
He hasn’t closed Gitmo (issued an order to try, but Bush tried too)
He will still do renditions
He put a guy in charge at CIA who admits to doing 60-80 renditions HIMSELF
He sent 17000 Americans to Afghanistan w no plan and no timeline for withdrawal
He has not ordered the withdrawal from Iraq in 16 months (cause its not possible to speed up the withdrawal Bush started)
He ignored millions of Americans devastated by an ice storm in Tennesee, W Virginia, and Kentucky
He has NOT HELPED the economy one bit
He has no plan to solve even a single challenge facing his admin
Oh well, at least he has a D next to his name and can read a teleprompter
WORST PRESIDENT EVER
Agreed, Scott. I linked that NYTs article in my Obama’s Iran policy vague as interal admin depts fight for control post today.
It’s another “atta boy” I have to give Obama. specifically, Obama’s “expansion” includes going where Bush had not previously gone… ala going after Baitullah Mehsud directly as a target.
Then again, you can chalk this up to another broken Obama promise (you *are* keeping score, right? LOL). Obama wanted to concentrate on AQ and OBL. Mehsud… certainly a bud to Osama and an AQ enabler – as well as a thorn in the side to the Pakistanis…. is not exactly going after Osama Bin Laden, is it?
But I’ll give him a thumbs up on continuing the Predator drone attacks, and heretofore including Mehsud in the crosshairs. And, as it was under Bush, the Pakistanis tacitly agree and publicly complain in order to keep the peace amongst their citizens, and the WH refuses to confirm or deny.
Yep… just another day of the Bush foreign policy doctrine. On this level, count me happy.
Now if we could stop his marionettes from spending the US into oblivion, we might have something here.
Let’s not forget the use of Executive Orders… the left hated the use of Executive Orders.
I’m laughing my ass off right now… my old constitutional law professor was probably most radical leftist I have ever met. He use to rail against Bush on a daily basis (and I’m paying tuition for this idiot to spread his propaganda). Idiot liberals. Ha!
I want to second Scott’s statement that Obama is the worst president ever!!!
Did you see the news about his plan to cut in half the deficit?!! Are you serious?!!! He just got done spending more money in less time than any other president ever and he’s going to talk about reducing the deficit?!! The guy must still be on drugs. And his plan is to raise taxes on businesses?!! Oh goodness, this recession is going to last into 2010, and then we have stagflation to look forward to.
No doubt liberals will continue to blame Bush in 2012 for the economic woes caused by Obama, even though they blamed Bush for the Clinton recession in Bush’s first 6 months.
When I found out about this, I told my dad (who regularly criticized Bush for his detainment policy and voted for Obama). Of course, when I told him, I brought up his past criticisms of how it was wrong for Bush to do what he did. I asked him if he would criticize Obama the same way and if those who didn’t were being hypocrites. Of course, I already knew his answer – “Oh, it’s different because… uh, Bush did things that Obama now has to deal with differently than he would’ve otherwise.” (Okay, definitely not his exact words, but the gist of it.) I quickly called him a hypocrite and (needless to say) he wasn’t happy about that. Somehow, I doubt other Obama supporters will act any differently.
Me? Of course, I agree with Obama on this, though this another case of his mouthing off on the campaign trail and realizing that those pesky things called “facts” were of no concern at the time. I’ll also say this – while I would disagree (and certainly wouldn’t support any out-of-line language), I can have some respect for liberals that would criticize Obama for this just as they did for Bush. Those that don’t (like dear, old dad), however…
Oh… about the detainment policies… maybe the liberals should look at the International Criminal Court’s policies. They kept Milosevic over 6 years before he died in jail, and they never charged him with anything. But I guess indefinite detentions by the UN is okay, as long as it’s not Bush doing it. Huh… makes total sense…
and so….patriotic Americans should applaud all this?
The ever-growing expansion of unchecked, unbalanced Government power-
Warrantless wiretaps;
Imprisonment of American citizens on American soil without charges;
secret prisons;
secret Government email accounts;
war without end, authorized by no one but the whim of the Chief Executive;
Seriously, why are so many Americans cheering this? Is it really just the loony left that is alarmed by the expansion of the police power of the State? Or can the intellectual heirs to Jefferson and Madison mount some sort of defense of the right of the People to control their own government?
I hated the liberalism of the 70’s for the very reason that their nanny state programs robbed citizens of power, transferring it to the government; but today, I fear less the government taxes or regulations than I do a government that states openly its power to imrpsion anyone, anywhere, for any length of time without any showing of cause.
As I posted elsewhere on this site, I sense that this polarized, “Our side” vs “Their side” tribalism politics is robbing us of the ability to recognize a bad idea when we see it; Whether it is Bush or Obama who suspends basic human rights, shouldn’t anyone who loves liberty rise up in protest?
@ChipD: How many regular Americans had their civil liberties infringed by Bush’s national security policy?
I get your point about concern for civil liberties but let’s keep it in perspective. Those rights don’t do us any good if we are dead.
And since we are neither dead nor in prison for our political beliefs I am less inclined to err on the side that would favor the jihadis.
@Scott Malensek: You know these libs don’t care about anything but power and the opportunity to advance world socialism.
They will throw nearly every one of their bumper sticker beliefs overboard in a heartbeat if they have the opportunity to acquire and wield political power.
As a died in the wool lefty, I am chagrined by Obama’s overt gestures of capitulation to the right. I hope that he is merely positioning himself to enact policies that would improve the lives of non-corporate entities. We’ll soon find out which way the path will lead.
Obama is not capitulating to the right, he’s covering his fanny with both hands. His entire career in IL and his brief stint as a Senator in DC has been a whole lot of doing nothing. He made a habit of voting present in the IL state house, stole the credit for the work of his Senate peers and never looked back. He has been AWOL in DC. Now he has to govern, he’s been winging it and not doing to well on that either.
Mike, while it is true that there haven’t been mass arrests of innocent American, thrown into a gulag- the fact remains that the Unitary Executive Theory advanced by Woo, Rove, Cheney and others DOES in fact allow President Obama to simply point to anyone…anyone at all, and declare that person to be an “enemy combatant”who at that moment loses all rights under the Constitution.
The fact that Obama hasn’t put that theory into practice doesn’t make me feel one bit better. What disturbs me so deeply is that it is the conservatives, the ones who agitate against excessive government power, who are seemingly going along with all of this.
The biggest weapon a tyranny has is a lack of skepticism among the people. I don’t trust any government with the sort of power we are witnessing. The idea that MUST tolerate this because of some “unusual” or “unprecedented” threat is just not true; We have faced civil war, the Nazi Army, the Red Army, Josef Stalin with nuclear weapons, and other threats without needing to burn the Constitution and crown an Emperor.
ChipD, you said:
“We have faced civil war, the Nazi Army, the Red Army, Josef Stalin with nuclear weapons, and other threats without needing to burn the Constitution and crown an Emperor.”
Before your soap box collapses under you, perhaps you best step down, grab a history book and study. Your examples aren’t supporting your argument. Lincoln/habeas corpus, WWII internment camps.
You want to pick at Bush, Cheney and Rove. Fortunately for us, they have done everything they could to protect us, too bad you can’t appreciate that.
One of our Flopping Aces hosts is away in Afghanistan right now, my nephew is also a part of this war. Nothing is more disheartening than to see people in our country whine about the evil pieces of humanity that are out there trying to kill those we love while they are serving those that are whining.
You obviously have no idea what we go through. You are concerned about maniac killers instead of our troops. Before you continue to whine about their treatment, make no mistake, time is not being wasted on innocents.
Missy-
I think you put forward a false dilemma-
That we either side with the terrorists, or completely surrender to whatever the Government says is “necessary” to protect us.
For instance, some of the most ardent gun-control advocates around the country are local police captains- they say that if they could only confiscate the guns of those criminal gangs, then we would be safe. Of course this is nonsense. Also nonsense is the notion that if we just gave the government all the power it wanted, to read our email, listen to our phone calls, throw us in jail on a whim, then we will be safe.
I too have a friend who served in Iraq; and I too believe that Islamism is a serious threat to Western civilization; but no, I don’t buy the argument that we need to throw away Western civilization in order to save it.
As for history- Yes, Lincoln and Roosevelt also trampled on the Consitution- the suspension of habeas corpus and internment camps comes to mind- but it was wrong then, and wrong now.
If nothing else, consider how this argument tends to expand- we are hearing the very same logic now being spouted by the Government, except in the economic realm- “The wolf is at the door! We must take radical action now, or we will all perish!” Throw away those notions of liberty and independence- the only one who can protect you now is we the Government!”
Sound familiar? Once the People are conditioned to surrender liberty for safety, the State will continue to use that same song and dance in order to gain power.
I will say it again and again- the Government cannot be trusted with power.
There is no hint in my response to your post that we either side with the terrorists vs our government.
Bit of backround, my nephew was involved with abu Gharibe detainees, he was one of Saddam’s guards. He guarded the terrorists, made sure our interrorgators did not touch them, he also witnessed the interrogations. These aren’t innocent people, we do not have the time and resources to waste on anyone that isn’t providing information that can be used to protect the troops, Iraqis or their government officials.
Much is the same at GITMO, the results of the recently completed investigation ordered by Obama stated that GITMO is operating legally under the GC’s.
Like it or not other than GITMO, Obama will continue with the same techniques that Bush used. What he does with GITMO, he doesn’t even know, he didn’t understand his EO, is unfamiliar with CIPA, gave the 911/Cole families inaccurate information, it’s way over his head.
Definately not an improvement over President Bush’s leadership.