Comments on: Obama Executive Power Watch

By: Jason

Jason — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 16:53:01 +0000

Did anyone SERIOUSLY think Obama would do anything to limit his own power? Seriously? He rose from obscurity to POTUS in about 5 years, but he’s not in it for the power. Ha! He’s a democrat, but he doesn’t believe in big government. Ha!

By: Li

Li — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 18:59:43 +0000

To be frank; I think he is afraid. Afraid of the consequences of letting all of these abuses come to light. Afraid of being compelled to arrest and try large numbers of former administration officials. And afraid of the fact that two of the people that would surely have to be sent to the Hague are Nancy and Harry. He is making a false choice; he must be reasoning “I have to work with congress and the Republicans, so I can’t allow these crimes to come to light.” False, because these actions ruin his brand and will inevitably block the only route to real change that he has; that is, the co-operation of the freedom loving people of America. And also false, in that working with lawless criminals inevitably makes you a criminal yourself, and there is no stricture against impeaching a Democratic president in this country. .

By: Buck

Buck — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 15:48:26 +0000

McCain / Palin would have been more fucked up but admittedly more amusing.

By: scott in phx

scott in phx — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 14:20:43 +0000

Sorry to dissappoint all the frothingj-at-the-mouth Bush hating zeolots but Obama and the Democrats are a far greater threat to liberty than Bush ever was (not that he was/is not dangerous – as ALL gov’t officials are).

Don’t look for the LEFT to call him on this. They WANT a totalitarian gov’t – trouble is they’re going to get one that squashes them too.

I’d be laughing if it wasn’t so terrifying.

By: Nicholas

Nicholas — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 13:53:28 +0000

Can someone take a stab at a question for me?

From what I’ve read there aren’t much in the way for “set rules” on Executive Privilege.

Does EP carry over from one administration to another?

Is it less formal than that (ie more of a co-operative agreement between administrations that they respect EP of previous admins)?

Is Rove’s attorney wanting Obama to play arbitrateur because he’s betting it’ll bolster his case or because Obama has an official role in the matter?

Any thoughts or relevant case law would be appreciated. Thanks.

By: Steam McQueen

Steam McQueen — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 06:58:12 +0000

Decisively proving once again that if voting could really change things, it would be illegal.

By: Helmut O' Hooligan

Helmut O' Hooligan — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 05:01:55 +0000

#29 Cynical:

“Mmmm hmmm. I’m off the chart.”

Now I find that hard to believe (making my astonished face).

BTW, did you agree with my point about Friedman.

By: Cynical In CA

Cynical In CA — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 04:45:48 +0000

“Has anyone here taken the “Political Compass” ideology test?”

Mmmm hmmm. I’m off the chart.

By: Nick T

Nick T — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 04:08:42 +0000

#11 Chuchundra

You have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about. “Obama’s” DOJ lawyers could have asked for more time with the court before taking a stand on the state’s secret issue; the ACLU would not have objected and it’s almost certain the court would have allowed them more time if they cited the not-yet-3-week-oldness of the administration. They didn’t even ask. So the “it’s only been a month of blah blah blah” is utter crap. Sorry.

Secondly, the statement that they could not reclaim the privilege once they gave it up is BLATANTLY false. The state secret doctrine has existed for a long time but it has always been used to exclude *specific documents or infomration* from coming into evidence during a hearing. You do not need to claim this at the outset of the trial in order to be able to object when those documents come up any more than you have to make an argument against hearsay at the outset of a trial.

The problem is that the state secrets document was never used to dismiss lawsuits altogether. The distinction between those two concepts is the essence of complaints by civil libertarians. Even the ACLU agrees the state secrets doctrine is a valid one,it’s just being applied unlawfully here.

Sadly, I know you’ve heard your opinion on tv or whatever but ABOLSUTELY NONE of it is even remotely accurate.

By: Burrow Owl

Burrow Owl — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 03:11:50 +0000

Tim C at #17:

You took the words right out of my mouth.

My alarm bells really started ringing when he picked Jackass Joe Biden to be his running mate.
As he started naming off his cabinet/staff picks the alarms bells turned into air raid alarms- and the damned things keep getting louder.

By: DonH

DonH — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 03:02:10 +0000

So when do we get to start calling it the “Bush-Cheney-Obama” Terrorist Surveillance Program?

By: AMW

AMW — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 01:34:24 +0000

RELOADING CYNICISM NOW…

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]…………
92% COMPLETE

By: Tim C

Tim C — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 00:43:18 +0000

OOOOH I hate automatic emoticons, I mean the damn ascii : )

By: Tim C

Tim C — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 00:42:54 +0000

#21 BamBam – no shit! :) I.e, the only difference between the left and the right is that the left gets all pissy when the right does what Obama’s doing. @#%*&#@%)(*

By: Helmut O' Hooligan

Helmut O' Hooligan — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 23:37:29 +0000

#21 BamBam:
Point well taken. The tired old left v. right “political spectrum” has been outdated for a long time. Libertarians realize this, which is why they often use a diamond shaped model, rather than some silly straight line.

Has anyone here taken the “Political Compass” ideology test? I always wind up just slightly left-of-center and way down into the libertarian section. I think this test is a bit more convincing than some others. I will say I disagree with the fact that they show Milton Friedman as a far right-winger, because I believe someone who is truly “far-right” would advocate feudalism and/or corporatism, not free-market capitalism.

By: BamBam

BamBam — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 22:31:31 +0000

left/right is a false dichotomy. The words imply that the camps that claim each label are at polar opposites on the ideology spectrum. They are both very close to each other, therefore they can’t be accurately called left/right. The true polar opposites are those that represent anarchy (0%) and total fascism (100%). I submit that the left/right of today are at around 80% on this more accurate spectrum.

By: Cynical in CA

Cynical in CA — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 22:22:27 +0000

Couldn’t these types of stories be filed under, “Too Obvious to Bother Posting About?”

By: Michael Chaney

Michael Chaney — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 22:22:03 +0000

But, hey – at least the man can speak, and that’s a definite step up…

That’s a *huge* step down – that means he can continue to sucker the starry-eyed idiots who have been believing him all along.

By: rp BUCKmurphy

rp BUCKmurphy — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 22:02:46 +0000

I refuse to make my emails public, no matter what anyone anywhere says, they are mine and only mine, why should Ihave to give them up. It is my right as a free American(at least for now) to keep my emails private, as they should be private in a private way. Did anyone complain about privacy when jackie chan wanted to keep his emails private? uhh no….so then why should I make my emails public? If I would make them public this could set a precedent concerning the privacy of emails, I am going to take a stand even if it means going to jail, stand with me in the fight for email privacy.

By: Tim C

Tim C — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 21:46:48 +0000

I’d say Obama’s insincerity certainly shouldn’t be any surprise whatsoever. The man has a demonstrated history of lying, power-lust, and having pretty questionable associations with various anti-Americans. Any of this was obvious to anyone willing to dig around the web even a little bit – and after the MSM’s farcical election coverage, and utter failure to question these things that damn well should have been questioned, I’d say it’s hopelessly naive to expect said media to point out any of Der Annointed Fuhrer’s faults, reversals, lies, inconsistencies, etc, unless things get so bad that it’s impossible to ignore.