John Brennan and Bush's interrogation/detention policies by Glen Greenwald on Salon.com
This is a follow up piece to ...
The Democrats of 2002 and 2007 haven't gone anywhere by Glen Greenwald on Salon.com
The latest piece is details on the person who's transition advisor on intelligence policy. He is a big supporter of 'redition', FISA immunity and shall we say enhanced interrogation technigues.
The older piece has the amazing news that Joe Lieberman will likely get a key Senate chairmanship for the committee on Homeland Security.
7 comments:
"They care even less what their "base" thinks, what the so-called "Left" wants. Few things in this world are less likely than them ever taking even a mild stand -- such as stripping Lieberman of his Chair -- in order to defend some sort of political principle, or to punish ineptitude, or to announce that there are certain lines to the Right that can't be crossed. They don't do that. They never have. And it shouldn't surprise anyone that they won't now."
That part of the older article struck me. Mainly its because what I kept saying up on CD that got be banned.
The Democrats have no principles. Or they have one principle .... winning and thus grabbing power. There has been a long train of events that have consistently stated this.
The two I like to cite are the Iraq war and impeachment. In the case of the Iraq war, the vote authorizing that war was set by the Republicans as being in Oct before the 2002 mid-term elections. The Dems clearly came out and said that they would support this because they wanted the issue out of the way before the election. Ie, the voted for the war because they felt it would help them win.
Think about that, and think about all of the death and destruction that's occurred because of that. The Dems were perfectly willing to have all the horrors of war in Iraq over the last 5 years and counting just because they felt it was a better election strategy for them.
The same with impeachment. Their duty under the constitution was clear. There was certainly evidence enough to hold hearings to investigate whether Bush had committed impeachable offenses. They didn't have to move straight to impeachment. The first step should have been hearings to see if offenses had been committed.
But the Dems wouldn't do that because they felt they would win the next election and didn't want to do anything to put that at risk. So, they were willing to sell the Constitution and the rule of law in this nation down the river to help their election chances.
When they get caught unawares on camera, they call the left 'idiot liberals'. Their real feelings do show through sometimes. What amazes me is that the left hasn't caught on to this and is still willing to vote for a party that depises them and doesn't support any of their values or principles.
The interesting question is when will this change? With the Dems in full control of the government, by th 2010 midterms it will be clear where they stand. The question is, will the left accept this right-leaning Dem government or will it bolt from that party and rebel.
Hi Samson. Citizenblog here. I am truly surprised and, to be honest, upset, that my favorite commentators on commondreams have been banned. What criteria do they have for making these decisions? Given their professed aims banning reasoning posters seems very strange. Censorship is very demoralising. I always enjoyed the posts by you, RichM, Little Brother etc and will not be contributing to CommonDreams anymore since they have shown themselves to be against free speech. The writing was on the wall when the forum format changed. I only contributed after this because people like you continued to contribute to the site. How about an Impeach Obama and Indict Bush and Cheney campaign?
Spelling Rendition.
PS ... Lieberman keeps his chairmanship.
Note: That one is probably a big cash cow. A ton of money has flown into 'homeland security' budgets. And no signs Obama plans on reeling it back in. Certainly not if he just helped put Joe Lieberman and his right-wing views in the chair of this committee.
BTW, anyone remember Obama going over to CT and campaigning for Lieberman when that upstart took the Dem nomination away from Joe?
Common Dreams, folks, is a 501 c3. Do we have any attornies out there? They took $154,000 in taxpayer money as a non-profit (private), with an "educational mandate". They are NOT allowed to specifically back one candidate or party. (Obviously , there is some leeway there).
I saw their tax forms, their board membership---I went through the IRS links. It is public knowledge. I'm just too stupid to know what to do with it! I have Form 13909, a complaint against Tax-Exempt Organizations Form--anybody see a reason why I should not complain?
I run into more people banned everyday all over the web...
I am really sick of internet censorship--I guess the "left" (right...) thinks that that is how neo-cons got in power. That is what neo-liberals wil do now. They wil end up no better...
I seem to have trouble even navigating here--I am not very good at this, I'm afraid. I will try to come back and see what all have said...
I think that it is sad to see people who have nowhere else to comment...it just sucks...
This may mean nothing, but, they did , at least, get Capone locked up for tax evasion! There is also one in the Wash Post, but I havent found it yet...
http://therealnews.com/t/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=2825
Post a Comment