Obama not walking the walk with regard to "getting tough" on lobbyists

[brentspeak]

Oh, he's talking the talk, but that's about it. Here, he's closing ranks around the telecom industry to give them immunity for spying on American citizens: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3758004&mesg_id=3758004

[babylonsister]

1. Has Obama done ANYTHING you like? nt

[brentspeak]

2. Wrong question. Address the content of my OP.

[babylonsister]

3. Baloney. You live to criticize. nt

[brentspeak]

4. You're confusing me with someone else.

I haven't posted many threads critical of Obama since the end of primaries. And you're still attacking the messenger.

[Jim Sagle]

15. This is DU not OU.

[Somawas]

5. I pretty much gave up on the fight when he voted for it.

Telcom immunity was evil when he voted for it and evil now. And he hasn't figured that ouyt, apparently.

[Hutzpa]

6. Are you sure? you're with the right community???

just wondering.....:shrug: you are always posting negative threads.

:wtf: are you doing here??????????????????????????????????

[brentspeak]

8. What other "negative threads" have I posted?

And not all of us march in lock-step here. Not all of us worship politicians enough not to hold their feet to the fire.

Why do you like the fact that the telecom corporations have spied on American citizens? Why do you support the administration defending the telecoms on this issue?

[earth mom]

13. If you think everyone is in lockstep around here you are mistaken.

The most important aspect of freedom is to be able to speak truth to power.

Otherwise, you've got nothing but a dictatorship.

[Hutzpa]

16. You see

what the two of you don't understand is this, this is not the place for republican
ideology, this community is for democrats and coming to a private forum which no
one invited you to and asked for freedom of speech (oh the nerve) is like walking
into my house and asking me to live, which is something a republican would say or
do.

You want freedom of speech, create your own blog or forum whereas you can say
whatever you want, in this community, we cater to democrats and democrats only.

The idiocy is paramount...

[rcrush]

7. Well

I obviously disagree with him on this one. But I'm not ready to burn the white house down yet like some people are. He's not Bush or Jesus but I think he can be reasoned with.

[soccermomforobama]

9. The law is what needs to be changed.

If his Administration did not defend it at this time, then his Admin. would be breaking the law.
I do not agree with the law but I do not know what others want him to do.

I would like to see the Adminstration and Congress to revisit the law but his administration cannot and should not just unilaterally decide to break what is current law-even if they disagree with it.

ETA: As Pres. Obama has said "no one is above the law"

[brentspeak]

10. One thing the admin can do is not to defend the current legislation

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2009/02/obama-adminis-1.html

[soccermomforobama]

11. So then he would set precedence that his administration

will pick and choose as to what laws they will enforce. To me, that would be just the kind of precedence he needs to avoid.

[babylonsister]

12. Court Rejects Obama Bid to Stop Wiretapping Suit

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3760115

So now we wait to see what happens. And ftr, I don't agree with Obama on this either and am glad the court rejected it.

[soccermomforobama]

14. exactly. Let the courts figure it out.

That is what needs to be done.

If the issue makes it through the courts and the courts decide that the immunity is illegal then the law will have to be rewritten and it will be another bit of evidence of all of the illegal things that Bush did during his presidency.

[TahitiNut]

18. I suspect he may be playing chess.

:shrug:

[liberalsince1968]

17. He's walking BUSH'S walk. Our rights are being taken away by Obama just as they were

by Bush!

[EraOfResponsibility]

20. ...

:eyes:

[Occam Bandage]

22. ...

:rofl:

[Dawgs]

23. Liberal my ass.

:rofl: :rofl::rofl: :rofl::rofl: :rofl::rofl: :rofl:

[dionysus]

25. you, maam, are a liar.

[bertman]

19. I think it's too soon to tell yet, brentspeak. But thanks for alerting us. We'll keep our

eyes peeled on this one.

[biopowertoday]

24. Court Rejects Obama Bid to Stop Wiretapping Suit-2/27. The WH

also signaled they will take it the SC. It was posted here on DU.

Forum Name Latest Breaking News
Topic subject Court Rejects Obama Bid to Stop Wiretapping Suit
Topic URL http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3760115#3760115
3760115, Court Rejects Obama Bid to Stop Wiretapping Suit
Posted by kpete on Fri Feb-27-09 09:33 PM

Source: New York Times

Court Rejects Obama Bid to Stop Wiretapping Suit
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: February 27, 2009

Filed at 3:34 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Obama administration has lost its argument that the state secrets privilege is a good enough reason to stop a lawsuit over the government's warrantless wiretapping program.

A federal appeals court in San Francisco has rejected the Justice Department's request for an emergency stay. The Obama administration, like the Bush administration before it, claimed that national security would be compromised if a lawsuit brought by the U.S. chapter of an Islamic charity was allowed to proceed.

The case was brought by the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, a defunct charity with a chapter in Oregon.

The appeals court decision is a setback for the new Obama administration as it adopts some of the same positions on national security and secrecy as the Bush administration.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/02/27/washington/AP-Warrantless-Wiretaps.html#articleBodyLink


here is the brief:
http://static1.firedoglake.com/28/files//2009/02/090226-al-haramainsbrief2-26-09.pdf

[uponit7771]

21. I agree on the too soon to tell mostly cause Obama has turned these things onto themselves....

[EraOfResponsibility]

26. Oh well, time to punish him then. Since he all but declared war on lobbyists yesterday

during his weekly address, I guess we'll just have to punish him by leaving him since he's really a hypocrite (even if it means we might actually get some real health care reform) but THAT'S OKAY because he's not really "walking the walk" so therefore don't bother to get behind him when he's about to gear up against the lobbyists on Capitol Hill...THAT'LL SHOW HIM!!!!!











fucking idiot...:eyes: