Obama = George Bush the Third?

[JMU DJ]

Uncontrolled spending, bail outs, similar Iraq withdraw plans, failure to close GITMO, empty promises, etc. I'm starting to see why the conservative press is making all the comparisons of Obama to Bush (i.e. "Obama's Weapons of mass destruction," "Obama's Katrina," etc), though those crusty conservatives were some of the biggest Bush apologist at the same time.

After reporter's subpoena, critics call Obama's leak-plugging efforts Bush-like

James Risen, who shared a Pulitzer Prize for disclosing President George W. Bush's domestic surveillance program, has refused to testify about the confidential sources he used for his 2006 book "State of War: The Secret History of the C.I.A. and the Bush Administration."

"The message they are sending to everyone is, 'You leak to the media, we will get you,' " said Lucy Dalglish, executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. In the wake of the Bush administration's aggressive stance toward the press, she said, "as far as I can tell there is absolutely no difference, and the Obama administration seems to be paying more attention to it. This is going to get nasty."

Kurt Wimmer, a Washington lawyer who helped win White House approval for a proposed federal shield law, called the move against Risen "disappointing" after "we had positive discussions with the Obama administration" on the need to give journalists a legal foundation for protecting their sources in most cases.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 04656.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


First, don't leak national secrets... it's illegal and if the gubernment has enough evidence and finds out you have, I hope they skull fuck you. At the same time, the gubernment shouldn't be conducting illegal activities that they need to "cover up." So shame on you too, I hope you get your comeuppance.

Second, Shield Laws. There's no federal protection of sources, and the federal government can obtain confidential sources if it's pertinent to the case, as long as they've exhausted every other possible avenue. What's more confusing, is that Obama has said he would sign a Shield Law that is currently in front of the Senate (as mentioned in the article).


Is this just the press making a "woe is me" statement or are their rights as journalist being infringed upon? I thought about this when it was happening under Bush too and the only thing I can think of is that there is no federal protection granted, but does the First Ammendment cover that?

[AZGrizFan]

Had this exact conversation with my neice this weekend. She worked on Obama's campaign in Montana and told me I was "offending" her by saying that Obama is no different that GW.

The biggest thing that pisses me off with the koolaid drinkers is this: Obama filled their pretty little heads on the campaign trail with visions of a big kumbaya party, railing against Bush's policies and promising closing GTMO, pulling out of Iraq, reversing the Patriot Act, etc., etc., etc...McCain, being a Bush allie, had to publicly support the policies (plus, he knew they were right).

Then, lo and behold, as soon as Obama gets in the WH and gets an actual security briefing, he figures out that GTMO, the Patriot Act, and all the other "Bush War on Terror" policies ain't such a bad fucking thing....just like 90% of the conservatives in the country KNEW he'd do....he's a fuckin' hypocrite, and basically said whatever he needed to to get himself elected king....don't be surprised if he goes after the 2-term limit at some point.

Koolaid drinkers.....pathetic.

[JMU DJ]

he figures out that GTMO, the Patriot Act, and all the other "Bush War on Terror" policies ain't such a bad fucking thing....just like 90% of the conservatives in the country KNEW he'd do....

GITMO good?


Patriot Act good?


Nothing like a good ol' illegal wire tap to get your going in the morning.

The Obama Administration this week released its predecessor's post-9/11 legal memoranda in the name of "transparency," producing another round of feel-good Bush criticism. Anyone interested in President Obama's actual executive-power policies, however, should look at his position on warrantless wiretapping. Dick Cheney must be smiling.

Just read this in the same article.... yet they want journalist to release their sources? Guess it's only a one way door.

The Obama Justice Department has adopted a legal stance identical to, if not more aggressive than, the Bush version. It argues that the court-forced disclosure of the surveillance programs would cause "exceptional harm to national security" by exposing intelligence sources and methods.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123638765474658467.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

WASHINGTON — A federal judge ruled Wednesday that the National Security Agency’s program of surveillance without warrants was illegal, rejecting the Obama administration’s effort to keep shrouded in secrecy one of the most disputed counterterrorism policies of former President George W. Bush.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/01/us/01nsa.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hope Bush and Obama get cornholed over this. All for national security though, so it's OK to give up your rights.

[AZGrizFan]

Except it wasn't OK with Obama when he was RUNNING for President. But he just needed soundbites to get elected.....the attention span of the koolaid drinkers is truly frightening.

[YoUDeeMan]

Had this exact conversation with my neice this weekend. She worked on Obama's campaign in Montana and... Obama filled their pretty little heads on the campaign trail with visions of a big kumbaya party...

AZ,

niece + pretty little heads = pictures.

Post them.

[houndawg]

he figures out that GTMO, the Patriot Act, and all the other "Bush War on Terror" policies ain't such a bad **** thing....just like 90% of the conservatives in the country KNEW he'd do....

GITMO good?


Patriot Act good?


Nothing like a good ol' illegal wire tap to get your going in the morning.

The Obama Administration this week released its predecessor's post-9/11 legal memoranda in the name of "transparency," producing another round of feel-good Bush criticism. Anyone interested in President Obama's actual executive-power policies, however, should look at his position on warrantless wiretapping. Dick Cheney must be smiling.

Just read this in the same article.... yet they want journalist to release their sources? Guess it's only a one way door.

The Obama Justice Department has adopted a legal stance identical to, if not more aggressive than, the Bush version. It argues that the court-forced disclosure of the surveillance programs would cause "exceptional harm to national security" by exposing intelligence sources and methods.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123638765474658467.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

WASHINGTON — A federal judge ruled Wednesday that the National Security Agency’s program of surveillance without warrants was illegal, rejecting the Obama administration’s effort to keep shrouded in secrecy one of the most disputed counterterrorism policies of former President George W. Bush.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/01/us/01nsa.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hope Bush and Obama get cornholed over this. All for national security though, so it's OK to give up your rights.

[AZGrizFan]

Had this exact conversation with my neice this weekend. She worked on Obama's campaign in Montana and... Obama filled their pretty little heads on the campaign trail with visions of a big kumbaya party...

AZ,

niece + pretty little heads = pictures.

Post them.

don't have any. Ask Ursus though...he's met her.