Just weeks after the ACLU released its scathing indictment of the Obama Administration’s failures on civil liberties, law professor Jonathan Turley has become one of the most prominent individual civil libertarians in America to attack President Obama’s record as he seeks reelection. The list of transgressions he lists in a Los Angeles Times op-ed is familiar to regular readers of this space: “He continued warrantless surveillance and military tribunals that denied defendants basic rights,” Turley writes. “He asserted the right to kill U.S. citizens he views as terrorists. His administration has fought to block dozens of public-interest lawsuits challenging privacy violations and presidential abuses.”

Despite these transgressions, the Obama Administration has faced a lot less backlash from the left — notable exceptions include organizations like the ACLU and individuals like Glenn Greenwald — than did the Bush Administration, an unfortunate truth that causes Turley to offer a harsh assessment of the Democratic Party…

The combination of the record and the left’s reaction to it is what worries [Turley] most of all. “In time, the election of Barack Obama may stand as one of the single most devastating events in our history for civil liberties,” he writes.



The Civil Libertarian Backlash Against Obama 2012 Begins

On Aug. 16, Mr. Daley met with environmental, public-health and other groups to discuss the Environmental Protection Agency rule that would tighten air-quality standards. At one point he lamented that the issue couldn’t be worked out by consensus with industry, as the White House did with the auto industry on fuel-economy rules.

When the American Lung Association mentioned a poll showing public support for EPA standards, Mr. Daley appeared uninterested, according to one person in the room. “He literally cut the person off and said ‘I don’t give a [expletive] about the poll’,” this person said. A senior White House official said Mr. Daley wanted to hear arguments about the substance of the regulation and its impact, not political arguments, and he was uninterested in all polls on this topic.

The same day, Mr. Daley met with industry groups, who gave the White House a map showing counties that would be out of compliance with the Clean Air Act if the stricter standards were put in place. The map showed that the rule would affect areas in the politically important 2012 election states of Florida, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Ohio.



The stupid politics behind Obama’s ozone cave

Dissatisfaction with President Obama is hurting Democrats’ chances in two House special elections that will take place on Tuesday.

In a Democratic-leaning New York City seat previously held by Democratic Rep. Anthony Weiner, some prominent local Democrats have endorsed Republican Bob Turner because of Obama’s handling of Israel, while Democrat David Weprin has sought distance from the president.

In a GOP-leaning Nevada district left vacant when Dean Heller was appointed to the Senate, Republicans are using Obama as a cudgel against Democratic candidate Kate Marshall, featuring him in all of their ads while mostly ignoring her.

Many Democratic strategists are privately blaming Obama for their party’s difficulties in both districts and worry that if his numbers don’t improve he could hurt their chances at retaking the House in 2012.



Obama dragging down Democratic candidates in House special elections

Obama seems obsessed with wanting to lead the country in what he sees as a post-partisan era while his opponents are so partisan they have only one goal in mind—to destroy him even if they have to burn down the house to do it. Well, you may want with all your heart to save your marriage but if your philandering, uncaring, unredeemable, and narcissistic partner is determined at all costs to break up the marriage, the sooner you decide not to play the fool, the better.


Bill Moyers (via azspot)

(via azspot)

Tonight, President Obama proposed corporate tax cuts paid for with cuts to Medicare benefits. Forcing Americans to choose between jobs and Medicare is unthinkable, especially for a Democratic president. America needs a massive government investment in jobs – not Medicare benefit cuts, not corporate tax giveaways, and not telling the unemployed to work for big corporations for free.” — The Progressive Change Campaign Committee has 800,000 members


The Progressive Change Campaign Committee (which represents 800,000 members)

(Source: vruz)

[I]t’s worth taking a closer look at why environmentalists and clean-air advocates are so furious right now. Groups that have been lobbying for the long-delayed ozone update say they were essentially betrayed by the Obama administration, which, back in 2009, had fended off a lawsuit over Bush-era ozone rules by promising to issue tougher new standards. That, obviously, isn’t going to happen now. What’s more, critics note, the White House’s stated reasons for yanking the rules make no sense at all…

So what happens now? Right now, most states are still operating under the old 1997 standards. The EPA [under Obama] had earlier directed states not to follow the (somewhat stricter) 2008 Bush standards, because it was working on even tighter rules. But now those tighter rules aren’t happening. As Bill Becker of the National Association of Clean Ar Agencies told me, the EPA now has the option of directing states to follow the Bush-era rules, but that seems unlikely, given the White House’s preference to wait until the 2013 review. Which means states would keep operating under the old 1997 standards, which are more lax than even what the Bush administration had proposed. “We would have stricter protections right now if we had just followed the Bush-era rules back in 2008,” says Becker.


Ezra Klein, “Did the White House double-cross its supporters on the smog rule?”

The betrayals by this administration are coming at such a dizzying rate it’s becoming difficult to keep track of them. — Ryking

quickhits:

Candidate Obama, 2008: “We will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick. And good jobs for the jobless. This was the moment, when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal…”

President Obama, 2011:

LA Times:

President Obama Friday asked the Environmental Protection Agency to drop the development of controversial rules to cut smog levels, pleasing the business community but upsetting environmentalists.

The business community and the Republican Party have loudly decried the possibility of more stringent rules on ground-level ozone, the main ingredient in smog, as job-killers.

But to Obama’s environmental base, the decision to back down from the ozone rules was the latest in a string of decisions and signals that suggest to them that the administration is backing away from key anti-pollution initiatives before the 2012 election to court business and anti-regulation voters.

Late last week, the State Department issued an environmental impact statement that removed a key hurdle to the construction of the widely criticized Keystone Xl oil pipeline. For two weeks now, hundreds of environmentalists, some of them former campaign workers for Obama, have been arrested for protesting the pipeline in front of theWhite House.

In a statement, the president said: “I have continued to underscore the importance of reducing regulatory burdens and regulatory uncertainty, particularly as our economy continues to recover. With that in mind, and after careful consideration, I have requested that Administrator [Lisa] Jackson withdraw the draft Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards at this time.”

Well, so much for that then…

The administration’s fecklessness is no doubt based on some crass political (mis)calculation. But in fact the standard would not have any noticeable negative impact on the economy and, if anything, would have driven investment and innovation even in the short term. The biggest uncertainty businesses have now is “what the heck will Obama do next?” since the President appears to have no coherent and consistent philosophy guiding his economic and environmental decisions.

And as for how this plays out with the voters, it’s one more move that disempowers a core constituency. It also misses a chance to win over the biggest block of independent voters, those who want to preserve clean air and clean water for their kids. As a May Pew poll found, 71% of Americans say “This country should do whatever it takes to protect the environment.


President Obama Backs Down On Ozone Standards

The decision “follows immense pressure from industry groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American Petroleum Institute, that had lobbied hard against the EPA decision to tighten Bush-era ozone standards.”

vruz:

vruz: wait, is Obama still president? or I’m missing something?

Hey Barry, Boehner wants you to shoot yourself in the head at the end of your speech, too. He’ll let you know what caliber gun to use in a bit. #can’twaitforpresidentbiden #barackSPINELESSJELLYFISHobama — Ryking

(Source: brooklynmutt)

Salon.com columnist Glenn Greenwald on Thursday blasted President Barack Obama’s mantra that the nation should “look forward, not backward” regarding alleged crimes committed by the Bush administration.

“Imagine if, for example, we decided to announce tomorrow that we were no longer going to prosecute murder or rape or child abductions because we didn’t want to ‘keep looking backwards,’” he said on MSNBC’s The Last Word. “What do you think would happen? Obviously there would be a lot more people engaging in murder, rape, and child abduction.”

Greenwald added that American political culture had “decided our highest political officials are free to break the law without consequences” and Obama had continued the “evisceration of the rule of law for political elites.”

“So political elites like Dick Cheney know that they can commit crimes with total impunity, and that is why he goes around proudly boasting about the crimes he has committed.”



Glenn Greenwald: Obama upheld ‘evisceration of the rule of law for political elites’

Via Greg Sargent, I learn that some people in the Obama campaign really, really dislike people like me, who complain when the president gives in to GOP blackmail.

Well, at least they’re paying attention.

I would say this: on one side you have the GOP, which responds to completely crazed Tea Party demands by doing all it can to assure the hard right that it’s on its side. On the other, you have the Democratic establishment or at least part thereof, which responds to complaints from its own base that it’s going too easy on the crazies by lashing out at the base, with a bit of bearded-professor bashing on the side.

Way to strengthen your bargaining position, guys.



Paul Krugman, “Hippie Punching”

azspot:

John Sherffius
@JohnFugelsang: What do you call a President who won’t hire Elizabeth Warren but wants to re-hire Tim Geithner? GOP calls him ‘Liberal.’

@JohnFugelsang: What do you call a President who won’t hire Elizabeth Warren but wants to re-hire Tim Geithner? GOP calls him ‘Liberal.’

Mr. Obama’s senior adviser, David Plouffe, and his chief of staff, William M. Daley, want him to maintain a pragmatic strategy of appealing to independent voters by advocating ideas that can pass Congress, even if they may not have much economic impact. These include free trade agreements and improved patent protections for inventors.

But others, including Gene Sperling, Mr. Obama’s chief economic adviser, say public anger over the debt ceiling debate has weakened Republicans and created an opening for bigger ideas like tax incentives for businesses that hire more workers, according to Congressional Democrats who share that view. Democrats are also pushing the White House to help homeowners facing foreclosure.

Even if the ideas cannot pass Congress, they say, the president would gain a campaign issue by pushing for them…

“Playing it safe is not going to cut it,” said [Christina Romer, former chair of Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers], a professor of economics at the University of California, Berkeley. “Not proposing anything bold and not trying to do something to definitively deal with our problems would mean that we’re going to have another year and a half like the last year and a half — and then it’s awfully hard to get re-elected.”

But there is little support for such an approach inside the administration…

As part of this appeal to centrist voters, the president intends to continue his push for a so-called grand bargain on deficit reduction — a deal with Republicans to make even larger spending cuts, including to the social safety net, in exchange for some revenue increases — despite the strong opposition of Congressional Democrats who want to use the issue to draw contrasts with Republicans.



White House Debates Fight on Economy

(Emphasis added above.)