Disappointing
From SFGate, we read:
(02-09) 17:30 PST SAN FRANCISCO — President Obama’s Justice Department signaled in a San Francisco courtroom Monday that the change in administrations has not changed the government’s position on secrecy and the rights of foreign prisoners – and that lawsuits by alleged victims of CIA kidnappings and torture must be dismissed on national security grounds.
I truly hope this will change; it’s a given that the Obama administration has not been in office long, and so it is not surprising that they are following practices of the Bush administration. They need to look things over and make sure the changes they want to put into place are for the better. However, I hoped that we would get a better indication than this that human rights ignored by the Bush administration would be validated by the Obama administration.
Comments are closed.
it’s a given that the Obama administration has not been in office long, and so it is not surprising that they are following practices of the Bush administration.
Given the many changes that the Obama administration made within two or three days, to great fanfare, one can be pretty certain that its position here is quite deliberate (as opposed to a holdover from Bush).
Given the many changes that the Obama administration made within two or three days, to great fanfare, one can be pretty certain that its position here is quite deliberate (as opposed to a holdover from Bush).
That is possible, but it is not the only way one can read it. There are, of course, many things going on at once, and it is clear the economy is right now Obama’s primary concern; while this might explain the situation, it does not excuse it (especially in regards to Darfur, but even here). Not all things need be directly dealt with by Obama himself: all he needs to do is tell the policies he wants, and have people work out the details, and get his confirmation. So there is to be some blame here — but, again, it is early, so we might not have seen what Obama will eventually do. It is for this reason why SB is jumping the gun in determining that this is deliberate.
Very disappointing…
That’s always true: No matter what someone does, you can always speculate that he’ll do something different at some unspecified and unknowable future date. But trust me, DOJ lawyers don’t take a position like this as an accidental holdover; there’s no way that this is anything other than a deliberate choice that was debated internally.
Yes, this is disappointing. It’s not enough just to abolish torture; the administration needs to thoroughly clean its hands of past practices.
It seems the Obama administration is making this its policy:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/02/obama-administr.html
You know, this is why I don’t get my conservative friends AT ALL. Policies like this are fine as long as your buddies are in office, but what happens when your buddy Bush is no longer there?
Once Pandora’s Box is Opened it takes an extraordinary human being to close it. Most humans are not extraordinary.
For the record, this deeply disappoints me.
So,if Obama changes Bush’s policies, it means you were right to support him despite his stance on abortion. If Obama doesn’t change Bush’s policies…it’s somehow your friend’s fault?
I find this disappointing but hardly surprising. Here’s a link that explains it a bit more. As S.B. says, DOJ lawyers don’t just make stuff up; it sounds (unfortunately) like it was vetted:
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2009/02/dear-obama-administration.html
More here:
http://balkin.blogspot.com/2009/02/you-cover-it-up-you-own-it.html
Henry, you’re so plainly in the tank for Obama. It’s strange how you still think you’re not a partisan Democrat. Even stranger that you claimed you had no particular preference in the past election season. I’d take you more seriously if you were forthright in the future.
And the policy is terrible, and the policy was terrible when Bush was president, too.
Zach,
Henry is posting about a disappointing move by Obama. Granted, he expressed the hope that this would be temporary, but why does this indicate he is in the tank for Obama?
Zach seems lately to be running his own truth commission, singlehandedly.
Does he actually believe that he can extract motives, beliefs and inner thoughts from others, where most of us have to humbly claim our ignorance and/or give our interlocutors in this regard the simple benefit of charity.
I readily admit it’s really nothing in this post, except his willingness to hold out hope the administration will change policies. His hope for the Obama administration is often against all reason. Henry doesn’t(didn’t) have a similar unfailing hope for the Bush administration.
Honestly, I’m a bit grumpy because I haven’t been sleeping well.
And Mark, I don’t think making a comment about the character of Henry’s politics constitutes “running [my] own truth commission”.
Zach
The reason I hope some things will change come from 1) the fact that we are at the beginning of the administration and so it is likely things will change from what we see now (for good or for ill, I do not know) 2) this policy goes against what Obama implied he would do and 3) who said I didn’t have hope that Bush would change?
I never said I didn’t have a preference between the McCain or Obama, but I did say I wuld not support either candidate. And that you claim that I am a Democrat is quite amusing. I will say once again: I didn’t vote for Obama. Ok?
I didn’t and never would have voted for O given his position on certain issues, and I do not believe his “change” rhetoric is anything other than hot air. But, I do agree that, while disappointing, it is a bit early in his reign – with the economic stimulus obviously front and center right now, I would wait a couple months before declaring this issue decided.
On the other hand, there are those of us who had no trouble with previous administration policies concerning rendition, Guantanamo, or special-case interrogation that is “enhanced” (or whatever euphemism is currently fashionable).
However I do seem to recall that during the election there were those on this board that believed an Obama administration would both 1) not really be able to increase the number of abortions, and 2) least he would end the Bush policies towards terrorists that people here found so objectionable.
Don’t know what’s going to happen in the long run of course but it doesn’t seem to be working out yet.
It’s only disappointing if you were expecting Obama to keep his campaign promises. I’ve been assured — on this site, I think it was — that Obama was pandering, and didn’t really mean his promises.