Click this link, RightChange.com videos. It will take you to the video center for RightChange.com. Wait for the video Failed Leadership Timeline to appear in the big TV window. When it does, a link will appear with it in the lower-right hand corner of the window that says “CLICK TO WATCH THE VIDEO.” Click it and see one of the best political videos you have ever seen. It takes you through the major points along that timeline of failed leadership by President Obama in the British Petroleum oil spill in the gulf. In this video you will see why the BP oil spill is such a game changer for the political scene in America.

Note: I do not suggest you give money to RightChange.com until they make it clear who is behind their website

God allowed the BP oil spill to teach us a lesson

I believe God has allowed the BP oil spill to happen to America because nothing short of such a calamity would finally show the remainder of the American electorate who still believe in President Obama and his liberal agenda is not the best way to a free lunch. Liberalism (a.k.a. socialism, communism, Marxism) is wrong: dead wrong. The only people it helps is the ruling class. Not a single poor person has ever been given a leg up economically by liberalism. Many have been re-enslaved by liberalism, but none have ever seen their lot improved by liberalism.

A president badly needs business experience before he becomes president

How could anyone expect a man and a party composed of people, 90+% of whom, including the president, have never been the CEO of so much as a Kool-Aid stand, to be able to know how to manage an entity as large as America.

Add to that the man, the president in this case, had three strikes against his abilities to understand and be capable of being the CEO of U.S. government.

I confess I am wrong to say he had three strikes against him. He had a lot more strikes against him.

Here is a short list, though not an exhaustive list, of the strikes against him:

• He is an academic.
• He is an egomaniac.
• He grew up loving Marxism and Marxist leadership.
• He hates America.
• He hates white people, even though his mother was white.
• He attended a church where hate for America, white people, and the Constitution of the United States that was composed and voted on by white people, was loudly proclaimed by his pastor every Sunday and every chance he got outside of church.
• He is a product of Chicago gangster-style government.
• He is believes government is more munificent and intelligent, and, ipso facto, better knows than does the electorate, how to care for you and your needs from cradle to grave; and, as a bonus, it better knows when you should finally repose in your grave than you, your family, and your physician.

Instead of liberals like those, we would do well to listen to God and to those who would conserve His ways. The only way for us to bring back the American exceptionalism that we have lost is to follow the constitutional conservative way. The best hope for us to get started along that way is to elect Republicans—constitutional conservative Republicans—when and where possible. That means no more big spender Republicans like we have been electing for the last twenty plus years.

No more big spenders

We don’t need big spender Republicans in office who will triple the size of the federal government, as did George W. Bush. We need real conservatives.  Do you realize that Bill Clinton was the most conservative president we have had since Ronald Reagan

I think it good that Obama became our president

I must say that I was pleased that we elected Obama as president rather than the Republican John McCain. Had we elected John McCain he would have tried his best to ruined America, just as Obama has tried to do. And he would probably have forever ruined any chance that we would ever believe in the promises of Republicans again. Therefore, I was very pleased when Obama was elected president. He has given us a political enema like no one else could have given us.

God knows, we don’t

God knows when we need to suffer. He knows the right choice of the moment that is most beneficial for the soul. We don’t. We can pray that the coke machine will cough up a coke when we put our money in the slot and it usually will. But God isn’t a coke machine. When you pray to God for a coke, you may get one in answer to your prayer if God thinks it will be good for your soul. God answers our every prayer, He just does always give us the answer we want.

We must remember the lessons that God has taught America through the idiocy of President Obama. That remembrance will be the right change for us.

President Obama has mismanaged the oil spill on purpose

I can’t add this to the strikes list I gave above, but I am convinced that President Obama’s clumsy handling of the British Petroleum oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is not the result of his lack of managerial skills but is purposeful. I won’t take the time to go into why he would do such a thing here. But you can probably figure that out yourself. If many of you say you don’t understand why he might do such a thing, I will try to address that subject.  You might have noticed I am not doing much on this blog right now. That is because I am busy trying to make enough money to survive in this economy.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Obama vows to fight on for climate change bill (alternet.org)

Related posts:

1. The Great Mockery: Climate-change

By Patrick J. Buchanan

“It’s time to stop worrying about the deficit — and start panicking about the debt,” the Washington Post editorial began. “The fiscal situation was serious before the recession. It is now dire.”

The editorial continued:

“In the space of a single fiscal year, 2009, the debt soared from 41 percent of the gross domestic product to 53 percent. This sum, which does not include what the government has borrowed from its own trust funds, is on track to rise to a crushing 85 percent of the economy by 2018.”

What are the risks of an exploding U.S. public debt?

The Chinese, Japanese and Arabs still buying that debt will begin to suspect they are holding onto paper on which the United States will default, or will cheapen by inflating its currency — as the Germans did in 1923 to avoid paying war reparations.

When they do, they will stop buying U.S. debt and start dumping. The Fed will then have to raise interest rates to attract borrowers, throwing the economy into a tailspin.

Is Congress even aware of what is happening?

Harry Reid is talking about doubling Medicare rolls to include folks 55 to 64. Facing a second straight $1.4 trillion deficit, Congress is moving to raise the debt ceiling by another $1.8 trillion.

And the lead story in the Post Monday began:

“The Senate cleared for President Obama’s signature on Sunday a $447 billion omnibus spending bill that contains thousands of earmarks and double-digit increases for several Cabinet agencies.”

Total cost of the Senate bill passed Sunday was “$1.1 trillion, including average spending increases of 10 percent for dozens of federal agencies.”

Ten percent hikes for federal agencies? What is going on?

Democrats say the money is needed to make up for the neglect of the George W. Bush years. But the Bush years were the fattest years for federal social spending since the Great Society.

Sen. Dick Durbin says the spending is necessary “to keep cops on the street … so that families feel secure. … Money spent to help our first responders, firefighters and policemen is a critical investment.”

But aren’t cops and firemen a state and local responsibility?

“It is business as usual, spending money like a drunken sailor, ” said Sen. John McCain. “And the bar is still open.”

But when sailors get drunk and spend crazily, they are on shore leave and spending their own money. When they get back aboard ship, they sober up and shape up, and do the vital work they enlisted to do.

These congressmen never stop bingeing. They are addicts. They are alcoholics. And they are spending our money. According to Taxpayers for Common Sense, there are 5,200 earmarks in that one Senate bill, which averages out to 12 pork projects for every House member — and 52 for every senator.

What is going on in Washington?

Democrats are following the Rahm Rule of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel. “Don’t allow a crisis to go to waste. … There are opportunities to do big things.”

The Party of Government is exploiting the economic crisis to grow the government. And from the standpoint of self interest, this makes sense. Most government employees are Democratic voters, as are most beneficiaries of government programs.

Moreover, Democrats have to get the money out the door before the midterms, where the party is going to take a bath and lose power.

How else to explain this lead story last week in USA Today:

“The number of federal workers earning six-figure salaries has exploded during the recession. …

“Federal employees making salaries of $100,000 or more jumped from 14 percent to 19 percent of civil servants during the recession’s first 18 months — and that is before overtime pay and bonuses are counted.

“Federal workers are enjoying an extraordinary boom time — in pay and hiring — during a recession that has cost 7.3 million jobs in the private sector.”

When the recession started, the Defense Department had 1,868 civilian employees earning $150,000. Defense now has 10,100. The Transportation Department had one person earning $170,000 when the recession began. Transportation now has 1,690 employees earning above $170,000. Recession in America means boom times in D.C.

The financial crisis that almost sank the capitalist system was the work of Washington and Wall Street. The Fed created the bubble. The White House and Congress goaded banks into making all those subprime mortgages. Fannie and Freddie bought up the lousy paper and turned it into securities. Wall Street banks bought them up and put them on their books as Triple A assets. Federal regulators looked the other way.

Yet happy days are here again on Wall Street. And Washington never saw better times, with federal workers now earning, on average, $31,000 a year more than workers in the gutted private sector.

Is this the government the Founding Fathers dreamed of — or is this the kind of arrogant government they took up arms against?

Source: Patrick J. Buchanan

Related articles by Zemanta

• Tax hikes loom in the post-crisis world (financialpost.com)
• Eroding the debt (economist.com)

Related posts:

1. The Empirical Evidence Against Big Government
2. Globalism vs. Americanism
3. Poll Reveals Trauma of Joblessness in U.S.

Get off your Christian hands now and go to work. Do it soon. If you don’t, there will be nothing left of the American Dream to fight for. It is for this reason that I say the offer is a Limited Time Offer; for, if we continue setting on our Christian hands doing little or nothing to challenge those who are intent on taking our most basic God-given rights away from us, time is limited and it will be too late before we know it.

In fact it is very late in the day now, so read what follows below, take it to heart, and do your utmost to help the rest of us signers and activists by becoming a signer of the Manhattan Declaration and become active in anyway you can. Step outside of your comfort zone to help America remain the freest of the free countries on the face of the earth; the one that all men look up to as the epitome of freedom, economic wealth, and security.

The rights set forth in the First Amendment are among the most important in the U.S. Constitution. The text of the First Amendment is:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

These words, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, are to my mind the most important in the constitution and are the words that give power to all the other words in that great document. In essence these words say that Congress shall not establish a state religion (or, by implication, give preference to one religion over another), as was the case in England; the country the founders of our republic fled from when they came here to establish our country.

Not only does the First Amendment prohibit Congress from establishing a state religion, but more importantly, it prohibits Congress from prohibiting the citizenry from the free exercise of religion (and by implication free choice of religion).

Those words do not sound like the basis for separation of Church and State, but that is what the liberal humanists who would overthrow Christianity’s influence in American culture have said those words mean.

I beg you, my fellow Americans to step outside your comfort zone and put forth every effort to actively fight the good fight we are all called to by Christ, and now, in these latter times, by the Manhattan Declaration.

If you go to ManhattanDeclaration.org you will see the following message:

Christians, when they have lived up to the highest ideals of their faith, have defended the weak and vulnerable and worked tirelessly to protect and strengthen vital institutions of civil society, beginning with the family.

We are Orthodox, Catholic, and evangelical Christians who have united at this hour to reaffirm fundamental truths about justice and the common good, and to call upon our fellow citizens, believers and non-believers alike, to join us in defending them. These truths are:

1. the sanctity of human life
2. the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife
3. the rights of conscience and religious liberty.

Inasmuch as these truths are foundational to human dignity and the well-being of society, they are inviolable and non-negotiable. Because they are increasingly under assault from powerful forces in our culture, we are compelled today to speak out forcefully in their defense, and to commit ourselves to honoring them fully no matter what pressures are brought upon us and our institutions to abandon or compromise them. We make this commitment not as partisans of any political group but as followers of Jesus Christ, the crucified and risen Lord, who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

And, should you elect to sign the petition (see The Manhattan Declaration post which immediately proceeded this one in time)

To all signers of the Manhattan Declaration:

Thank you for signing. We are now over 200,000 strong-and counting, for which we give thanks to God.

We have received thousands of e-mails asking what’s next – a good question. The goal of those of us who drafted and signed the document is not just to get a lot of names on a manifesto, gratifying though that is. We are seeking to build a movement – hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of Catholic, Evangelical, and Eastern Orthodox Christians who will stand together alongside other men and women of goodwill in defense of foundational principles of justice and the common good. These are people who could expose the lie which so many in our culture have embraced about self being the center of life; and then winsomely present, in the words of St. Paul, “a more excellent way.”

We are looking for people who will work in every possible arena to advance the sanctity of life, rebuild and revitalize the marriage culture, and protect religious liberty.

So what’s next for you? Let us offer some specific suggestions. More will undoubtedly follow in the weeks ahead.

1. Pray. We can do nothing apart from God. So lay this before the Lord every chance you have, and ask your friends and prayer chains to do the same thing.
2. Study and learn about these issues. We see the Manhattan Declaration as a great teaching and reference source. Share it with others. Only after you have tried to teach it to someone else will you have really learned it. And go deeper in your own study. There are many organizations that offer excellent resources in support of these foundational truths. If you can’t find resources, you can visit www.colsoncenter.org and look at the Worldview Resource Directory we’ve assembled.
3. Come back to www.manhattandeclaration.org if you want help in answering questions others pose to you. We’ve posted a FAQ (frequently asked questions) tab on the home page, but most people signed the statement before this was added. So revisit www.manhattandeclaration.org – and watch for other resources we will be posting.
4. Invite all of the friends on your e-mail lists to go to www.manhattandeclaration.org, read the Declaration (that’s most important) and sign it.
5. Talk to your pastor or small group leader in church. We have heard from a number of pastors who are already referring to this document in their sermons and using it in their teaching. We’ve also heard from bishops and other church leaders who are planning ecumenical gatherings in their areas of responsibility. Some are talking about campaigns to equip the faithful. Other pastors are asking their congregations to sign the document, and become informed. Go to your pastor; urge him to do this. You can really help in this area. Suggest it, and then volunteer to be a part of it. Step forward as a leader.
6. If you belong to a civic group like Kiwanis or Rotary, and you have regular meetings, that’s a great forum in which to share information about the Manhattan Declaration. Explain to people what you’ve signed and why you’ve signed it. A lot of people are asking about this statement, its meaning and purpose. Educate them.
7. Letters to the Editor can be a very effective way to spread information about important issues. According to some sources, more people read the Letters to the Editor columns than the editorials.
8. Watch the issues being debated in the public arena, particularly as the health reform bill is moving through Congress. As a citizen you have a duty to let your representatives know what you think about the issues, particularly on profoundly important moral questions like those being raised now.
9. Get on Facebook or any other chat rooms or blogs that you have access to. Social networking, as we are learning, can have a powerful impact.
10. Finally, talk to your neighbors. Robert Naisbitt wrote that fads begin from the top down, movements from the bottom up. We are convinced that societies are changed over the backyard fence, standing around the barbeque grill, and sitting in the barber shop or hair salon. Learn to be an advocate in any environment.

In conclusion, in asking you to sign we were not just asking you to raise your hand, but to raise your voice. Great changes in society have often come about when Christian people unite in this way – think of the Wesley awakening, the Celtic revival, or movements for social justice and civil rights in our own country. We believe God is looking for good men and women who will pledge (as you have done in signing the Manhattan Declaration), never to compromise the gospel, and to become well-informed, effective advocates true and godly principles.

This is a message of hope for every area of human life and endeavor, and a call to discipleship for every believer.

God bless you.

Dr. Robert George
Dr. Timothy George
Chuck Colson

Dearly beloved Brethren in Christ,

Do it now. Sign up and become a modern day Christian Warrior and American Patriot.

Yours truly

Related articles by Zemanta

• EU: Churches Must Hire Gays? (answersforthefaith.com)
• -Re: ‘Manhattan Declaration’: A Call of Christian Conscience (answersforthefaith.com)
• State and Religion (stephankinsella.com)

Related posts:

1. The Manhattan Declaration
2. Governor Bobby Jindal on Christianity
3. Controlling Leviathan: The Battle for Limited Government

By Patrick J. Buchanan

While America was consumed this summer with quarrels over town-hall radicals, “death panels”, the “public option” and racism’s role in the plunging polls of Barack, what happens to health care is not going to change the history of the world.

What happens in Afghanistan might.

Gen. Stanley McChrystal has done his duty. He has bluntly told his commander in chief what he must have in added combat troops and warned that if he does not get them, America faces “mission failure.”

Translation: a Taliban victory and U.S. defeat—as in Saigon 1975.

Not only does President Obama face the most critical decision of his young presidency, this country is facing a moment of truth. Obama, now the Decider, has four options.

• There is the Biden option of drawing down troops, drawing away from Hamid Karzai, and focusing McChrystal’s men on what they do best—running down and killing al-Qaida, be they in Afghanistan or Pakistan.
• Second is the option of indecision—holding off on more troops until the 68,000 already committed have arrived by December, and seeing how McChrystal does with them until spring.
• The third option is to give McChrystal some but not all the tens of thousands he says he needs.
• Final option: Give Gen. McChrystal the blank check George W. Bush gave Gen. David Petraeus, with the surge of 2007 in Iraq, which radically reduced the violence and set the stage for U.S. withdrawal beginning in 2010.

If Obama meets some or all of McChrystal’s request, America will stave off defeat in the short term. But the cost will be hundreds and perhaps thousands more U.S. dead, tens of billions more sunk, growing divisions in our country and more innocent Afghan victims.

And the surge may simply push a U.S. withdrawal and Taliban takeover a few years off into the future.

This assumes that Afghanistan is unwinnable, that America does not have the perseverance or will to send the hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops for the decade needed to crush the Taliban and create a government and army able to stand on their own when we depart.

If, however, Obama comes to believe the cost of “victory” in blood, money and years is not worth it, or the American people, already against the war and adding more troops, will not sustain it, or the war is unwinnable, then we need to look defeat in the face.

For that is what McChrystal says we are risking, if Obama dithers or draws down troops.

Russia’s withdrawal of 1988-89 led to the collapse of the Soviet Empire. What would a U.S. withdrawal do to the American Empire?

A Taliban triumph would mean the Afghans who sided with us in this war would face the same retribution as our allies in Cambodia and Vietnam.

Western aid workers would have to flee the country.

Under Taliban control, Afghanistan would be a sanctuary for the Pakistani Taliban, which would be emboldened to settle scores with the Islamabad politicians who had sided with the United States.

Taliban allies in the Pakistan army and intelligence services would be seen as on the wise and winning side, while those who sided with America would be seen as losers. The odds would rise that Pakistan would face a revived insurgency and acts of terror against the regime. The odds on the survival of a pro-American regime in a country already marinated in anti-Americanism would fall.

Among Islamists worldwide, news that the Afghan Sunni Taliban had defeated and driven the United States out, as their fathers had the Soviet Empire, would be electrifying. Muslim governments aligned with America would be shaken and perhaps imperiled.

Al-Qaida, thwarted by U.S. security services and ravaged by U.S. Predator and Special Forces strikes, would be seen as having helped inflict a defeat on America unseen since Vietnam.

Osama bin Laden would be a candidate for Man of the Decade.

With his 9-11 attack, he had fired a shot heard ’round the Islamic world, sucked America into two wars that bled, divided and helped to bankrupt her, and seen the last superpower off in Afghanistan.

Osama’s ultimate goal from the start—the removal of all U.S. troops from sacred Saudi soil and expulsion of all Crusaders from the Islamic world—would no longer be an impossible dream.

For America, loss of Afghanistan would poison U.S. politics as did the loss of China and of Vietnam. It would discredit nation-building for decades and ring down the curtain on Wilsonian interventionism for a generation. And it could bring about the defeat of Barack Obama as the liberal who lost the war al-Qaida began on 9-11.

Whether Obama cuts U.S. forces and advances the day of a Taliban victory, or doubles-down and sends the tens of thousands of U.S. troops Gen. McChrystal demands, Afghanistan has claimed another hubristic imperial power.

Source: Patrick J. Buchanan Blog

Related articles by Zemanta

• Will Afghanistan be ‘mission impossible’? (thestar.com)
• Obama: Politics won’t shape war strategy (msnbc.msn.com)
• AP sources: Instead of troops, maybe more drones (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• You: Mullen Worried By Declining Support For Afghan War (huffingtonpost.com)
• Obama: Politics of moment won’t shape war strategy (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Afghan civilian deaths reach record high in August (ctv.ca)
• Afghanistan’s bottomless pit (timesunion.com)
• Mission Creep In Afghanistan (themoderatevoice.com)

No related posts.

by Patrick J. Buchanan

Down at the Chinese outlet store in Albany known as Wal-Mart, Chinese tires have so successfully undercut U.S.-made tires that the Cooper Tire factory in that south Georgia town had to shut down.

Twenty-one hundred Georgians lost their jobs.

The tale of Cooper Tire and what it portends is told in last week’s Washington Post by Peter Whoriskey. [As Cheaper Chinese Tires Roll In, Obama Faces an Early Trade Test, September 8, 2009]

How could tires made on the other side of the world, then shipped to Albany, be sold for less than tires made in Albany?

Here’s how.

At Cooper Tire, the wages were $18 to $21 per hour. In China, they are a fraction of that. The Albany factory is subject to U.S. health-and-safety, wage-and-hour and civil rights laws from which Chinese plants are exempt. Environmental standards had to be met at Cooper Tire or the plant would have been closed. Chinese factories are notorious polluters.

China won the competition because the 14th Amendment’s “equal protection of the laws” does not apply to the People’s Republic. While free trade laws grant China free and equal access to the U.S. market, China can pay workers wages and force them to work hours that would violate U.S. law, and China can operate plants whose health, safety and environmental standards would have their U.S. competitors shut down as public nuisances.

Beijing also manipulates its currency to keep export prices low and grants a rebate on its value-added tax on exports to the U.S.A., while imposing a value-added tax on goods coming from the U.S.A.

Thus did China, from 2004 to 2008, triple her share of the U.S. tire market from 5 percent to 17 percent and take down Cooper Tire of Albany.

But not to worry. Cooper Tire has seen the light and is now opening and acquiring plants in China, and sending Albany workers over to train the Chinese who took their jobs.

Welcome to 21st century America, where globalism has replaced patriotism as the civil religion of our corporate elites. As Thomas Jefferson reminded us, “Merchants have no country.”

What has this meant to the republic that was once the most self-sufficient and independent in all of history?

Since 2001, when George Bush took the oath, the United States has run $3.8 trillion in trade deficits in manufactured goods, more than twice the $1.68 trillion in trade deficits we ran for imported oil and gas.

Our trade deficit with China in manufactured goods alone, $1.58 trillion over those eight years, roughly equals the entire U.S. trade deficit for oil and gas.

U.S. politicians never cease to wail of the need for “energy independence.” But why is our dependence on the oil of Saudi Arabia, the Gulf, Nigeria, Canada, Mexico and Venezuela a greater concern than our dependence on a non-democratic rival great power for computers and vital components of our weapons systems and high-tech industries?

As Executive Director Auggie Tantillo of the American Manufacturing Trade Action Committee compellingly argues:

“Running a trade deficit for natural resources that the United States lacks is something that cannot be helped, but running a massive deficit in manmade products that America easily could produce itself is a choice—a poor choice that is bankrupting the country and responsible for the loss of millions of jobs.”

How many millions of jobs?

In the George W. Bush years, we lost 5.3 million manufacturing jobs, one-fourth to one-third of all we had in 2001.

And our dependence on China is growing.

Where Beijing was responsible for 60 percent of the U.S. trade deficit in manufactured goods in 2008, in the first six months of 2009, China accounted for 79 percent of our trade deficit in manufactured goods.

How can we end this dependency and begin building factories and creating jobs here, rather than deepening our dependency on a China that seeks to take our place in the sun? The same way Alexander Hamilton did, when we Americans produced almost nothing and were even more dependent on Great Britain than we are on China today.

Let us do unto our trading partners as they have done unto us.

As they rebate value-added taxes on exports to us, and impose a value-added tax on our exports to them, let us reciprocate. Impose a border tax equal to a VAT on all their goods entering the United States, and use the hundreds of billions to cut corporate taxes on all manufacturing done here in the United States.

Where they have tilted the playing field against us, let us tilt it back again. Transnational companies are as amoral as sharks. What is needed is simply to cut their profits from moving factories and jobs abroad and increase their profits for bringing them back to the U.S.A.

It’s not rocket science. Hamilton, James Madison and Abraham Lincoln all did it. Obama’s tariffs on Chinese tires are a good start.

Source: Patrick J. Buchanan Blog

Related articles by Zemanta

• Who’s The Power Behind Barack Obama’s Throne? (themoderatevoice.com)
• Cutting Through Tire-Tariff Flubber? Think American Rubber (blogs.thecarconnection.com)
• Context, Reality, Debate (themoderatevoice.com)
• Ex-CIA chiefs seek halt to harsh tactics probe (msnbc.msn.com)

No related posts.

This is an enlightening report by Cato@Liberty. The report is both enlightening and sickening. Read on.

Posted by Doug Bandow

It’s fair to say that civil liberties and limited government were not high on President George W. Bush‘s priorities list.  Indeed, they probably weren’t even on the list.  Candidate Barack Obama promised “change” when he took office, and change we have gotten.  The name of the president is different.

Alas, the policies are much the same.  While it is true that President Obama has not made the same claims of unreviewable monarchical power for the chief executive-an important distinction-he has continued to sacrifice civil liberties for dubious security gains.

Reports the New York Times:

Civil libertarians recently accused President Obama of acting like former President George W. Bush, citing reports about Mr. Obama’s plans to detain terrorism suspects without trials on domestic soil after he closes the Guantánamo prison.

It was only the latest instance in which critics have argued that Mr. Obama has failed to live up to his campaign pledge “to restore our Constitution and the rule of law” and raised a pointed question: Has he, on issues related to fighting terrorism, turned out to be little different from his predecessor?

The answer depends on what it means to act like Mr. Bush.

As they move toward completing a review of their options for dealing with the detainees, Obama administration officials insist that there is a fundamental difference between Mr. Bush’s approach and theirs. While Mr. Bush claimed to wield sweeping powers as commander in chief that allowed him to bypass legal constraints when fighting terrorism, they say, Mr. Obama respects checks and balances by relying on—and obeying—Congressional statutes.

“While the administration is considering a series of options, a range of options, none relies on legal theories that we have the inherent authority to detain people,” Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, said this week in response to questions about the preventive detention report. “And this will not be pursued in that manner.”

But Mr. Obama’s critics say that whether statutory authorization exists for his counterterrorism policies is just a legalistic point. The core problem with Mr. Bush’s approach, they argue, was that it trammeled individual rights. And they say Mr. Obama’s policies have not changed that.

“President Obama may mouth very different rhetoric,” said Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union. “He may have a more complicated process with members of Congress. But in the end, there is no substantive break from the policies of the Bush administration.”

The primary beneficiaries of constitutional liberties are not terrorist suspects, but the rest of us.  The necessary trade-offs are not always easy, but the president and legislators must never forget that it is a free society they are supposed to be defending.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Obama Considering Indefinite Detention Executive Order (dailykos.com)
• Bush Appointees Bucking Obama On Terror Policies (huffingtonpost.com)
• Uh, Which Civil Liberties Groups Pushed For A ‘Prolonged Detention’ Executive Order? (attackerman.firedoglake.com)
• Civil Liberties Advocates Dismayed at Obama’s Recent Moves (time.com)
• Obama Wants Review Of Signing Statements (cbsnews.com)
• Grand Jury Hears From Top C.I.A. Officers on Destruction of Tapes (nytimes.com)
• NSA to help watch feds’ civilian networks (msnbc.msn.com)
• Another pack member heard from (languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu)

No related posts.