New York Columns: George W. Obama

This image is the front cover of a liberal newspaper that's printed in the NJ/NY area. Just letting you guys know, even liberals are admitting that Obama is a continuation of bush, and that the two party system is really a single party system.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/80b6d8ed85e5.jpg[/atsimg]

Before President Obama, it was grimly accurate to write, as I often did in the Voice, that George W. Bush came into the presidency with no discernible background in constitutional civil liberties or any acquaintance with the Constitution itself. Accordingly, he turned the "war on terror" over to Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld—ardent believers that the Constitution presents grave obstacles in a time of global jihad.

In other words, an excuse to suspend constitutional rights.

On January 22, 2009, the apostle of "change we can believe in" proclaimed: "Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of my presidency." But four months into his first year in command, Obama instructed his attorney general, Eric Holder, to present in a case, Jewel v. National Security Agency, a claim of presidential "sovereign immunity" that not even Dick Cheney had the arrant chutzpah to propose.

He ran on lies, and then showed his true colors. still in Obama denial?

It is one thing, as the Bush regime did, to spy on us without going to court for a warrant, but to maintain that the executive branch can never even be charged with wholly disregarding our rule of law is, as a number of lawyers said, "breathtaking." On the other hand, to his credit, Obama's very first executive orders in January included the ending of the CIA "renditions"—kidnapping terrorism suspects off the streets in Europe and elsewhere and sending them for interrogation to countries known to torture prisoners. However, in August, the administration admitted that the CIA would continue to send such manacled suspects to third countries for detention and interrogation.

More unconstitutional violations in the name of freedom? more like the goal of suppression of information, and keeping the status quo.

President Obama also solemnly pledged to have "the most open administration in American history." Nonetheless, his Justice Department lawyers have already invoked "state secrets" to prevent cases brought by victims of the CIA renditions from being heard. In February, in a lawsuit brought by five graduates of CIA "black sites" before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, one of the judges, visibly surprised at hearing the new "change" president invoking "state secrets," asked the government lawyer, Douglas Letter, "The change in administration has no bearing on this?"

He promised transparency, yet he is protecting secrets.

Please got to the full news article below.

Source: Village Voice

This sure as hell is a continuation of the Bush policies.

even liberals are admitting to it.

a conspiracy?

NO, its not, not when they are throwing it in our face.

when is enough, enough?

They are playing the American people for fools. I know were not fools, were just majorly misinformed. if you think watching CNN, FOX news, MSNBC, or any other corporate media source for that matter is a way of informing yourself; you are fooling yourself.

Please discuss, and yes i really hope this reaches the front page.

Here is a related thread of mine from a few weeks ago. Bush 3.0?

[edit on 1/14/2010 by ugie1028]

reply to post by ugie1028


There was a day they feared us. They did things covertly. They tried to cover things up. That day is gone. Now they just wave it in our faces. Nonchalantly.

I've said it once, and I'll say it a million times more. Rome cares not which side of the coin you pick, merely that you pick the coin.

I have suspected Obama would be Bush 2 since he appeared and seemed to be destined for the presidency.

What perplexes me is that I can't find any obvious connections between Bush and his people and Obama and his people. Usually, you can find obvious stuff on Wikipedia.

Anyone know of any ties? A good place to start looking? I can't seem to connect him to the neocons or PNAC or any of it.

[edit on 14-1-2010 by crunchypickle]

Obama and Bush are both run by the same corporate fascist scumbags.

Big banks and the military industrial complex.

Obama's appointments over monetary policy are almost exclusively drawn from the ranks of Goldman Sachs, which of course bilked the public out of 13 billion that we know about. These are the same criminals that were in Bush's administration. Geithner was NY Fed chairman under Bush, Paulson was the Treasury Sec under Bush a Goldman CEO, Geithner's deputy Treasury Sec was a Goldman executive, the NY Fed chair now is a former Goldman CEO I believe, its total insanity.

Half of Obama's cabinet appointments are tax cheats.

Half of his cabinet are former lobbyists.

The wars under Obama are being accelerated and expanded, now we are openly threatening Iran and Yemen. Troops have been increased in Afghanistan, and very few troops have been drawn down from Iraq. Bush's appointment of Gates is still the Sec Def!

The Obama administration is colluding with the IMF/World Bank/UN to set up private carbon exchanges to be administered by - you guessed it - Goldman Sachs. The existing exchanges have already been embroiled in numerous lawsuits for fraud.

The Obama administration has presided over 27 trillion in banking bailout actions administered by the Fed, whose chairman he just re-appointed.

The Dems in congress are now engaged in the largest fascist takeover of our economy in history. Mandating individuals purchase private health insurance or pay a fine, refusal to pay can result in a 250,000 dollar fine and a felony conviction for supposed "tax evasion". Of course, its not really a tax, its looting paid directly to the insurance industry.

No change in any of the Bush policies, plus his cabinet is pushing for even more draconian measures of media control and invasive searches.

Total unhinged tyranny.




People, this is why big government is bad.

It doesn't matter if its dems in charge or republicans. A government powerful enough to give you everything is also powerful enough to take it all away. Free people are not dependent people. Free people must make their own way in life without handouts, favors, special tax breaks, government contracts, or anything else expropriated from other members of the public.

Government has nothing. All it has is other peoples stuff. Eventually YOUR stuff is going to be taken.


[edit on 14-1-2010 by mnemeth1]

They work for the same guys and they are also they same people who put hitler in power the truth is out there you just need to find it. The right vs. left crap is just a diversion they use to get us looking the other way and give us something to rally behind and the stupid sheep follow their master right to the slaughter house. If you kept getting something stuck inside of you every time you bent over would you not think to stop bending over?

reply to post by mnemeth1


you are correct. there are people behind the scenes controlling things.

I just find it shocking, only one year into his presidency, his liberal minions are calling him out. its great!

not to mention the liberals were losing their viewership, so they had to change course, and re-align what the people are interested in, like Obama's policies compared to bush.