No problem in the liberal "mind" to oppose if done by a Republican but ignore if done by a Democrat.
notice no comment yet by lib and
Seal team 6 was Cheney's assassination squad until then
as was in the book by seal, they took him out
he was treated as he should have been
I will give BHO kudos on that. He took all the fame as usual and had nothing to do with the end except giving the go
6
CIA
all the work
I will not give any more detail on movie or book, but the lawyer-ed up terrorist at Gitmo and ending the interrogation methods almost blew the entire op
MUST SEE
Hi JRK: (1) I am a progressive Democrat, and Constitutionalist who defends prochoice and prolife views equally under law and against partisan bias, so I may be too conservative sounding to answer your questions from a left liberal perspective that forgives and justifies Obama's actions while vilifying Bush's (2) i also did not understand all your short hand typing, but am guessing you are talking "in general" about Democrats selectively accepting Obama's use of the Patriot Act and military drones and other questionable uses of military and executive authority, while rejecting Bush and calling for impeachment of him while denouncing those who call to impeach Obama, etc. etc. I would like to understand your specific issues, also, but will answer in general:
(a) the genuine liberal left that is anti-war, pro-single payer, and anti-corporate has always protested Obama as a sellout fraud. The last candidate they went with was either Kucinich or Nader. The Occupy protestors immediately jumped on Obama for the extensions of the defense measures that were even more draconian. So those leftists types also rally against Obama as a corporate abuser to get into Office. They recognize the point is to hijack the peace and green vote and only use these for corporate gain, as with the ACA. The problem is you won't hear about them because their protests are coming from the opposite direction as the rightwing Tea Party protesting for the same reasons of constitutionality. As long as they are divided against each other, they remain at the mercy of the media who paints them in the most stereotypical way possible. Cornell West may be more visible in his protests of Obama from the left side, but the other leftists like Amy Goodman, you'd have to dig into NPR and Pacifica before you hear from any of that side. All you will see in the mainstream are the corporate Democrats, and that is why the left thinks the media is conservative!!
Again you won't hear from these folks because they divide themselves from the mainstream and rightwing so much, they end up censoring their own message by social segregation.
(b) for the ones you will hear from, the onesided Democrats still fear Republicans/Conservatives/Tea Party more as the influence to be battled against. So yes, they will forgive things Obama does just in reaction to counter the right wing they believe to be the source of oppression and division. (As you can see, they even overrode the whole concept of "prochoice" just to get the health bill passed, and they forgive that because it is a start and something is better than nothing. But they would NEVER let rightwing prolife take "one step" too far on the abortion issue and having to amend it later.)
So of course you are right that the Democrats in it for the political influence are going to forgive Obama and bash Bush, push measures to ban guns but never measures to ban partial birth abortion, permit medical information on guns but not on abortion, etc etc etc.
(c) for the war issue in particular, I believe it served good purpose to have Obama as a Muslim-sympathetic African American leader finish the job of taking out OBL rather than a white Republican Conservative Christian. People are not ready to see beyond race and politics, so there would not be as visible protest if Obama did this, but if Bush or McCain did it and the political backlash came out then enemy forces would take advantage of that political rift to try to stir up more garbage and divide people against the US. It was better that the protests were kept off to the side and stymied (as were the Republican/Conservative protests against Bush kept low on volume). There are protests against Obama for all this, but you won't hear about them in the media but have to dig.
In this case, Obama's image helped shut up the protesting and allow it to go through.
(d) As for my own opinion, I believe the political retribution back and forth between Obama and Bush supporters and haters cancel each other out, but create double damage in the meantime. It is clearly hypocritical for Obama to hijack the anti-war vote where (a) the pro-peace movement want negotiations and diplomacy with terrorist ravaged countries, without calling names, but can't even seem to negotiate civilly with Republicans and call them names as the enemy (b) they protest war and the death penalty as being revenge and anti-peace, but then Obama calls people to vote as their revenge against the opposition.
I believe in restorative justice, and do not believe any govt leader should be abusing positions policies or resources for "revenge" because retributive justice just reaps more of the same. It is especially hypocritical for the Democrat liberal leaders and members to be against retribution and then call for this to oppress and override dissenting views targeted as the enemy; if you did not agree to be treated that way, it makes no sense to do likewise.
I believe that is pushing a religious bias in two ways (a) the concept of retribution instead of restoring good faith relations (b) favoring one political party or agenda over another instead of following and upholding the Constitution
In general, from my experience, i've had more success reaching agreement with Republicans conservatives etc using the Constitution (even to agree on how to handle prochoice and prolife differences). the liberals I know depend on Government or party leaders to enforce or protect their liberties, instead of invoking the Constitution directly.
Sorry for the long answer, to show you where I am coming from as a progressive Democrat.
I voted for Bush and for McCain as stronger Constitutionalists than Obama or Kerry.
I try to defend each person's equal interests under the party and candidate of their chioce, to be fair as with equal religious freedom, but do not support any party imposing their own agenda onto dissenters much less trying to force them to pay for them against their beliefs.
I believe the current karma back and forth with Bush and Obama is part of the process of people learning to recognize their equal and opposite biases, so at some point people will figure out to separate funding and platforms by party and quit imposing at all on each other!
I am still working on my own biases, and recognize I tend to forgive Bush and hold fellow Democrats more harshly to their own words such as the whole ACA bill that is anti-choice.
I will hold Republicans to enforcing Constitutional values when it comes to corporate abuses that violate the same principles, or respecting equal religious freedom for prochoice or for Muslims within constitutional bounds, but they seem to take rebuke better as Christians than my liberal Democrat friends who still seem in denial about the whole ACA prochoice issue. Either I am the one who doesn't get it because of my bias, or they are the problem or both!
Thank you and I hope more people will see they have equal biases on both sides.
we will all forgive biases that we don't think cause harm next to biases or hypocrisy we are afraid of. Both sides do that. it is about even. The difference is who is willing to admit it!
Your a funny guy
