Obama's choice for Attorney General is a very bad sign for those who had hoped for liberal policies on civil liberties issues from Obama.
The upside of being a Liberty Republican is that when either party gets elected there's always some reason to be hopeful. When the Republicans get elected we can hope for fiscal responsibility, smaller government and robust capitalism. When the Democrats get elected we can hope for some progress on civil liberties and social issues. The downside is that this also means we can be disappointed when the parties don't follow through on the more positive parts of their agendas. For the last eight years the Republicans let us down pretty consistently, failing to live up to their promise of smaller government and fiscal responsibility and giving only a few small victories on issues like gun rights and taxes. Now it looks like the Obama administration is setting us up for another round of disappointments as they move to the center and pass up the opportunity to take genuinely liberal positions on social issues.…
Article comments
126 - Dan(Miller)
I was busy writing comment 125 and did not read the several comments preceding it until after I had posted it. So, I left out an apparent bone of contention.
The military has a presumption of innocence, and one does not officially become a deserter or murderer or whatever until convicted. Off topic, but I feel compelled to say it having been a small cog in the military justice system, I feel rather strongly that the military justice system (once things proceed to the special or general court martial stage) is very fair and better than many civilian jurisdictions.
Dan(Miller)
127 - Glenn Contrarian
Dan -
Ah...I forgot about 'intent'. My mistake. I apologize to all for my error...and thank you for correcting me, Dan. I will no longer call Bush a deserter.
In that case, in your opinion should Bush have been considered AWOL for the periods that he should have been drilling? Just for my own understanding.
Also, I agree with you that court-martials are very fair and better than many civilian jurisdictions...but the non-judicial punishment process leaves much to be desired, IMO.
I won't reply right away - gotta go.
128 - Dave Nalle
Clav and Dan did an excellent job of saying everything I should have if I'd been around earlier and saying it with greater authority.
I'll just chime in that I know of several examples of individuals who went AWOL for extended periods of time for various reasons and were dealt with administratively and not with a court martial because a. they came back voluntarily and b. their commanding officers thought they had a reasonable excuse. They avoided a trial were punished within their unit and eventually were honorably discharged.
It is also a good idea to remember that Bush was in the national guard, not the regular military, and that conditions in the units he was in were extremely lax, because they were units full of rich and politically connected kids avoiding the draft and playing soldier on the weekends. In that sort of unit missing duty was commonplace and leave policy was very liberal. You'd have to do a lot worse than not reporting for duty for a couple of months to get into trouble.
Dave
129 - Dan(Miller)
Glen, here are the elements of the part of Article 86 which seems pertinent:
There are other flavors of AWOL, the elements of which can be found at the link.I don't know enough of the facts to suggest whether then Lt. Bush should have been found guilty of AWOL if tried by court martial. Did he receive orders from competent authority directing him to report to a specific place at a specific time? Were those orders countermanded by competent authority? Did he understand the orders? Did he disobey them? A whole lot depends on the facts and the admissibility of evidence concerning them.
Once again, off topic, one of the most important functions of a military judge is to inquire into facts surrounding a plea of guilty before accepting it. I still remember inquiring into the provenance of a guilty plea offered by a young man to the offense of willfully disobeying the lawful order of a superior noncommissioned officer. The order was to get out of bed and go to work. When I questioned the accused, it turned out that he had a broken leg in a cast and had been ordered by the military physician in charge of his treatment to remain in bed. I obviously rejected the guilty plea, the convening authority dropped the charge, and I gave the young man's attorney -- a member of the bar but not a JAG officer -- a short lecture on his duties as defense counsel.
I absolutely agree that (at least forty years ago) non judicial punishment (UCMJ Article 15) would not have won any prize for fairness. The same, to a lesser extent, was true of summary courts martial. The UCMJ was amended sometime back in 1968, I think, to give the accused in a special court martial substantially the same rights accorded the accused in a general court martial. At about the same time, a few generals were relieved of their commands for having attempted to exercise command influence over the outcome of courts martial. That seemed to have worked.
It's a very good system, and generally proceeds quite fairly. Not only that, but people called me "Your Honor" and laughed at my jokes; a heady experience from which I may or may not, over the next forty years, recover.
Dan(Miller)
130 - Glenn Contrarian
Dave -
As you can see above, I'm having a heaping helping of fricasseed crow served up to me piping hot by Dan. Fortunately, I learned a long time ago that Tabasco makes almost anything taste better.
mmmm...yuck! Ptooie!
Just found out Tabasco doesn't do jack for crow's feet. But doggone it, I'll finish the whole blasted thing 'cause I deserve it for opening my big fat mouth when I shouldn't oughta done it.
I do say it's good for the soul to be humbled every now and then. Helps one to keep things in perspective. I'm not afraid of being wrong, only of being unwilling to admit it when someone shows me I'm wrong.
And to Dan - again, my sincere thanks for the correction.
131 - Dave Nalle
You could always lick the Tabasco off the crows feet and just throw them away. And if you do put it on your crows feet be careful - that's awfully close to your eyes.
Dave
132 - pablo
Obama the spook, and I am not talking about the color of his skin.
Obama/Dunham marriage license -- Not released
Soetoro/Dunham marriage license -- Not released
Soetoro adoption records -- Not released
Fransiskus Assisi School School application -- Released
Punahou School records -- Not released
Selective Service Registration -- Released " Proven Counterfeit
Occidental College records -- Not released
Passport (Pakistan) -- Not released
Columbia College records -- Not released
Columbia thesis -- Not released
Harvard College records -- Not released
Harvard Law Review articles -- None (maybe 1, Not Signed)
Baptism certificate -- None
Medical records -- Not released
Illinois State Senate records -- None (Locked up to prohibit public view)
Illinois State Senate schedule -- Lost (All other Illinois state senators' records are intact)
Such a smile, so charasmatic, yet he is a complete mystery except to for the spooks that created him, open government my ass, its all hidden.
You liberals are about to be very very surprised very soon, as the wolf is easy to see, it is the wolf in sheep's clothing that you need to be worried about, and your just too plain eager to swallow, hook, line, and sinker. Have fun!
From Webster Tarpley's book 'Barrack H. Obama - The Unauthorized Biography', who incidentally in my opinion also wrote by far the best book on the Bush dynasty ever written.
Obama is a spook. I don't mean that in the racist sense of the word.
Obama's mother was a CIA officer.
Obama was one of 8 students selected to study sovietology in Columbia's IR program under Brzezinski, one of the CIA's top- ranking officers.
Obama went to work for a CIA front, Business International Corporation (one of whose specialties was recruiting leaders of domestic left-wing organizations as CIA assets).
Obama ran for state office and his opponent quit the race before the election.
Obama ran for US Senate, and his opponent quit the race before the election.
Obama ran for Pres., and his foreign policy chief was, who else, one of the CIA's top officers, Brzezinski.
I use the same simple technique that the security forces use to identify intelligence agents and prevent infiltration: I do a background check.
I'm not saying Obama is good or bad. I'm just pointing out that he is a spook.
133 - Dave Nalle
An interesting theory, Pablo. But for Obama to have been useful as a CIA asset wouldn't he have needed to pursue a career where he travelled overseas or at least had contact with people from outside the US who might be of interest to the CIA? His job history seems poorly suited to that kind of role - though of course the CIA does develop potential assets and then doesn't always use them.
Dave