I was a member of the ACLU for years.  I quit because I disagreed with them on several important issues, including their positions concerning for the American Nazis, the Man-Boy Love Association, and spam.

 

I've rethought my position however.  In part, this was due to an excellent book, "Monkey Girl," by Edward Humes.  It's the story of the attempt to put religious beliefs into public schools through the device of intelligent design.  The book focuses on the case in Dover, Pa, and the critical role played by ACLU in supporting the parents who opposed the school board.

 

However, even more important is the Obama administration.  Several recent actions have convinced me we were misled during the campaign about Obama's commitment to civil liberties and the rule of law.

 

§              Mohamed et al. v. Jeppesen  This case seeks to challenge the practice of extraordinary rendition, Bush's term for kidnapping and torture.  The Bush administration blocked the litigation by invoking "state secrets."  This is the notion that even talking about the case in court would divulge secrets.  Never mind that everyone knows the basics of what happened; also never mind that individual pieces of evidence could be blocked at a trial if they would divulge secrets.  Under the Bush doctrine, nothing about the case can ever be discussed or come to trial.  The Eric Holder Justice Department was given a chance to reverse this policy and it refused.  The new administration takes the same view as Bush, and will not let any aspect of the case come to trial.

 

§              Al-Marri v. Spagone  In this case, a man in this country legally was arrested and held for nearly six years without trial or even an indictment, using the enemy combatant theory.  When the Supreme Court at last agreed to hear the case, Obama's Justice Department arranged for an indictment, and has now asked the SC to dismiss the suit, saying that the indictment has rendered the six years of imprisonment moot.  If the SC falls for this, there will no remedy for this illegal detention, and no court decision protecting anyone from a similar fate in the future.

 

§              Signing statements.  Bush issued hundreds of these statements when he signed legislation.  It was a tool for him to proclaim that his expansive view of presidential power trumped acts of congress.  McCain campaigned on a promise to abolish signing statements.  The American Bar Association considers them unconstitutional.  Obama has now directed the government to review all of Bush's statements, possibly with an eye to overturning them.  But, he hasn't explicitly overturned Bush's signing statements, and he hasn't renounced the use of this tool in the future.  On the contrary, he's made clear that he will use them.

 

Obama has said that Bush abused power, but we should trust that Obama and his people  won't do the same.  But, Obama will not renounce the expanded and probably unconstitutional tools which Bush used to commit these abuses.  So we have nothing to rely on but our faith in Obama.  That is not enough for me.

 

I joined ACLU for a start.  It is the one organization that we can count on to oppose government abuse of power, regardless of which party is behind it.

In addition, I wrote to my senators and representative urging them to support the State Secrets Protection Act.  This legislation would block using state secrets as a wall to prevent a case from going to court.  The law provides mechanisms which allow the government to challenge the introduction of evidence or testimony that might disclose secrets.  Secrets would still be protected, but so would the right to a fair trial.  I suggest that everyone who cares about these issues support this law, and support the ACLU.

      Obama has announced a new Economic Recovery Advisory Board.  And who does he name to the board, Martin Feldstein.  Who is Feldstein?
      Many years ago, the haves of this country would reject the notion of giving anything to the have-nots by saying "they'll spend it all on strong drink."  More recently, this strong drink image was replaced by Cadillacs and coke.
      In a recent piece in the Washington Post, Martin Feldstein expressed the latest concern of the haves:  the undeserving among us might waste the money which they're given on foolishness like savings and paying off debt.  Have the people of this country no shame?  no national pride?  We lead the developed world in low savings rates and high debt, and some selfish people might want to jeopardize our country's lead in these categories.
      Of course, other people might spend a tax cut to pay medical bills, or rent, or a mortgage.  How foolish!  How wasteful!
     What would Feldstein have them do?  Buy a car.  No matter that they might not have a job to drive to, buy a car anyway.  Make sure it's an SUV, so you can also stimulate the oil companies.  Or, take out a home improvement loan.  You might lose the house soon to the bank that won't let you refinance an exorbitant adjustable rate mortgage, but improve the house anyway, as a favor to whoever buys the house at auction when the bank forecloses.
    Feldstein also wants to postpone expiration of the dividend and capital gains tax cuts, claiming that a postponement would raise share prices and lead to increased consumer spending.  He doesn't explain why the shares of companies on the edge of bankruptcy would rise, nor how this would put money in the hands of consumers unless they sell those shares, but never mind the petty details.  What's important is that consumer spending will somehow go up, and all those Chinese exporters who are so dependent on us will be making more money, some of which they might lend to us.  More likely, they would use that money to buy up the few remaining healthy American businesses that aren't already foreign owned.
      Finally, Feldstein offers us a spending plan.  Don't waste money on things like transportation, after all, unemployed people don't need to travel anywhere, spend the money on the military.  After many years of base closures, let's build new military bases, creating a construction boom.  Let's buy more and more weapons, to replace the arms that rotating units routinely leave behind.  This would create a weapons boom -- as if there isn't one already.  Of course, what would we then do with all those news bases and new weapons?  Maybe we could start another war.  I'm sure Feldstein can offer suggestions for targets.
       Feldstein describes himself as a conservative economist.  That would be funny if it weren't so tragic.

Remember Orwell's Animal Farm?  The pigs had led the farm animals in a revolt against the men.  By the end, the pigs had joined with the men to exploit the animals, who could only look in from the outside in dismay.

When Tom Daschle, supposedly a man of the people, was defeated for reelection, he sold himself to the highest bidders.  $5 million in four years is chicken feed to the big guys, but it got them what they wanted.  Daschle, who has never run anything, is suddenly the best qualified person to run one of the biggest and most complex agencies outside Defense.  His power over the health care industry, which contributed mightily to his wealth build-up, will be enormous.  And we're to believe that there will be no pay-back.

Who assures of us this?  The members of the milliionaires' club, aka the Senate.  I don't find that reassuring.  Remember the Keating five?  When Daniel Inouye was called as a character witness for one of them, what did Mr. Integrity have to say?  That what they did couldn't be wrong because "we all do it."  This is the kind of moral and ethical standard that the rest of that crowd look up to.

Daschle, Geithner, and now Nancy Killefer, the wannabe "Chief Performance Officer," want to run the country and they supposedly can't figure out their taxes.  Until nominated for a prominent job, then it suddenly occurs to them.  The Washington Post, in an editorial today, found it hard to understand how these people could have made such mistakes.  I don't find it hard at all, because I don't believe those were mistakes, but the product of greed.  The Post ended the editorial saying that, even with their problems, the President deserves to have the people he wants in important jobs.  Sadly, the Post doesn't bother to address what the country deserves.

Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the House have not gotten Obama's message.  

During the campaign, gas prices hit $4 and more a gallon.  Many of the professional panderers in Congress called for a cut in the gas tax.  At 18.4¢, the Federal gas tax was less than 4% of the price of gas.  A tax cut was stupid and Obama rightly opposed it.

Read more »