Another disappointing Obama-Bush regression

President Obama may be miles better then Bush when it comes to many realms, particularly in civil rights and a proper respect for science, but he may as well be wearing Bush’s exact shoes when it comes to policies on judicial and security matters – his administration’s recent reauthorization of the oh-so-ironically-named “PATRIOT Act” being just a prominent example amongst all the other Bush-era defense policies (such as the wretched State Secrets Privelege) he also holds in place, despite his vows for change. One of the few bits of progress that did seem promising for a while was how he also made it clear that “enemy combatants” (ie. suspected terrorists) would be tried in civilian courts, where they would be covered by the same civil rights that are applied to every other accused criminal, as decreed by the freaking Constitution. (You know, that oft-ignored document at the heart of the country?)

Of course, Republican demagogues took it upon themselves to shout about how this would endanger civilian lives, or give terrorists who are actually guilty a chance at being cleared, or whatever. Of course, this is nothing but pure bullshit; for fuck’s sake, a country that already imprisons an estimated 10% of its own population (albeit a large part of this number for pointless drug charges) isn’t going to go easy on alleged terrorists. But, don’t tell the Republicans that. (Seriously, they’d just ignore you.)

You know what the real problem here is? It seems to have worked: the Obama administration is edging closer to making a decision to try “enemy combatants” in military tribunals, where standard civil rights don’t shine.

The article reports that "President Obama's advisers are nearing a recommendation that Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the self-proclaimed mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, be prosecuted in a military tribunal . . . a step that would reverse Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr.'s plan to try him in civilian court." This reversal will be due to "demands, mainly from Republicans, that Mohammed and his accused co-conspirators remain under military jurisdiction." [original emphasis]

This is so disheartening. The lesson seems to be that if and when demagogic cranks stir up enough shit, all you should do is just to give in to their irrational fear-mongering and accept their demands like a good puppy, betraying the principles you claim to espouse. True, this is hardly surprising at this point … but that doesn’t make it any less of a let-down.

As the article concludes:

For years, Democrats have failed to grasp the fact that they are perceived as "weak" not because of any specific policies, but because they are perceived -- rightly -- to believe in nothing (or at least nothing that they claim to believe).

Not only that; I believe they may indeed have beliefs and principles. The problem, as has become infuriatingly evident over the past year (and since long before still), is that they – are – COWARDS. Spineless little gumbies who quake in fear and submit to the vociferation of asshat Republicans at every turn: healthcare reform, social and civil rights, foreign policy, what have you. The Democrats truly are the better party in terms of their goals and ideals, but … damn it, do they have to be such complete pussies?

They need more like this guy. Many more.

(via @todayspolitics)