Michael Moore opposes Obama's erosion of civil liberties.

  1. 1
    I must admit I was dumbfounded when I saw this article. As I read it I kept looking for the punch line, the O Henry moment, or Paul Harvey's "the rest of the story". However, it appears MM is not kidding. He truly does oppose the NDAA which granted the government the power the arrest and detain indefinitely anyone they say is a supporter of Al Quida or any group fighting against the government. In this I must say I agree with MM.
    The case has been brought against a little known piece of legislation called the National Defence Authorization Act (NDAA) which critics say has been changed to grant Obama the power to indefinitely detain American citizens without charge.
    Now Moore has come out swinging against the NDAA too, saying that the Obama White House is embarked on a plan to scrap vital civil rights that should concern every American citizen despite a relative lack of publicity about the case. “At the moment a lot of people think the NDAA does not look scary. But this sort of thing never looks scary at the start. But the American people will rue the day if they do not stop this,” he told The Guardian in an interview.
    Moore was speaking after a court in New York heard an appeal in the case against the NDAA. Lawyers seeking to overturn the NDAA argued that it erodes American rights and free speech and grants huge and unconstitutional powers to the government to suppress dissent and indefinitely detain people without going through proper legal channels. Lawyers for the Obama administration insists that the NDAA represents nothing new and has never been used in the ways that its critics suggest.
    [Moore] said that liberals were giving Obama a free pass due to his popularity with Democrats. “(Obama) puts this face on it that makes it difficult. It was much easier when the face was Bush,” Moore said “We have to work and speak out against the Obama administration and everything they are doing to destroy civil liberties.”

    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/02/0...vil-liberties/
    herring_RN likes this.
  2. Get our hottest nursing topics delivered to your inbox.

  3. 13 Comments so far...

  4. 3
    A very interesting post, given the right-wing insistence that O is a lefty extremist.

    Those of us who really are left-wing extremists know better

    And I agree that the NDAA is pretty scary ... I'll be interested to see if the small-government/libertarian/don't-tread-on-me set will have anything to say about it. Personally, I find it far more threatening to civil rights than any ban on large-capacity magazines ever could be.
  5. 1
    so much for the writ of Habeas corpus???
    herring_RN likes this.
  6. 1
    I agree that these are frightening issues when we consider the health and status of our rights.
    herring_RN likes this.
  7. 2
    I don't think it's all that surprising, I haven't noticed liberals running away en masse from their civil rights beliefs just because we've continued to give civil liberties a low priority under a democratic administration.
    PMFB-RN and herring_RN like this.
  8. 5
    Quote from MunoRN
    I don't think it's all that surprising, I haven't noticed liberals running away en masse from their civil rights beliefs just because we've continued to give civil liberties a low priority under a democratic administration.
    Will it take a Republican administration to get liberals to give civil liberties a higher priority? Do they really want to give such a free rein to the White House knowing that it will be under a different President in 4 years?

    Maybe I'm just a little more hard nosed. If someone is going to get a license to trample my rights I don't care their political party.
    PMFB-RN, tewdles, VivaLasViejas, and 2 others like this.
  9. 3
    Quote from azhiker96
    I must admit I was dumbfounded when I saw this article. As I read it I kept looking for the punch line, the O Henry moment, or Paul Harvey's "the rest of the story". However, it appears MM is not kidding. He truly does oppose the NDAA which granted the government the power the arrest and detain indefinitely anyone they say is a supporter of Al Quida or any group fighting against the government. In this I must say I agree with MM.
    *** I find nothing at all suprising about MM's position. To me it seems only the natural, expected position for him to take given the positions he has taken on past issues.
    I disagree with MM about some things and think he is dead on right about others. I admire the fact that despite a total lack of any special talent, or "Holywood" looks he manages to get his point across so effectivly, even if I think he is wrong about some of them.
    It may not be comfortable for some people to find themselves on the same side of an issue as MM but not me.
    NDAA is scary and a direct threat to our civil rights. I will side with anyone who agrees with me, even if we disagree on other issues.
    tewdles, Elvish, and herring_RN like this.
  10. 0
    Quote from azhiker96
    Will it take a Republican administration to get liberals to give civil liberties a higher priority? Do they really want to give such a free rein to the White House knowing that it will be under a different President in 4 years?

    Maybe I'm just a little more hard nosed. If someone is going to get a license to trample my rights I don't care their political party.
    It took a Democratic administration to get conservatives to give civil liberties a higher priority, so yes, people are more likely to people criticize the opposite side than themselves for doing the same thing.

    Post 9/11 we happily traded our freedoms for security (which means we deserve neither), and these measures were successfully framed as not being anti-civil rights but as being pro-security. Given that the most successful attacks democrats face are usually based on the theme of being soft on security, Democratic politicians are wary of feeding into this storyline, and won't be all that likely to undo already established civil rights/security balances, if anything they'll take chances push more towards the security side.
  11. 2
    The first time I ever agreed with MM. You should be careful when you say that conservatives have never before cared about civil rights before now. That is simply not true. Maybe you mean Republicans? They are not the same thing.
    tewdles and herring_RN like this.
  12. 1
    Stalin was a left-wing extremist not too concerned about civil rights
    tewdles likes this.


Top