Obama: True and False

Icon

Don’t believe everything the media tells you

May 30, 2009 • 2:42 pm Comments Off

False! Judge Sotomayor is racially biased when deciding cases

Judge Sotomayor and Race

-snip

It seems to me that there is an infinitely simpler and more accurate way of figuring out whether Judge Sotomayor decides cases involving race fairly and dispassionately – read her decisions. So I did: I am in the midst of reviewing every single race-related case on which she sat on the Second Circuit.

There are roughly 100. They cover the gamut from employment discrimination to racial bias in jury selection. I decided that I would stop and write an interim report once I got through her 50 most recent race-related cases other than Ricci because the numbers are sufficiently striking and decisive. Here is what I found.

In those 50 cases, the panel accepted the claim of race discrimination only three times. In all three cases, the panel was unanimous; in all three, it included a Republican appointee. In roughly 45, the claim was rejected. (Two were procedural dispositions.)

On the other hand, she twice was on panels reversing district court decisions agreeing with race-related claims – i.e., reversing a finding of impermissible race-based decisions. Both were criminal cases involving jury selection.

In the 50 cases, the panel was unanimous in every one. There was a Republican appointee in 38, and these panels were all obviously unanimous as well. Thus, in the roughly 45 panel opinions rejecting claims of discrimination, Judge Sotomayor never dissented.

It seems to me that these numbers decisively disprove the claim that she decides cases with any sort of racial bias.

-more

SCOTUSBLOG

Filed under: Blogs, False!, Justice, Supreme Court

May 21, 2009 • 2:40 pm Comments Off

Speech: National Security, 5/21/09

Remarks of President Barack Obama – As Prepared for Delivery
Protecting Our Security and Our Values
National Archives Museum
Washington, D.C.
May 21, 2009

These are extraordinary times for our country. We are confronting an historic economic crisis. We are fighting two wars. We face a range of challenges that will define the way that Americans will live in the 21st century. There is no shortage of work to be done, or responsibilities to bear.

And we have begun to make progress. Just this week, we have taken steps to protect American consumers and homeowners, and to reform our system of government contracting so that we better protect our people while spending our money more wisely. The engines of our economy are slowly beginning to turn, and we are working toward historic reform of health care and energy. I welcome the hard work that has been done by the Congress on these and other issues.

In the midst of all these challenges, however, my single most important responsibility as President is to keep the American people safe. That is the first thing that I think about when I wake up in the morning. It is the last thing that I think about when I go to sleep at night.

This responsibility is only magnified in an era when an extremist ideology threatens our people, and technology gives a handful of terrorists the potential to do us great harm. We are less than eight years removed from the deadliest attack on American soil in our history. We know that al Qaeda is actively planning to attack us again. We know that this threat will be with us for a long time, and that we must use all elements of our power to defeat it.

Already, we have taken several steps to achieve that goal. For the first time since 2002, we are providing the necessary resources and strategic direction to take the fight to the extremists who attacked us on 9/11 in Afghanistan and Pakistan. We are investing in the 21st century military and intelligence capabilities that will allow us to stay one step ahead of a nimble enemy. We have re-energized a global non-proliferation regime to deny the world’s most dangerous people access to the world’s deadliest weapons, and launched an effort to secure all loose nuclear materials within four years. We are better protecting our border, and increasing our preparedness for any future attack or natural disaster. We are building new partnerships around the world to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda and its affiliates. And we have renewed American diplomacy so that we once again have the strength and standing to truly lead the world.

These steps are all critical to keeping America secure. But I believe with every fiber of my being that in the long run we also cannot keep this country safe unless we enlist the power of our most fundamental values. The documents that we hold in this very hall – the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights –are not simply words written into aging parchment. They are the foundation of liberty and justice in this country, and a light that shines for all who seek freedom, fairness, equality and dignity in the world.
Read the rest of this entry »

Filed under: Justice, National Security, Speeches

May 20, 2009 • 11:33 pm Comments Off

False!—Obama Promised A Single Payer Health Plan During His Presidential Campaign

In 2007

‘If you’re starting from scratch,’ he [Obama] says, ‘then a single-payer system’-a government-managed system like Canada’s, which disconnects health insurance from employment-’would probably make sense. But we’ve got all these legacy systems in place, and managing the transition, as well as adjusting the culture to a different system, would be difficult to pull off. So we may need a system that’s not so disruptive that people feel like suddenly what they’ve known for most of their lives is thrown by the wayside.’

New Yorker, May 7, 2007

At a roundtable with a handful of invited guests at Lindy’s Diner in Keene, Obama said if he were starting from scratch, he would probably propose a single payer health care system, but because of existing infrastructure, he created a proposal to improve the current system.

Concord Monitor, August 14, 2007

In 2008

Here’s the bottom line. If I were designing a system from scratch I would probably set up a single-payer system…But we’re not designing a system from scratch…And when we had a healthcare forum before I set up my healthcare plan here in Iowa there was a lot of resistance to a single-payer system. So what I believe is we should set up a series of choices….Over time it may be that we end up transitioning to such a system. For now, I just want to make sure every American is covered…I don’t want to wait for that perfect system…The one thing you should ask about the candidates though is who’s gonna have the capacity to actually deliver on the change?…I believe I’ve got a better capacity to break the gridlock and attract both Independents and Republicans to work together.

Seniors Town Hall, Ames, Iowa, January 5, 2008

“I have been entirely consistent in my position on health care. What I said . . . is if I were designing a system from scratch, I would set up a single-payer system.” But given the existing health care system, such a change would be impractical, he said.

Democratic Debate, Manchester, New Hampshire, January 5, 2008

I never said that we should try to go ahead and get single-payer [health insurance system]. What I said was that if I were starting from scratch, if we didn’t have a system in which employers had typically provided health care, I would probably go with a single-payer system.

Democratic Debate, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, January 22, 2008

“If I were designing a system from scratch, I would probably go ahead with a single-payer system,” Obama told some 1,800 people at a town-hall style meeting on the economy.

“Given that a lot of people work for insurance companies, a lot of people work for HMOs. You’ve got a whole system of institutions that have been set up,” he said at a roundtable discussion with women Monday morning after a voter asked, “Why not single payer?”

“People don’t have time to wait,” Obama said. “They need relief now. So my attitude is let’s build up the system we got, let’s make it more efficient, we may be over time—as we make the system more efficient and everybody’s covered—decide that there are other ways for us to provide care more effectively.”

Town Hall/Women’s Round Table, Albuquerque, New Mexico, August 18, 2008

And in 2009, as President

If I were starting a system from scratch, then I think that the idea of moving towards a single-payer system could very well make sense. That’s the kind of system that you have in most industrialized countries around the world.

The only problem is that we’re not starting from scratch. We have historically a tradition of employer-based health care. And although there are a lot of people who are not satisfied with their health care, the truth is, is that the vast majority of people currently get health care from their employers and you’ve got this system that’s already in place. We don’t want a huge disruption as we go into health care reform where suddenly we’re trying to completely reinvent one-sixth of the economy.

So what I’ve said is, let’s set up a system where if you already have health care through your employer and you’re happy with it, you don’t have to change doctors, you don’t have to change plans — nothing changes. If you don’t have health care or you’re highly unsatisfied with your health care, then let’s give you choices, let’s give you options, including a public plan that you could enroll in and sign up for. That’s been my proposal.

Town Hall, Rio Rancho, New Mexico, May 15, 2009

Filed under: False!, Health Care

May 18, 2009 • 12:12 am Comments Off

True!—Obama plans new fuel limit by 2016

President Barack Obama will announce plans on Tuesday for a national fuel-economy and greenhouse-gas standard for automobiles in an effort to give more certainty to car companies as they struggle for survival, industry and administration sources told POLITICO on Monday.

The administration will bill the tailpipe-emissions announcement as historic, because it avoids a patchwork of standards and has won agreement from so many stakeholders, including automakers, state governments, the Department of Transportation and the Environmental Protection Agency.

The national emissions policy for autos, which will ramp up to a new mileage-per-gallon standard in 2016, will harmonize the CAFE standard and the EPA’s greenhouse-gas standard, so that industry will not have to worry that the administration will regulate those on separate tracks.
Read the rest of this entry »

Filed under: Energy, True!

May 17, 2009 • 1:42 am Comments Off

False!—Catholics Opposed Obama’s Notre Dame Commencement Speech

U.S. voters say 56 – 31 percent, including 60 – 34 percent among Catholic voters, that Notre Dame University should not rescind its invitation to President Barack Obama to speak at the university’s commencement, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released today.

Observant Catholic voters who attend religious services about once a week say 49 – 43 percent that Notre Dame should keep President Obama on the program, while Catholics who attend services less frequently say 70 – 26 percent that Obama should speak, the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University survey of 2,041 registered voters nationwide finds.

Quinnipiac National Poll

WASHINGTON (CNN) – Six in ten Americans continue to approve of how Barack Obama is handling his job as president — and despite the controversy over Obama’s appearance at Notre Dame on Sunday, Catholics have a high opinion of him, according to a new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll.

…

The results from U.S. Catholics are virtually identical to the rest of the population. Sixty-one percent say the president’s abortion views don’t have any impact on their view of him. Twenty-two percent say it makes them feel less favorably toward him, and 15 percent say it makes them feel more favorably.

CNN

The Pew Research Center found that, of those Catholics who say they’ve heard about the controversy, 54 percent approve of the school’s choice. 38 percent oppose it. Among those who hadn’t heard about it, only a plurality approved, but the margin was much wider — 45 percent in favor, 18 percent opposed.

Those numbers are actually eclipsed by data Joan had previously pointed to: 73 percent of Notre Dame students, including 97 percent of its seniors, support the invitation.

Salon

It was the Catholic right wing and they lost this one.

By facing their arguments head-on and by demonstrating his attentiveness to Catholic concerns, Obama strengthened moderate and liberal forces inside the church itself. He also struck a forceful blow against those who would keep the nation mired in culture-war politics without end. Obama’s opponents on the Catholic right placed a large bet on his Notre Dame visit. And they lost.

Washington Post

Filed under: Ethics, False!

May 16, 2009 • 2:51 am Comments Off

False!—U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald let Obama slide on Chicago scandals

Fitzgerald tried to get Obama, came up with “Zilch,” says former Chicago Tribune editor

U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald interrogated convicted political fundraiser Tony Rezko and others intensively about then-senator and presidential candidate Barack Obama, a former managing editor of the Chicago Tribune said on television last week.

Jim Warren, now a political commentator for MSNBC, told Hardball host Chris Matthews that Fitzgerald questioned Rezko “very aggressively” about possible involvement of Obama in alleged political scandals in Chicago, and came away “with nothing.”

Warren said, “They have come away with zilch.”

This item, lost amid furor over newly released Justice Department torture memos last week, came out April 14. Warren was at the Tribune from 1984 until August 2008, according to the newspaper, going to the Tribune from the rival Chicago Sun-Times where he began in 1977. Warren was Washington Bureau Chief for the Tribune for eight years beginning in 1993.

Warren emphasized that his own viewpoint on whether Fitzgerald’s investigations included Obama has changed.

-snip

So, my notion that they took a passive attack toward Obama for a variety of reasons, I now have to admit, according to my sources, is simply wrong.

WSJ

Filed under: Chicago, Ethics, False!

May 15, 2009 • 11:37 pm Comments Off

False!—Obama Promised To Reject Military Commissions System

Obama promised to reject the Bush 2006 Military Commissions Act, in particular its underlying legal structure. He did not promise to reject military commissions.

President Barack Obama didn’t reverse himself on military commissions.

He was clear before the campaign that he’d favor them under different rules. On Jan. 22, a senior administration official briefed reporters that keeping the military panels alive with new rules was a real possibility. Obama’s campaign trail rhetoric was a bit murky, probably deliberately so, but if reporters didn’t nail him down is that Obama’s fault? Did anyone ask him if he was ruling out commissions?

Under the Radar

The president’s statement included a justification for the use of a revamped military commissions system. “In 2006, I voted in favor of the use of military commissions,” it read. “But I objected strongly to the Military Commissions Act that was drafted by the Bush administration and passed by Congress, because it failed to establish a legitimate legal framework and undermined our capability to ensure swift and certain justice against those detainees that we were holding at the time.”

The Supreme Court struck down part of the Military Commissions Act in June, ruling that foreign detainees at Guantanamo Bay had the right to challenge their detention in federal courts.

The changes announced today include a ban on using statements obtained from detainees through “cruel, inhuman and degrading interrogation methods”; limitations on the use of hearsay; greater latitude for the accused in choosing their lawyer; and basic protections for people who refuse to testify. Under the new rules, military commission judges would be able to establish the jurisdiction of their own courts.
Read the rest of this entry »

Filed under: False!, Justice, Military, National Security

January 22, 2009 • 3:10 am Comments Off

True!—By Executive Order on 1/22/09 President Obama Ordered Lawful Interrogations, An End To Torture

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release January 22, 2009

EXECUTIVE ORDER

ENSURING LAWFUL INTERROGATIONS

By the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, in order to improve the effectiveness of human intelligence gathering, to promote the safe, lawful, and humane treatment of individuals in United States custody and of United States personnel who are detained in armed conflicts, to ensure compliance with the treaty obligations of the United States, including the Geneva Conventions, and to take care that the laws of the United States are faithfully executed, I hereby order as follows:

Section 1. Revocation. Executive Order 13440 of July 20, 2007, is revoked. All executive directives, orders, and regulations inconsistent with this order, including but not limited to those issued to or by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) from September 11, 2001, to January 20, 2009, concerning detention or the interrogation of detained individuals, are revoked to the extent of their inconsistency with this order. Heads of departments and agencies shall take all necessary steps to ensure that all directives, orders, and regulations of their respective departments or agencies are consistent with this order. Upon request, the Attorney General shall provide guidance about which directives, orders, and regulations are inconsistent with this order.
Read the rest of this entry »

Filed under: Executive Order, Intelligence, Justice, Military, National Security, True!

birfer-baby-case

Categories

 

March 2010
M T W T F S S
« Jul    
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  

Meta

Blogroll