Will Obama be like Bush on executive power?

Why not? He's just like Bush on everything else, even more so.

I feel Obama will use "executive privilege" or "power" even more so than President Bush did as he has already done so much in this direction that it is actually scary. I didn't realize he was elected Dictator, I though he was elected President. NOTE: He did NOT and will never get my vote, he is not to be trusted.

Bush's abuse of Executive Power not only undermined his personal standing, but the standing of the entire country in the eyes of the world. Why would any administration repeat this obvious and shortsighted mistake? To maintain his momentum, Obama needs to keep his campaign committments to undo as much damage as possible created under the Bush fiasco. Respecting/restoring Constitutionally mandated balance of power between the Branches of Government should be "Job One".

Talk about a misleading headline. It says Obama is adopting an expansion of power. Then the article is all about whether he will.

Well, well, well....Barry decides to keep some of the presidential powers that he so deried those evil monsters Bush and Cheney for seeking...Hmm, wonder if Springsteen wants back all his sappy stump acoustic songs whining about the evil policies of 2000-08...Also I notice no Cambridge lunatic lefties have posted a response to this article yet...

That's funny....wasn't it our wise VP Joe Biden who stated again and again that Bush was so evil because he made the biggest power grab in the history of the Presidency?? In a month, Obama has gone above and beyond what the dems were griping about during the election.

Where is the outrage from the left wing loonies????

This man is too dangerous for our country,I think he thinks he is in Venezuela.

This is the dumbest question, the title of the article that is. All presidents guard their power. Do you think Bill Clinton, the previous Bush, Reagan or JFK guarded their powers any less than Bush did or Obama will? It is all in factoring in who the press is rooting for, that is what makes the difference.

Nice, only in America do Americans SUE american companies on behalf of fucking terrorists.

"Nothing has done more to damage America�s place in the world than the revelation that this nation stretched the law and the bounds of executive power to authorize torture and cruel treatment," Leahy said in opening remarks at today's hearing.
It's important to remember that this is Leahys opinion.

My opinion is that having people like Leahy running our nation is torture and cruel treatment.

What is lost here is that this is the business of the People being done. It must be done in the light of day; it must be capable of being questioned as to lawfulness and morality. Our Congress remains utterly gutless in ensuring the transparency of our governmental actions. It is not acceptable to have witnesses testify behind closed doors and not under oath, even if they can still be charged criminally for lying. They are supposed to be testifying at the demand of the People, for the benefit of the People in the clear view and hearing range of the People. Government has forgotten who it works for. A strong reminder is in order.

Let us all remember that the government works for US, not us for them. Keep your eyes on this; it matters.

Love the new openness of the Obama administration. Things are changing and it is so refreshing. Honesty and integrity are finally returning to Washington! Change Baby! ...NOT!

Wow, Obama saying one thing then doing something opposite! How many times are we going to keep hearing this? Hey Obama kool aid drinkers, how much does it hurt knowing you got hustled?

Will Obama be like Bush on executive power?
Email|Link|Comments (0) Posted by Foon Rhee, deputy national political editor March 4, 2009 07:05 PM
By Joseph Williams, Globe Staff

WASHINGTON -- As a Senate committee debated today whether to create a "truth commission" to investigate alleged abuses of White House authority during the Bush era, President Obama has quietly adopted some of his predecessor's expansive views of the power as commander-in-chief -- especially concerning anti-terrorism policies.

Those moves could lead to a confrontation over the scope of presidential authority with the Democratic-led Congress, whose leaders say they intend to recalibrate the balance of power between Congress and the White House. Some top Democrats, Obama allies, and civil libertarians say they are closely watching how the new president uses his power, and intend to challenge him if he does not voluntarily roll it back to pre-Bush limits.

Senator Russ Feingold, a Wisconsin Democrat and member of both the Senate judiciary and intelligence committees, was one of several lawmakers who co-sponsored legislation to limit use of a "state secrets" exemption after Justice Department lawyers, under new Attorney General Eric Holder, invoked the provision in a federal lawsuit against Jeppesen, Inc., a subsidiary of Boeing. The attorneys argued that the White House believes the case should be dismissed because it could force the revelation of classified information which could jeopardize national security.

"I'm certainly on guard that it's not abused by the Obama administration," Feingold said, referring to the president's view of power. "I will be disagreeing with some of their conclusions."

Senator Patrick "Leaker" Leahy, a Vermont Democrat (aka socialist) and judiciary committee chairman, is pushing for the "truth commission" to investigate the Bush administration's national security policies, including search and seizure powers.

"Nothing has done more to damage America’s place in the world than the revelation that this nation stretched the law and the bounds of executive power to authorize torture and cruel treatment," Leahy said in opening remarks at today's hearing. (uhhhh, Clinton's cowardly behavior did more to embolden our enemies. ask Bin Ladin)

Quoting a recent decision by Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, Leahy said the Constitution "is not something an administration is able 'to switch … on and off at will,' " and that to prevent future abuses the nation "must not be afraid to look at what we have done" no matter how painful. (Wow, please tell us how and where American citizens, not terrorists or enemy combatants, have had their rights violated.

The dems are proving themselves incapable of holding power. Can we have some adults take over please before it's too late?

Obama is liar and Holder is a coward. Barney Frank should resign.

Even the very liberal Obama Administration can't stomach the bordering-on-treasonous ACLU.
Suing Boeing for flying them out of Guantanamo...but, isnt that what these mass murdering scum wanted?

Some one has to take charge around here . I trust obama to handle his authorty with honor and lets not waste time on mickey mouse issues There is a lot to be done. daliya

"[T]he case should be dismissed because it could force the revelation of classified information which could jeopardize national security."

As odious as this sentiment is to me, the fact that we do not have any rational system of determining whether information is "properly" classified, let alone know whether the classification system itself is functional—President* Bush's attempts to fix the system had left us with more, less well defined classifications, and more, less regulated groups of people with the power to classify (naturally).

It seems that any argument such as the one the government is trying to make is moot unless and until the classification itself has some modicum of credibility.

I can't help but remember that Bill Clinton said Barack has the "instincts of a street thug". I think the White House is filled to the rafters with punks and thugs.

What happened to: Changing the tone in DC? "post-partisanship"? Rahm Emanuel- "a good crisis shouldn't be wasted." Paul Begala, James Carville, George Stephanopoulos

AND would somebody tell these clowns that Bush might have signed the HOG bills into law but they came from CONGRESS (controlled by Democrats)! Bush would NOT sign this latest bill so it will be interesting to see if Obama does.

PORR - Pelosi - Obama - Ried Recession!

Of course he will. All the greatest accumulators of executive power were on the political left--Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Franco, Mussolini. Or, if you prefer something closer to home, try Jefferson and FDR, for starters. The question itself betrays an incredible ignorance of history. The left always prefers more power in the executive than does the right in American politics.

President Obama is NOT going to allow a Truth Commission or a Special Prosecutor because his TOP Democrats including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi would face almost certain investigation and likely conviction.

"The Post also reported that in 2002 Nancy Pelosi and her Congressional Intel committee colleagues got a virtual CIA tour and APPROVED of the interrogation techniques being used including the WORST: waterboarding. Apparently NO objections were raised. Instead, at least two lawmakers in the room asked the CIA to push HARDER !!

They did nothing to stop such activities, when they weren't fully sanctioning them. If they now decide the tactics they heard amount to abuse, then by their own logic they themselves are complicit.

"The Post also reported that in 2002 Nancy Pelosi and her Congressional Intel committee colleagues got a virtual CIA tour and APPROVED of the interrogation techniques being used including the WORST: waterboarding. Apparently NO objections were raised. Instead, at least two lawmakers in the room asked the CIA to push HARDER !!

Posters keep asking why not convict Bush or Cheney or Rumsfield for war crimes ?

The answer is simple. Congress including TOP Democrats sanctioned and approved these techniques. Congress has never even banned waterboarding after years of indignation.. faked perhaps ?

Archie, you should read a bit of history yourself: Hitler, Mussolini, and Franco were on the right, supporting policies to return their countries to the grand old days. Yeah, Hitler, for example, made left-wing noises, but he also spouted right-wing slogans, and when push came to shove he went with his fellow right-wingers, the Nationalists (despite Jonah Goldberg claiming that was impossible).
And you seem to have forgotten the recent Bush II administration, when it was a Republican president that accumulated power. Or are you going to call him a leftie, too?

Yog-Sothoth

Hitler a right-winger.... really? So, the establishment of TOTAL governmental control over all aspects of life is a right-wing ideology?

Noooooo..... that is the left.

Hilter wanted to "return to the grand old days" meaning Germany's status prior to WW1 by using leftist tactics and policies. His rhetoric of being strong sounded good, but his methods were as LEFT as it gets.

Moron.

Yog - You truly need to get your history from a different source.
Adolf Hitle - National Socialist Party. I think he would just be called a Progressive Democrat today. Never mind killing millions of people based on their beliefs and religion. Obama's pal Bill Ayers said the U.S. would have to "kill 20 million come the revolution".
Then we have the Hitler Youth, SS... We are certainly watching the Obama agenda taking exactly the same footsteps to dictatorship - banks, oil companies, insurance...

"the people" (Das Volk).

Benito Mussolini was a Socialist that founded the National Fascist Party for God's sake!

Bottom line his create a crisis to gain control is exactly what we are seeing from our SOCIALIST AND SOON TO BE COMMUNIST Obama Administration.

Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist Party. I think he would just be called a Progressive Democrat today. Never mind killing millions of people based on their beliefs and religion. Forget about the Hitler Youth, SS, and everything else. We're seeing the remake with the Obama Youth and he is most certainly following in the footsteps the same steps to becoming a dictator.
Hitler, justified everything he did in the name of "the people" (Das Volk). The Nazi State was, like the Soviet State, all-powerful, and the Nazi party, in good socialist fashion, instituted pervasive supervision of German industry (can we say nationalize business, banks, oil companies, insurance...get the point?)

Benito Mussolini was a Socialist that founded the National Fascist Party for God's sake!

Bottom line his create a crisis to gain control is exactly what we are seeing from our SOCIALIST AND SOON TO BE COMMUNIST Obama Administration.

I see I'm being bombarded by the anti-Obama clones.
First, check your facts. You know those big Germans firms, like Krupp, Siemens, I.G. Farben? They all came through the Nazi era without being nationalized, because Hitler didn't nationalize businesses as a general policy.
Second, Mussolini left the Socialists because he disagreed with them. Got it? And like Hitler, he heavily recruited the conservative elements of society and politics to support his regime once he got into power.
Finally, the only mass movement I see right now is that of copycats Black dog and MSP.

Looks like my previous reply to John vanished in the ether.

John, political movements are mapped to left or right based on their goals, not their methods. If the Republicans decide to emulate Obama's fund raising techniques, that doesn't make them Democrats. The Nazis using leftist revolutionary techniques does not make them leftists. The Nazis talked like lefties sometimes, talked like righties sometimes. When push came to shove, they went right.

Both left and right want to use the state to control things, just different things. The old saw was that the left wanted to control the economy, the right your bedroom; it's a bit simple, but gets the idea across.

Hitler came to power with right-wing support, because he and they had similar goals, killed the lefties that were in his party to seal the deal, and supported business against labor. Doesn't sound like a leftie to me.

Yog, my reply to your post #23 has not been posted yet. Don't know if it's in the queue or getting deleted. If it doesn't show up after a while, I will try to figure out what was objectionable, correct it, and repost.

But, with respect to your post #27, socialism does not necessarily imply ownership of the means of production. That is one particular form of socialism known as communism. Socialism can merely control the means of production. And make no mistake, the big German arms manufacturers took marching orders from the Nazis. In particular, they did exactly whatever Albert Speer, Minister of Armaments and War Production for the Third Reich ordered them to do. Just to make it clear, Minister Speer was formally a member of Hitler's governent.

Yes, Mussolini left the Socialist Party because he disagreed with them. However, that is not the same as abandoning socialism.

Archie, I agree that the Nazis mobilized industry to arm for war. Every major power in World War II did so as a matter of necessity. That doesn't mean they were all headed by left-wing governments; in particular, I have difficulty seeing Churchill as a leftie.
Lefties are supposed to favor labor, righties capital. The Nazis favored capital against labor. The Nazis had no problems with big firms making huge profits. The Nazis eliminated the independent unions. One had to have a work card to get and hold a job, and one's employer could withhold it for any reason whatsoever, preventing one from getting another job. Sounds much more like the right than the left to me.