Barack Obama, Progressive: Presente! (11/4/08- 11/20/08)

F*ck The Dimocrats!!, Love Me, I'm A Liberal...NOT!!!, Political Smackdown 2008!!! November 19th, 2008

Well…it was fun while it lasted.

Perhaps I should have listened to my instincts that told me that Barack Hussein Obama as President of the United States would be your typical DLC Democrat in the finest tradition of Bubba Clinton (but with a nice deep tan and without Bubba’s pussy hound instincts).  But, silly, stooopid me being the optimist I am, I chose to give him the benefit of the doubt, being so happy that he and the Democrats would be able to flush the evil, bad Reaganites and Bushites out of Capitol Hill.

And then Rahm Emanuel happened.

As did Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State.

As did several of Bubba’s cronies started making their way into the transition team.

Then…Tom Daschle as Health and Human Services Secretary. Yeah…THAT Tom Daschle.

Then Obama broke bread with….John McCain?!?!?! Why not invite Sarah Palin as your Interior Secretary then, Senator??

And…Holy Joe Lieberman keeps his plum Homeland Security seat and his “Democratic” Caucus standing, with no less a push from BHO himself. As a Senator’s spokesman parapharsed: “Suck on that one, ‘ya stoopid liberals.”

And now, we have this latest: Eric Holder, who was Janet Reno’s first assistant, is now tagged to become Attorney General.

Wouldn’t be so bad, were it not for the fact that he was a highly paid corporate lawyer for Chiquita, the banana comglomerate who was so busy trying to undercut and undermine native Latin American fruit markets…..while also defending fascist, death squad dictatorships.

And oh, lookee here…..he even seems to have a thing against adult sexual expression, too (from an AVN.com article, h/t to Ernest Greene at BPPA:

While Holder will have to undergo an extensive vetting process before officially being offered the job, he has already generated concern in the adult industry over a decade-old memo he wrote on the topic of obscenity prosecutions.

Addressed to all 94 United States Attorneys on June 10, 1998, the memo was titled “Prosecutions Under the Federal Obscenity Statutes”. Adult industry attorneys have since referred to it as “The Holder Memo.”

“As you are aware,” Holder wrote, “within the past few years there has been increasing concern about the distribution of obscenity and child pornography both by traditional purveyors of “adult material” and in particular by those who distribute such material over the Internet. As a result of this unprecedented growth, I wish to remind you of the Department’s policies and priorities in the prosecution of federal obscenity cases… Thus, priority should be given to cases involving large-scale distributors who realize substantial income from multistate operations and cases in which there is evidence of organized crime involvement. However, prosecution of cases involving relatively small distributors can have a deterrent effect and would dispel any notion that obscenity distributors are insulated from prosecution if their operations fail to exceed a predetermined size or if they fragment their business into small-scale operations… In particular, priority also should be given to large-scale distributors of obscenity over the Internet. Because of the nature of the Internet and the availability of agents trained in conducting criminal investigations in cyberspace, investigation and prosecution of Internet obscenity is particularly suitable for federal resources.” [Citation removed]

[...]

Perhaps even more troubling is a letter Holder wrote to Morality In Media founder Paul McGeady on July 2, 1998, which references a meeting apparently attended by Holder, McGeady and representatives of various religio-conservative pro-censorship groups:

“I appreciated having the opportunity to meet with you recently to discuss the prosecution of obscenity cases,” Holder wrote. “Your commitment to this important issue is commendable, and I fully share your concerns about the distribution of obscenity and child pornography, whether it is over the Internet or by more traditional purveyors of such material. I encourage you, and the other organizations with whom I met, to continue working closely with the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section of the Department of Justice as we work aggressively to address this troubling problem. Based on the many insightful comments and observations made by representatives of the various groups who attended our recent meeting, I determined that it was appropriate for me to send a memorandum to all United States Attorneys reminding them of the Department’s policies.”

[...]

Holder’s stance on obscenity drew comments from First Amendment attorney and AVN columnist Clyde DeWitt, who dealt with the “Holder Memo” in his column for AVN’s September, 1998 issue (”Federal Obscenity Prosecutions in General, and the Internet in Particular”.) DeWitt referenced Holder’s stance that U.S. Attorneys should follow the United States Attorneys’ Manual, which at that time still suggested that adult companies could be targeted using a “multiple-prosecution strategy,” where a single company could be indicted in multiple jurisdictions, forcing that company to expend vast resources defending itself, which might bankrupt the company - exactly as the Justice Department intended the tactic to accomplish.

“Perhaps most shocked by the article was Adam & Eve owner Phil Harvey, who had undertaken tireless efforts to have the multiple-prosecution policies of the Department of Justice ruled unconstitutional,” DeWitt later wrote. “Indeed, during the course of the wind-up of the very successful PHE, Inc. v. United States Department of Justice case, Phil’s company received a promise from the Department of Justice at a November, 1993 hearing that, according to Assistant United States Attorney Thomas Millet, it was anticipated that ‘within the near future,’ the Department policy would be changed so as to ‘no longer encourage multiple prosecutions in obscenity cases.’ Accordingly, Phil was to say the least alarmed to find the old policies still in effect.”

“I wrote the first article — this was ‘97, ‘98 — just generally to inform the newly-emerging Internet community, who didn’t remember obscenity prosecutions, of what they were and that it’s out there and it’s serious,” DeWitt recalled. “I mentioned the multiple prosecution strategy, and Phil Harvey called me up or faxed me or something and said, ‘What the hell is this? They changed that because of my lawsuit.’ I said, ‘No, they didn’t. here’s what it says presently,’ and he said, ‘Well, that’s exactly what it said before!’”


Indeed, the U.S. Attorneys’ Manual was not changed until June of ‘98, just after Holder wrote his memorandum - and that change came at the insistence of Harvey, who contacted the Justice Department to demand that it fulfill its promise.

Now…in some defense of Holder, the antiporn zealot groups meeting with him have a slightly different view what took place. Taken from the Concerned Women of America website today (and crossposted by moi to BPPA):

In 1993, the United States began a staggering decline in obscenity prosecutions. During the Clinton administration’s first six years, federal enforcement of obscenity violations plummeted more than 80 percent. In fiscal 1997, only six prosecutions included a lead charge of federal obscenity law violation. In 1998, those cases totaled only eight. Further, no prosecutions against major interstate distributors of hard-core porn have occurred for the past several years, according to a report by Morality in Media, a New York-based decency organization.

The last eight years have been “peaches and cream as far as prosecutions have been concerned,” said Paul Cambria, a “First Amendment” lawyer whose clients include Hustler publisher Larry Flynt. Cambria spoke at a pornography trade show in September. “We’ve had some state prosecutions, but by-and-large no federal prosecutions” under the Clinton administration, he said.

To remedy the situation, pro-family groups, including the National Law Center for Children and Families and Concerned Women for America, pressed for meetings with Justice Department officials. They ignored our requests to meet with U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno for nearly eight months—although we represented millions of children and families. When I pressed inside contacts for the meeting, officials said we did not merit a meeting with Miss Reno and offered us Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder instead.

At that May 1998 meeting, Mr. Holder seemed genuinely concerned with our requests. But he had little understanding of the obscenity industry. Afterwards, he contacted all 93 U.S. attorneys in the states to remind them that the prosecution of obscenity producers and distributors was still a priority, and they were responsible to act.

Still, nothing happened. The porn industry’s trade publications reported the Justice Department had sent this letter, but pornographers obviously didn’t fear prosecution and continued “business as usual.” In 1996, the industry endorsed President Clinton for a second term, stating in AVN, “There have been fewer federal prosecutions of the adult industry under Clinton than under Reagan and Bush. … [W]ith no reason to change his hands-nearly-off porn policy, vote for him.”

The AVN article also mentions some more questionable tactics of Holder, such as the aftformentioned ties to Chiquita and his role in one of Bubba’s final acts of cronyism: the pardoning of financeer Mark Rich.

But if even that isn’t enough to chill your spine, here are two words that should horrify you: Catherine MacKinnon.

That’s right, Clones….the long-time Svengali of antiporn “feminism” has openly endorsed and blessed Obama’s presidency (even explicitly in an editorial in…of all places, The Wall Street Journal), calling him “a family man with two daughters.” You would note that this hasn’t gone too well with the usual Womyn Warrior crowd of radfems; some of them being still in Hillary/PUMA-induced shock and anger (and some even reduced to attempting to mine Sarah Palin as the next great feminist heroine)….but why would such an antiporn  firebrand like MacKinnon make such a public endorsement?? Could it be because one of her closest allies, University of Chicago professor Cass Susstein, just might be headed to the US Supreme Court??? Could it be that Michelle Obama really could be a closeted radical feminist?? Or, at least, be sympathetic to MacKinnon’s theories??

With all that happening, I wouldn’t be surprised if by next week Obama would be doing another presser announcing his plans to reform welfare by increasing work requirements and cutting benefits…oh, wait, he’s already done that, too???

Yup…change we can believe in, indeed. Unfortunately for progressives and the Left, more like chump change left at the bottom of a bag of coal lumps.

Looks like that vote for Cynthia McKinney wasn’t such a waste of mine, doesn’t it???


BONUS: Thanks to Ms. Shag over at Wear Clean Draws for this further example of the rightward influences that are ruling Obama right about now (adopted from here):

[...]  Later Emanuel responded to a question on the Employee Free Choice Act, a measure backed by organized labor but strongly opposed by business, saying, “Let me take your question and go somewhere else.” Instead, he spoke about the need to address falling income among middle class workers.


0 Comments