Glenn Greenwald makes a compelling case that even beyond support for bailouts, the Obama administration's most close mirroring of the Bush administration comes on the issue of secrecy and civil liberties - and he says the behavior will separate the knee-jerk Obama partisans from movement progressives:
It is becoming increasingly difficult for honest Obama supporters to dismiss away or even minimize these criticisms and, especially, to malign the motives of critics. After all, the Obama DOJ's embrace of many (though by no means all) of the most radical and extremist Bush/Cheney positions -- and the contradictions between Obama's campaign claims and his actions as President -- are now so glaring and severe that the harshest denunciations of Obama's actions are coming from those who, during the Bush years, were held up by liberals and by Obama supporters as the most trustworthy and praiseworthy authorities on these matters.
Now, sure, Obama may use the powers he's protecting more benevolently than Bush, but Greenwald says that's not the point:
Simply put, there is no excuse, justification or mitigation for advocating blatantly unconstitutional and tyrannical powers or claiming that secrecy shields the President from the rule of law. Nor is the faith-based belief that Obama is a Good Person who therefore deserves trust even remotely rational or relevant.
I (obviously) agree with Glenn on this 100%. If we're going to be part of a credible movement, we've got to have a credible and honest discussion about what any administration - Republican or Democrat - is doing. And in the case of these issues of secrecy and civil liberties, the initial moves are not positive.
STATE BLOGS
