Is the ACLU a Liberal Organization?

Complete video at: http://fora.tv/2007/06/18/Anthony_Romero_In_Defense_of_America

Anthony Romero, Executive Director of the American Civil Liberties Union, challenges mainstream characterizations of the ACLU as a strictly liberal organization.

-----

"In Defense of America: Fighting A Different Kind of War, Without Becoming A Different Kind of Country" with Anthony Romero, Executive Director, American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

President Bush says the U.S. is fighting a "different kind of war," but does that mean it must become a different kind of country? Rather than justifying the usurpation of constitutional powers, this war demands that we stick to our core values more strongly than ever, says the ACLU. Romero shares examples from the legal war that he has been fighting at home.

Anthony D. Romero is the Executive Director of the American Civil Liberties Union, the nation's premier defender of liberty and individual freedom. He took the helm of the 87-year-old organization just four days before the September 11, 2001 attacks. Shortly afterward, the ACLU launched its national Safe and Free campaign to protect basic freedoms during a time of crisis. Under Romero's leadership, the ACLU gained court victories on the Patriot Act filed landmark litigation on the torture and abuse of detainees in U.S. custody, and filed the first successful legal challenge to the Bush administration's illegal NSA spying program.

Romero, an attorney with a history of public-interest activism, has presided over the most successful membership growth in the ACLU's history and more than doubled national staff and tripled the budget of the organization since he began his tenure. This unprecedented growth has allowed the ACLU to expand its nationwide litigation, lobbying and public education efforts, including new initiatives focused on racial justice, religious freedom, privacy, reproductive freedom and lesbian and gay rights.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• speech
• first
• amendments
• rights
• laws
• private
• rush
• limbaugh
• radio
• drugs
• abortion
• marriage
• conservatives
• liberals
• foratv
• fora.tv
• fora
• tv

[Cadle1am]

ACLU is definitely has a more Libertarian view point than anything

[jerico641]

Exactly my point. Regardless of how bigoted, brutal, or perverted a certain group may seem to most of us, the ACLU will defend their constitutional rights if called upon to do so. And they'll do the same for groups most of us believe in as well, such as The Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, etc. They're neither liberal nor conservative, and couldn't function if they were. Thanks for your time.

[TehFunnehMann]

@PsychoPunk1965 Yes!

[jerico641]

@mrbriscoe2001

Okay, I would say in closing that those liberal whites were and are the ones who usually achieve changes that benefit us all as a society; conservatives by their very nature don't want change (except for silly things like a federal law recognizing only opposite sex marriage), and don't fight for the basic rights of the underpriviledged, as liberals do. I'm proud to call myself a liberal, and will just state again that the ACLU exists ONLY to defend the Bill of Rights. 'Bye now.

[mrbriscoe2001]

@jerico641 All Right;I apologize for getting personal[ essentially,though .these programs are instituted by Liberal whites who won't be adversely affected in anyway;Busing in Boston was a disaster that pretty much ruined the education of generations of kids in Boston;and that's a concensus;and it was instituted by a White Liberal judge who had HIS kids not even in the school system;the way A.A. is instituted now,the main people screwed are lower income whites.....Peace.

[jerico641]

@mrbriscoe2001

Institutional racism is what we had in this country for hundreds of years before we decided to try and do something about it. AA isn't a perfect solution, neither was bussing, for that matter. Both were attempts to right wrongs in our social system. The playing field was never level anyway and probably never will be. Personally, I have enough confidence in my abilities to know I can find work w/o a problem, and AA doesn't bother me. But let's just drop it, OK? It's hopeless.

[mrbriscoe2001]

@jerico641 Of course it's racism;race shouldn't be a factor ingetting a job-and it shouldn't be a factor in NOT getting a job-and it IS institutionalized-have you any experience in Civil service tests at all? Tghe fact that you wouldn't give up YOUR job,but you have noproblem with someone ELSE losing a job or opportunity based on race just proves my point;white supporters of Affirmative Action programs are hypocritical-and cowardly.

[jerico641]

@mrbriscoe2001

They are minorities, they usually have far less juice in our society than caucasians.  It's not racism, and it's not even institutionalized. Nobody ever went to prison for not keeping a quota of certain minorities on their payroll. And of course I wouldn't give up my job voluntarily, that just puts another burden on the system anyway. That's silly. But how do you KNOW what anybody else will or won't do?? Nobody should be "priviledged", that's really what AA was about.

[mrbriscoe2001]

Respond to this video...Anyway,Why not have "voluntary Affirmative Action day" You and other Liberals nation-wide could give up YOUR jobs to minority applicants. It would be a GREAT way to atone for historical wrongs ,and would be much less divisive than how A.A. programs are administered now,You up for it?

[mrbriscoe2001]

Respond to this video...affirmative Action is a lazy"window dressing" remedy; Government has no business making one life and wreaking another(or,in other words,"Leveling Playing Fields) The ONLY way to ensure fairness and non partisanship in Civil Service is with an exam,but under AA madness,disparate effect is enough to get the exam tossed;it's the most condescending,insulting statement to minorities;You can't study harder,take the prep tests;we have to rig the system for you.i

[mrbriscoe2001]

@jerico641 Affirmative Action contradicts the most fundamental concept of justice;it punishes the wrong party for perceived wrongs;a second generation White American shouldn't have to pay for "historical wrongs" he had nothing to do withif a company or school racially discriminates,bring the full power of government down on them;quotas ,or 'goals"(they're the same thing,just disguised by lawyers0is the lazy way to go.Secondly,the wayto level the playing field is to improve inner city schools.

[jerico641]

@mrbriscoe2001

I never classified all white people as anything, I just said that given the choice, history sure as hell proves that on average, employers want to hire a clean-cut white male rather than a minority of any type. The playing field needed to be levelled; had to be, as a matter of fact. Now most employers are more liberal on their own as far as hiring practices are concerned, and AA had a lot to do with that. Employers saw that hiring minorities wasn't a disaster for them.