stats for wordpress

Are you on Facebook?

Would you please click "like" in the box to your right, or

Visit us on Facebook!

Watch: George Takei’s Endorsement Of Barack Obama Will Make You Cry

by David Badash on October 6, 2012

in News,Politics

Post image for Watch: George Takei’s Endorsement Of Barack Obama Will Make You Cry

Editor’s note: A very special thank you to George Takei, who posted this piece on his Facebook page. We are deeply grateful.

George Takei has become known as not only the actor who portrayed “Mr. Sulu” on the original Star Trek TV series, but as a humorous and engaging LGBT activist. But in this President Barack Obama endorsement video he recorded for the campaign, Takei wears a different hat — a representative of the Asian American community, as he tells of the “memory seared” into his brain when “soldiers came marching up our driveway” and his family and he — at the age of five — were locked up in World War II internment camps.

“We were in prison, behind barbed wire fences, for four years, for the duration of the war, simply because we happened to look like the people that bombed Pearl Harbor. We were American citizens, yet, because of who we were, what we looked like, we were in prison, without due process.”

Stop right now and imagine a five-year old George Takei, in prison. That was America seventy years ago. It may make you cry, at least a little. It did me.

“But, we have, as an Asian-American community, low voter registration,” Takei states. “We’ve got to be actively involved in the electoral process. And if you really appreciate the price that has been paid, for that right, you should be in there participating, protecting our interests, and, in so doing, making our democracy a truer democracy.”

“We have a unique opportunity to support a president who is a part of us. He grew up in Hawaii, the ‘Aloha’ spirit, his sister’s half-Asian. He understands, and loves, the Asian-American community.”

George Takei is a gift to America.

And he’s right — we need everyone to register and vote.


George Takei To Join ‘The New Normal’ As Himself

George Takei Brands Anti-Gay Lawmakers Heartless, Brainless, Cowardly Friends Of Dorothy

George Takei Says, Can’t Say Gay? Say Takei! (Video)

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...


We invite you to sign up for our new mailing list, and subscribe to The New Civil Rights Movement via email or RSS.

Also, please like us on Facebook, and follow us on Twitter!


LOrion October 6, 2012 at 12:53 pm

Sharing, good one.

banseabhag October 7, 2012 at 10:15 pm

Thanks George. You are always a class act…

xweaponx October 7, 2012 at 11:13 pm

"That's a BIG SHIP" – Scotty
"Not as big as her Captain" – Kirk

WAY to Go George!

Ricster99 October 7, 2012 at 11:47 pm

Excellent George and thank you!!! I will share this on my FB page and encourage others to do the same.

SolvingADream October 7, 2012 at 11:51 pm

The relocation camps that locked up American citizens during WWII were a horrific crime, a shame upon our nation. And it's a shame that a Democrat, President Roosevelt, that signed the order to lock American citizens up. Most young people don't know that. And I would like to point out that the first formal apology to our Asian citizens was penned by a Republican, President Ronald Reagan.

Barack Obama is hardly a LGBT advocate. For over three years of his presidency he did not support Gay rights, early on he is on record opposing it. Only in the last few months, in an attempt to mobilize his base has he come on board. I would content that Lesbians and Gays are being used by Obama to pull out a victory in the November elections.

xweaponx October 8, 2012 at 12:07 am

That's Crap, He's supported it from Day 1. Leave it to a Limbergerbaugh-ite to ruin a great TREK Moment.

PhoenixBennu October 8, 2012 at 1:37 am
PhoenixBennu October 8, 2012 at 1:49 am

Obama did not always support gay marriage. He played with words and supported Gay rights and gay civil unions but rejected Gay marriage. Than, he "evolved" into supporting Gay marriage, just in time to get more support from the LGBT community.

If Takei did not like it when Arnold flipped on the Gay issue, why is he setting himself up for another run around by Obama.

Same-sex couples should be allowed to marry. (May 2012)
No federal laws should hinder state-based same-sex marriage. (May 2012)
Opposes CA Prop. 8, one-man-one-woman marriage. (Jul 2008)
Hate crimes related to the immigration issue is unacceptable. (Feb 2008)
Being gay or lesbian is not a choice. (Nov 2007)
Decisions about marriage should be left to the states. (Oct 2007)
Homosexuality no more immoral than heterosexuality. (Oct 2007)
Ok to expose 6-year-olds to gay couples; they know already. (Sep 2007)
Has any marriage broken up because two gays hold hands? (Aug 2007)
We need strong civil unions, not just weak civil unions. (Aug 2007)
Legal rights for gays are conferred by state, not by church. (Aug 2007)
Disentangle gay rights from the word “marriage”. (Aug 2007)
Gay marriage is less important that equal gay rights. (Aug 2007)
Gay rights movement is somewhat like civil rights movement. (Aug 2007)
Let each denominations decide on recognizing gay marriage. (Jul 2007)
Pass ENDA and expand hate crime legislation. (Mar 2007)
Opposed 1996 Illinois DOMA bill. (Mar 2007)
Supports health benefits for gay civil partners. (Oct 2006)
Opposes gay marriage; supports civil union & gay equality. (Oct 2006)
Marriage not a human right; non-discrimination is. (Oct 2004)
Gays should not face discrimination but should not marry. (Oct 2004)
Include sexual orientation in anti-discrimination laws. (Jul 1998)

Lizard_Of_Oz October 8, 2012 at 2:09 am

Your references show that Obama has supported gay marriage while President of the US.
Can you show references that Romney will similarly support gay marriage or any other gay rights issues?

PhoenixBennu October 8, 2012 at 4:34 am

Since the administrators have not approved my other message, I just recommend that you take a look at the link and keep in mind that Romney and Obama are two different people, and Romney may not agree with the same things you want him to agree with, but, unlike Obama, he has been consistent and fair within the law and not a flip flopping person who panders more and more as his need for power grows (which is one reason you only really see Obamas support while he is in office and trying to reelection)

Romney has fought against gay hate and discrimination but for traditional marriage. ….and just to be proactive here and stop the expected response from the LGBT community…hate against gays and support for traditional marriage are not the same thing.

Janis Alanis October 8, 2012 at 12:59 am

And Cheney? Waiting until you are a dried up political prune to support your own flesh and blood? How dare you criticize the ONLY sitting POTUS that has ever stood up for LGBT rights. Whether is was three years ago or three minutes ago, he has done more for them than anyone you will ever name from the past. Your hypocrisy is staggering.

Lizard_Of_Oz October 8, 2012 at 2:12 am

According to your calendar, July 2011 is in the last few months. That is when Obama certified the repeal of "Don't Ask Don't Tell."

PhoenixBennu October 8, 2012 at 4:39 am

ok so we can safely assume Obama supported gays in the military in July 2011 (at least for political reasons). Whereas Romney supported them at least as far back as 2008 in which records show his support for Gays serving openly.

timelordGQ October 8, 2012 at 12:04 am

I loved the video, but the flashing Michelle Bachmann ads were very counter-productive in my opinion.

blubberisland October 8, 2012 at 12:05 am

Take that, Clint Eastwood.

rwo6564 October 8, 2012 at 12:08 am

Nothing like being a single issue voter George. The SECURITY, growth and economic stability of the country is much more important than your selfish social agenda. I respect your position and understand it, but couldn't possible disagree with you more. It's refreshing to see the number of rebuttals on your FB page……Romney by 10 pts on Nov 6th.

NEGtron_Zero October 8, 2012 at 12:36 am

Mr. Takei, I am a fan of yours and an intense advocate of freedom of speech and opinion, but I believe that there is something about Mr. Obama that you should be aware of. Hearing your personal narrative of the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II is truly saddening, and it is our duty as American citizens to ensure that such a terrible breach of freedom will never happen again in this country. Human life is short, and to live in a society that deprives a human being of a full and free life is simply immoral.

At the end of last year, President Obama signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, or NDAA. This law allows for anyone under suspicion of terrorism, citizen or otherwise, to be arrested and held by the government indefinitely without trial, which robs citizens of habeas corpus. While not currently being heavily enforced, the mere existence and availability of this law is highly dangerous to the civil liberties of the American people. This law is eerily similar to previous assaults on the freedom of Americans, including Japanese-American internment, and those who endorsed it need to be confronted and told that such a heinous law is unconstitutional and needs to be stopped.

This is especially concerning because both parties, without substantial opposition by the people, will do little to stop NDAA. President Obama has no plans to repeal the provisions, and Governor Romney has voiced support of NDAA as well. The bill was passed through a Republican Congress and a Democratic President. The bill's mention of indefinite detention is an extension of the assault on civil liberties expressed in the PATRIOT Act, an act passed by George W. Bush that promotes government intrusion. The only Presidential candidates that oppose these oppressive measures are third party candidates like Gary Johnson. As citizens, we have two viable options to preserve our freedoms: we either call up our elected officials en masse and voice our opposition as a legion, or we turn to other parties that support freedom and the repeal of terrifying bills such as the NDAA.


MB October 8, 2012 at 2:57 am

Well written, NEGtron. I personally was unaware of the details of the NDAA as I am certain many others are also. I commend you for writing the facts without resorting to any sort of lowbrow name-calling or other nastiness that so frequently shows up on discussion boards.

Yes, now that I read your words, it is very similar to what happened during the internments. I am reminded of the movie The Siege with Annette Bening and Bruce Willis (and Denzel, I think) in which the Army created internment camps for all Arab-American men. Clearly it could happen.

Please note that the NDAA does not take habeas corpus from any US citizen.

But I also question a better solution. How do we protect ourselves from the possibility of attacks internally?

I wouldn't ask Gary Johnson – I'd ask Ron or Rand Paul.

XSergeantD October 8, 2012 at 3:59 am

There is a third provision: Know what you are talking about. You may need to read the 500 pages again and try to re-explain the detention you describe as I will now quote what you missed about military indefinite detention, (from section 1021 you are specifically describing)
"(e) AUTHORITIES.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States."

Have a great day

PhoenixBennu October 8, 2012 at 4:43 am

Your point is?

From the link:
(e) . . . Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.

Comment: This provision is sometimes touted as protecting citizens because it preserves existing Supreme Court decisions. The problem is that, as yet, there are no Supreme Court decisions that squarely provide the full measure of habeas corpus protection to citizens or legal aliens accused within our borders. This is true because neither the Bush nor the Obama administration has had the audacity to round up U.S. citizens without our borders and hold them indefinitely without trial.

Here are the principal Supreme Court decisions the law preserves:

(1) A post-Civil War case (Ex Parte Milligan) saying a citizen non-combatant incarcerated outside the theater of war is entitled to habeas corpus. (This holding doesn’t help those accused of being combatants.)

(2) The World War II-era Quirin decision that permitted President Roosevelt to detain, try in a secret military hearing, and execute a U.S. citizen captured on U.S. territory and accused of being a German spy. Obviously, this decision—which is widely acknowledged to be egregious—offers no protection against the National Defense Authorization Act.

(3) The 2004 Hamdi case, which says that a U.S. citizen captured bearing arms in the war theater is NOT entitled to habeas corpus. He is entitled only to a minimal military hearing without a jury and without many of the traditional due process protections.. (Some apologists for the National Defense Authorization Act are claiming the Hamdi case granted a right of habeas corpus; this claim is flatly wrong.)

(4) The 2008 Boumedienne decision, which held that alien Guantanamo detainees are entitled to habeas corpus and a civilian hearing to show that they were non-combatants.

Obviously, none of these prior holdings addresses the habeas corpus rights of a U.S. citizen or legal alien apprehended within the U.S. and charged with being an enemy combatant. So there is no Supreme Court case providing the necessary protection preserved by the law’s provision that “existing law or authorities” are preserved.

XSergeantD October 8, 2012 at 10:39 pm

So your irrational reasoning to strike down the Defense Budget (which is what the NDAA is) is: "This is true because neither the Bush nor the Obama administration has had the audacity to round up U.S. citizens without our borders and hold them indefinitely without trial."

The sky is falling, the sky is falling. If you wish to debate, please bring facts.

This wouldn't even be a discussion if the POTUS had the line-item-veto ability that 85% of our Governors have. Here's the upon signing the budget on 12/31/11: "The fact that I support this bill as a whole does not mean I agree with everything in it. In particular, I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists…his section breaks no new ground and is unnecessary." the multipage statement is found here:

liberty89 October 8, 2012 at 12:59 am

THANK YOU FOR POSTING THIS NEGtron!! The NDAA is an assault on our civil liberties! We must all rise up as citizens to fight for it’s repeal!!



XSergeantD October 8, 2012 at 10:45 pm

NDAA is our defense budget and expenditure. It changes every year, speak to you representative about changing 2013 wording, not about wasting time repealing the defense budget

sfbaywalk October 8, 2012 at 6:02 am


It was war. It was global war. The internment prevented a great deal of sabotage and spying by Japanese agents and sympathizers already in the country. In that respect, the internment prevented major loss of life among the allied forces. And it helped end the war sooner and not later.

Yes, you and your family suffered. My mother suffered by standing in Germany under the allied bombs on many occasions, and she had nightmares for much of the rest of her life. My father suffered as Allied soldier crossing Europe on foot. Millions and millions suffered loss of life, loss of limb, and loss of mind.

It's wasn't a party. Your imaginary rules of "due process" are irrelevant. In grand scheme of suffering, the experience of your family was minor.

I thank you for your contribution and your family's contribution to the war effort. Now please stop whining.

DarthEVaderCheney December 4, 2012 at 11:18 pm

What the hell are you talking about?? These were AMERICAN citizens, you jerk! Another rightwing ignoramus! No wonder you people are good at losing important elections!!!

ponderthis1 October 8, 2012 at 10:56 am

This is all well and good, but I have to call bs on this because whatever allowed the US government to detain the Japanese during WWII is more in force than ever because of the National Defense Authorization act signed into law by President Obama on Dec. 31, 2011. This act provides for the detention of persons the government suspects of involvement in terrorism and those persons may be held indefinitely and could include U.S. citizens arrested on American soil, including arrests conducted by members of the Armed Forces.

The biggest hinge of Mr. Takei's endorsement is how "far" asians have come to be respected from the days of being stashed behind barbed wire, and thus asians should get out the vote for Obama because he has particularly given opportunity to asians in his administration. And that's great in and of itself, but the original problem of having a government that can round up people (citizens) on suspicion of being a threat to the government is still intact for people of any creed or color and is supported and enacted by Obama. This makes this country a military state and George Takei should be as concerned about this as ever. Things have changed, but they have NOT changed.

It seems to me that a site named The New Civil Rights Movement would also be VERY concerned about this aspect of the Obama Administration's policies. These detention powers in Section 1021 and 1022 of this law are under legal challenge, as they should be, as they are undoubtedly in violation of constitutional principles and of the Bill of Rights.

So not cool to me.

doodlbug17 October 8, 2012 at 4:15 pm

does no one see a problem that he talks about the horror of the japanese internment and goes on to endorse the man who signed indefinite detention of us citizens into law???

LibertyMcG October 9, 2012 at 11:21 am

It's absolutely astonishing that Mr. Takei, a victim of unconstitutional detention, would work to re-elect a president who signed a law claiming for the executive branch the unconstitutional power to indefinitely detain U.S. citizens without trial or due process. Mitt Romney likewise fails on this issue, but it's too fundamental to our civil rights to be swept away in a "better of two evils" comparison.

Lily02886 October 8, 2012 at 6:25 am

ROMNEY IS A SADISTIC, ANTI-GAY BULLY. You may support any candidate you wish. But please do NOT lie and circumvent the truth; the very unpleasant truth.
Mitt Romney physically attacked and tortured a smaller, gay classmate in high school. Most of Romney's classmates ( rich kids, the upper 5 % of the America; the 5% that count) remember Mitt Romney as a "mad man". Reference:

Comments on this entry are closed.

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: