Obama Mirrors Bush - Again

N

nji098

New member
Our new "leader" floats another trial balloon. Change you can believe in or just another "fascist" regime ? ? ?

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is considering forgoing legislation and issuing an executive order that would authorize the president to incarcerate some terrorism suspects indefinitely, White House officials said Friday.

Such an order would be controversial — seemingly aligning the administration with a disputed legal doctrine of former President George W. Bush, whose lawyers held that the president had sweeping authority in wartime to imprison those he deemed threats to national security.

Obama officials sought to play down the significance of the discussions by an administration panel, saying that consideration of such an order was still in an early phase and subject to change. They said that lawyers had not written a specific proposal and that nothing had been submitted to the White House for review by senior officials.

Still, the possibility of the order appeared to reflect increasing frustration within the administration over the difficulties posed by the effort to meet Mr. Obama’s commitment to close the detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, by January and the dwindling options for dealing with the detainees before then.

More : http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/27/us/politics/27detain.html?ref=global-home
 
nji098 said:
Our new "leader" floats another trial balloon. Change you can believe in or just another "fascist" regime ? ? ?

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is considering forgoing legislation and issuing an executive order that would authorize the president to incarcerate some terrorism suspects indefinitely, White House officials said Friday.

Such an order would be controversial — seemingly aligning the administration with a disputed legal doctrine of former President George W. Bush, whose lawyers held that the president had sweeping authority in wartime to imprison those he deemed threats to national security.

Obama officials sought to play down the significance of the discussions by an administration panel, saying that consideration of such an order was still in an early phase and subject to change. They said that lawyers had not written a specific proposal and that nothing had been submitted to the White House for review by senior officials.

Still, the possibility of the order appeared to reflect increasing frustration within the administration over the difficulties posed by the effort to meet Mr. Obama’s commitment to close the detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, by January and the dwindling options for dealing with the detainees before then.

More : http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/27/us/politics/27detain.html?ref=global-home
Click to expand...

I just don't get this......we currently have the jokers from the 1st WTC bombings cooling their heels in American prisons. Given the growth in prison constructions throughout the country over the last 15 years, I can't see what's all the hand wringing is about. Obama and the Dems better "consider" that they WON the damned elections, and stop letting the conservatives and neocons on both sides of the political fence dictate the tone of the debate.
 
nji098 said:
Our new "leader" floats another trial balloon. Change you can believe in or just another "fascist" regime ? ? ?

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is considering forgoing legislation and issuing an executive order that would authorize the president to incarcerate some terrorism suspects indefinitely, White House officials said Friday.

Such an order would be controversial — seemingly aligning the administration with a disputed legal doctrine of former President George W. Bush, whose lawyers held that the president had sweeping authority in wartime to imprison those he deemed threats to national security.

Obama officials sought to play down the significance of the discussions by an administration panel, saying that consideration of such an order was still in an early phase and subject to change. They said that lawyers had not written a specific proposal and that nothing had been submitted to the White House for review by senior officials.

Still, the possibility of the order appeared to reflect increasing frustration within the administration over the difficulties posed by the effort to meet Mr. Obama’s commitment to close the detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, by January and the dwindling options for dealing with the detainees before then.

More : http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/27/us/politics/27detain.html?ref=global-home
Click to expand...

He probably changed his mind when he got into the office and realized that all he had said about this in his campaign, was a crock of BS and Bush was right.
 
TuTu Monroe said:
He probably changed his mind when he got into the office and realized that all he had said about this in his campaign, was a crock of BS and Bush was right.
Click to expand...

Think, you nitwit. It's the "bluedog" Democrats and neocon Republicans that are giving him static on this. Their rhetoric is just that, rhetoric....because the WTC bombers from 1992 were bagged, tagge, prosecuted and are serving their sentences ON AMERICAN SOIL.

Obama keeps trying to appease everyone....and in doing so might lose his support base, as well as inadvertently continue the failed policies of the Shrub & company. Let's hope this "consideration" doesn't result as such.
 
Reminds me of the bullshit the lefties tried after voting for the War Resolution....

Bush fooled us....we didn't know the truth....the CIA lied to us....it wasn't our fault....
We never really meant all those "imfamous" quotes about Saddam....Bush made us vote for war....we didn't mean to.....


Rather than take responsibility for their actions they whine and cry and blame others....and the brainless, bootlicking lefties believe it....
 
bravo said:
Reminds me of the bullshit the lefties tried after voting for the War Resolution....

Bush fooled us....we didn't know the truth....the CIA lied to us....it wasn't our fault....
We never really meant all those "imfamous" quotes about Saddam....Bush made us vote for war....we didn't mean to.....


Rather than take responsibility for their actions they whine and cry and blame others....and the brainless, bootlicking lefties believe it....
Click to expand...

Even Dick Armey says that he was fooled by the White House into believing that they intended to exhaust every peaceful option before committing forces to Iraq. I wouldn't exactly call him a leftie...
 
Onceler said:
Even Dick Armey says that he was fooled by the White House into believing that they intended to exhaust every peaceful option before committing forces to Iraq. I wouldn't exactly call him a leftie...
Click to expand...


I don't know that he said "he was fooled" by anybody but,
House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX) was one of the very few Republicans to oppose the resolution coming up for a vote before the elections.
Armey was suspect of the WMD "evidence" from the beginning....
Thats true....
 
Onceler said:
Armey voted FOR the Iraq resolution; he did not oppose it...
Click to expand...

Absolutely right.....I would say he DID oppose it but voted for it anyway....
he is quoted as saying to Bush...“Mr. President, if you go in there, you’re likely to be stuck in a quagmire that will endanger your domestic agenda for the rest of your presidency.”...
Sounds like a warning to me....he said the "evidence" was shakey from the start.....he voted like a party hack....
 
bravo said:
Absolutely right.....I would say he DID oppose it but voted for it anyway....
he is quoted as saying to Bush...“Mr. President, if you go in there, you’re likely to be stuck in a quagmire that will endanger your domestic agenda for the rest of your presidency.”...
Sounds like a warning to me....he said the "evidence" was shakey from the start.....he voted like a party hack....
Click to expand...

Yep, and thanks to that along with other "hacks" over 4,000 Americans died over an invasion based on lies.

You just contradicted your previous diatribe, you know.

FYI regarding one of the many aspects of the Bush lies regarding pre-invasion Iraq

http://feinstein.senate.gov/crs-intel.htm

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/05/divided-senate-committee_n_105374.html
 
TuTu Monroe said:
He probably changed his mind when he got into the office and realized that all he had said about this in his campaign, was a crock of BS and Bush was right.
Click to expand...

A reasonable summation, and no doubt more Obama "epiphanies" will follow. And of course the same Media that devoted itself to trumpeting any Bush administration "hypocrisies" and "flip-flops" will duly portray this as yet another example of the current presidents' "flexibility" and "nuance", while certain posters on this Board will attempt to equate those who committed domestic crimes on American soil with enemy combatants who are captured on foreign battlefields...
 
Taichiliberal said:
Yep, and thanks to that along with other "hacks" over 4,000 Americans died over an invasion based on lies.

You just contradicted your previous diatribe, you know.

FYI regarding one of the many aspects of the Bush lies regarding pre-invasion Iraq

http://feinstein.senate.gov/crs-intel.htm

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/05/divided-senate-committee_n_105374.html
Click to expand...

There was no 'diatribe' to contradict....
your lack of reading comprehension is showing....

1. Armey didn't buy the "evidence" about Saddam and if he voted his conscience he would have voted no.....but he didn't...he voted like a hack, for the resolution...the disagreement is that he never to my knowledge said he was fooled or tricked into supporting the resolution,...he plainly voted with his party despite his convictions...

2. Democrats on the other hand covered both sides of the issue...some that harped publicly against Saddam and WMD voted for the resolution...

Some were like Armey, they disbelieved the "evidence" but still voted for the resolution.....the difference was, when public opinion started to turn against Bush and the war, these whiney bastards started to cry about being fooled and lied to and tricked into the "Yes" vote, utter nonsense....
and assholes that sometimes suffer from "brainlock" believe that crap because they have to....and they want to....
Pinheads prove its obviously difficult to see things clearly from the far left
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Yep, and thanks to that along with other "hacks" over 4,000 Americans died over an invasion based on lies.

You just contradicted your previous diatribe, you know.

FYI regarding one of the many aspects of the Bush lies regarding pre-invasion Iraq

http://feinstein.senate.gov/crs-intel.htm

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0...e-committee_n_105374.html


bravo said:
There was no 'diatribe' to contradict....
your lack of reading comprehension is showing.... Really? Lets' see if YOU can discern what I'm getting at:

1. Armey didn't buy the "evidence" about Saddam and if he voted his conscience he would have voted no.....but he didn't...he voted like a hack, for the resolution...the disagreement is that he never to my knowledge said he was fooled or tricked into supporting the resolution,...he plainly voted with his party despite his convictions...

Here's is your contradiction: A Republican "party hack" votes for the Party issue DESPITE his/personal reservations to the contrary. He didn't trust what information he did get....and he wasn't the only one. Problem was, there were ONLY 6 other REPS that voted AGAINST HJ114, while 215 voted for it.
297 Dems were AGAINST while 133 voted for it. So in effect, the information that I supplied regarding what information was shared with Congress still stands. Now there is NO WAY for your "party hack" assertion to apply to all those REPS and DEMS unless you can provide documented proof. The difference here is that the DEMS show that the majority of them NOT ONLY DID NOT GO FOR THE RESOLUTION, THEY VOTED SUCH, WHILE THE REPS DID THE OPPOSITE WITHOUT MORE FOLK LIKE ARMEY REGISTERING DISCONTENT.
2. Democrats on the other hand covered both sides of the issue...some that harped publicly against Saddam and WMD voted for the resolution... Well, given the information they were acting on, their reaction was understandable to a degree. However, more voting against the resolution would be considered "hacks" also....if they believed the information the Shrub gave them, but voted against it anyway. You can't prove otherwise unless you have quotes from everyone similar to what you said about Armey

Some were like Armey, they disbelieved the "evidence" but still voted for the resolution.....the difference was, when public opinion started to turn against Bush and the war, these whiney bastards started to cry about being fooled and lied to and tricked into the "Yes" vote, utter nonsense....
and assholes that sometimes suffer from "brainlock" believe that crap because they have to....and they want to....
Pinheads prove its obviously difficult to see things clearly from the far left
Click to expand...

Once again, you keep trying to substitute your supposition and conjecture as fact. Where's the quotes like stating such? What YOU don't understand is that all the quotes by DEMS saying they believed Saddam to be a threat, etc., DO NOT ADVOCATE INVASION/OCCUPATION. In fact, HJ114 gives a burden of proof before Congress and the UN that the SHRUB DID NOT MEET. We had inspectors on the ground and Hussein was contained. My original post stands. That the Shrub and company DID NOT supply ALL the intel available is a matter of fact & history that yo cannot change.


For all your bravado, you're STILL just another willfully ignorant neocon parrot whose bitter about being proved wrong.....so you lash out like a child, taking my quotes out of context because you just can't muster a debate beyond a certain point. Carry on.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top