Barack Obama - so much for change

[Rooster Cogburn]

Hey OP, you know he can't just snap his fingers and magically make it all better right? This is the first step to closing that place down for good. Besides, look at all the other good shit he's been doing. He has ALOT of stuff to fix, he can't do it all at once.

Thing is, he could snap his fingers and make it all better. Since Truman, the president has literally unlimited war powers.

Obama=Bush. They agree on virtually every issue. But Obama is not the problem. Nor Bush. The American people are invested in a system that not only doesn't benefit them, but ultimately has little to do with them. We should look back to our Founding Fathers. We should abolish the Federal government (which is not at all federal) and restore rule by the people. We should start from scratch and rebuild the republic. I do not think Washington can be salvaged at this point.

 

[Naeo]

I read the first post here as "Barack said he would bring about change and give the detainees in Guantanamo more human rights. He's doing just that but he's not keeping his promises."

Under Bush the detainees got no trial. Under Obama they're getting military trials- better than none- and probably false confessions from torture and the he-said-she-said arguments are being thrown out, allowing only evidence that is beyond doubt a fact. I'd say that's a huge step from the Bush administration.

 

[Arrers]

Hey OP, you know he can't just snap his fingers and magically make it all better right? This is the first step to closing that place down for good. Besides, look at all the other good shit he's been doing. He has ALOT of stuff to fix, he can't do it all at once.

This. did people seriously think he could solve all of americas problems in such a short time? Even Franklin Roosevelt couldn't do that.

 

[Ontoue]

Seriously , its not like hes god or something

 

[Blood_Lined]

I once heard, "if things are bad with 1 president and a new president with the opposite political party is elected and STILL things are bad, there's a good chance that there is a conspiracy". I don't know about this for sure, but in my opinion, we need to get another president like Ronald Reagen inside the White House.

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

The improved rights for detainees include restrictions on hearsay evidence; a ban on evidence obtained by cruel treatment; giving detainees more leeway to choose their own lawyers; and protecting detainees who refuse to testify, the statement said.

That sounds to me like a pretty big disagreement on the subject of due process of law.

I say it isn't much, which is why I added the obligatory "virtually." Even if they were polar opposites on this one point, they still agree on immigration, war policy, and the role of the state.

Actually, our Founding Fathers "founded" the Federal government because they saw that the whole Articles of Confederation thing wasn't going to work. Looking back to our Founding Fathers means looking back to people who recognized the necessity of limiting the power of state governments.

Nevertheless, you cannot seriously propose that the government as it now exists is identical or even similar to the one established by ratification of the Constitution. The Articles of Confederation were abolished, but they were replaced by a federal government restricted by the rule of law, not the lawless imperial capital we have today. They revised their original documents, but they did not say, "ah, hell, it can't work after all." The whole idea was that people would govern themselves. Without that, 'Liberty' means nothing. Certainly Jefferson or Madison would not understand why Constitutionality is decided without recourse by 9 dried up judges in Washington. Our government represents everything Washington and Jefferson fought against, and it conducts the wars and mercantilism it was designed to prevent.

 

[Lukirre]

There really does come a point where you have to sit back and say:

Fuck. Human. Rights.

You know that there was a terrorist who turned himself in in Toronto, and revealed that he was part of a terrorist group that was planning an attack on Canadian soil?

Really? They plan to attack somewhere and kill innocents? Killing people who have nothing to do with what's going on?

And you want me to respect his rights?

Guffaw. Guffaw.

 

[karkashan]

Actually, the Supreme Court set forth the concept of "Judicial Review" while Jefferson was in office. And he wasn't too happy about it. He tried without success to make it to where the Supreme Court was under more direct influence of the people.

You have to remember, it was a different time then. Jefferson wanted individual rights for the people because he thought America would forever be a nation of farmers. That's right, farmers. And the Local over National system works well if all your constituents are a bunch of farmers. However...that didn't last.

Oh, and by the way, there wasn't any real form of government at the time of the ratification of the Constitution. The Constitution itself is simply the outline by which all the laws that make up are government is based upon. The reason that the "Federal" government seems to have an inordinate amount of power over the states is due to "Money" and "Nationalism". The original United States was made up of tiny little countries/colonies, or "States". If you asked someone there where they would from, they would say, "Viginia, of the United States."
Now though, they would say, "The United States, and I live in -----, Virginia." Like it or not, this country is no longer a collective of smaller psuedo countries, but a Nation made up of lesser States.

 

[Cerebreus]

Hey OP, you know he can't just snap his fingers and magically make it all better right? This is the first step to closing that place down for good. Besides, look at all the other good shit he's been doing. He has ALOT of stuff to fix, he can't do it all at once.

I do have problems with some of the bad stuff he is doing, such as being extremely pro-Union to the point of ignoring the law and his promise of not being influenced by lobbyists.

He should figure out where to move the detainees to first before closing it down. It's irresponsible to not do that.

And I do agree that he can't to everything at once, but it seems he is trying to.

 

[asinann]

They're people considered by the United States government to be the "enemy". (which they are) Why the hell would they give them a "fair trial"? Thinking otherwise is just naive.

Yea, I wouldn't expect the US to ever abide by the Geneva Convention, or the UN charter on human rights or God forbid the actual Constitution of the United States!

Geneva convention doesn't apply, we never signed the UN charter on human rights and the Constitution only applies to citizens.

And they have gone from secret tribunals to actual military trials, at least people are being moved along as opposed to left to rot.

The US signed up to the Geneva convention in 1882. They have signed all subsequent conventions and ratified them in law. The US went to war with Afghanistan and Iraq hence, an 'enemy combatant' captured is a prisoner of war and are entitled to be treated under the rights given to them by the Geneva convention.

If you want to argue that the combatants are not prisoners of war then they are by definition, civillians. In which case you are subjecting them to illegal detention, any trials are invalid under international law and any death penalties carried out would be crimes against humanity.

The US constitution does not only apply to citizens of the United States, it applies to any person within the United States such as tourists, foreign business workers and diplomats. Even people who are in the United States illegally are entitled to be treated as criminals with constitutional rights.

Guantanamo Bay belongs to the United States and hence the Constitution applies there. Else it belongs to Cuba or is undesignated. In these cases the laws of Cuba would apply or International law would apply respectively.

While their situation has been improved the adminstration are still not respecting their human rights.

As you once again, like every other person, ignored the section of the Geneva Convention that protects only UNIFORMED MEMBERS of a signatory nations ORGANIZED MILITARY.

So unless Iraq and Afghanistan are prepared to call those terrorists members of their militaries, and hence admit that they as nations no only condone but CAUSE terrorism as a government they get ZERO protection under the conventions.

The Geneva Conventions don't apply to the terrorists, as they don't apply to civilians that are captured on a battlefield.

And get off your damn high horse, those people didn't respect the human rights of the people they killed and plotted to kill, and because of that they deserve none.

Do you own property you have leased?

The United States does not OWN Guantanamo Bay, it belongs to Cuba and the US holds a lease on the land there.

And we haven't been at war with Iraq OR Afghanistan for the last few years. We have been fighting "insurgents" from other nations that are interfering with the legitimate elected governments of those nations.

You should be more concerned with your own "rights" and freedoms anyway, the writ of habeus corpus STILL hasn't been reinstated and the Patriot Act is still on the books.

 

[CoziestPigeon]

Hey OP, you know he can't just snap his fingers and magically make it all better right? This is the first step to closing that place down for good. Besides, look at all the other good shit he's been doing. He has ALOT of stuff to fix, he can't do it all at once.

Thing is, he could snap his fingers and make it all better. Since Truman, the president has literally unlimited war powers.

Obama=Bush. They agree on virtually every issue. But Obama is not the problem. Nor Bush. The American people are invested in a system that not only doesn't benefit them, but ultimately has little to do with them. We should look back to our Founding Fathers. We should abolish the Federal government (which is not at all federal) and restore rule by the people. We should start from scratch and rebuild the republic. I do not think Washington can be salvaged at this point.

Man, words can't even describe how dense you must be. Sure, he technically could do that, but then the country would go to shit. No land can deal with that many changes all at once, with no plans of action. Think a little first next time okay?

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

Hey OP, you know he can't just snap his fingers and magically make it all better right? This is the first step to closing that place down for good. Besides, look at all the other good shit he's been doing. He has ALOT of stuff to fix, he can't do it all at once.

Thing is, he could snap his fingers and make it all better. Since Truman, the president has literally unlimited war powers.

Obama=Bush. They agree on virtually every issue. But Obama is not the problem. Nor Bush. The American people are invested in a system that not only doesn't benefit them, but ultimately has little to do with them. We should look back to our Founding Fathers. We should abolish the Federal government (which is not at all federal) and restore rule by the people. We should start from scratch and rebuild the republic. I do not think Washington can be salvaged at this point.

Man, words can't even describe how dense you must be. Sure, he technically could do that, but then the country would go to shit. No land can deal with that many changes all at once, with no plans of action. Think a little first next time okay?

You can disagree without insulting me. I do not think "the country would go to shit." I think we'd be fine.

 

[Lavi]

Obama's already done the one thing I wanted him to do: get elected and keep a republican out of government. Anyways, if Obama was to do everything at once and in an absolute extreme, he'd have America go apeshit (and the rest of the world squee in happiness). Democrats almost always get elected when the economy sucks. I WONDER WHY. No really, I do.

Anyways, after reading up on the Civil Rights movement, I suddenly appreciate the fact that he's black ._. and most people who don't probably never bothered to see how bad the USA was.

I'm a democrat, the USA could have elected a rabbit for all I care. I hate the republicans (though not necessarily conservatives).

 

[Dr.Sean]

brb, yelling at dad for voting nobama into office

 

[Hobofisherman]

Just because they were in Guantanimo doesn't make them wrongly accused. They still have to stand trial for what they may or may have not done. You can't let them go scot free because they were ill treated.

Our whole human rights ethic dictates that no one should be treated like those men were, and allowing exceptions is just hypocritical. If not everyone gets it, no one should, but this doesn't excuse them.

This is the first baby step of what will hopefully lead to many more.

 

[MercenaryCanary]

And to think... we could be bitching over something else if Ron Paul got elected.