Comments for Shhh: Obama may create “classified loophole” for enhanced interrogations »
Posted By pc25 11 months, 3 weeks ago in NewsThe news here is that this isn’t news. Less than a week after the election, rumors were already swirling that he was going to retain the option “in certain cases” to use procedures not authorized by the Army Field Manual
Read Full Story at hotair.com »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 174
-
59%
pc2511 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122636726473415991...
Reply
Intelligence Policy to Stay Largely Intact
WASHINGTON -- President-elect Barack Obama is unlikely to radically overhaul controversial Bush administration intelligence policies, advisers say, an approach that is almost certain to create tension within the Democratic Party.-
61%
Dionys11 months, 3 weeks ago
-
63%
buckncindykill11 months, 3 weeks ago
-
88%
DenCuddy11 months, 3 weeks ago
-
33%
pc2511 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I guess you didnt read this hot shot
Reply
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122636726473415991...
Intelligence Policy to Stay Largely Intact
WASHINGTON -- President-elect Barack Obama is unlikely to radically overhaul controversial Bush administration intelligence policies, ADVISERS say, an approach that is almost certain to create tension within the Democratic Party.
when I see a reply such as yours it reminds me of what a 5th grade teacher of mine used to say when the class used to get a little antsy as she was writing on the blackboard. You would turn and face the class and say "Empty barrels make the most noise" which has been proved time and time again by all the comments you post.-
-
50%
jakesguile11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Funny, before today I hadn't heard of DenCuddy, would this Cuddy happen to be related to the funny one on that show about a drug-addicted doctor with a limp that I like so much?
Reply
My point being that yes "empty barrels make the most noise" so far he's been more silent than you have, Mr. Hotair.
Or are you going to deny the name of the website you got this crap from? Don't, it's indefensible -
33%
HannibalBarca11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
pc.25
Reply
All one has to do is read the second sentence, see that word rumours ???? Yup rumours is what you post as true and that shows me that you are still in the 5th grade.
Your posts are very much like Peyton Place,,,,just a rumour mill is all
-
-
-
-
-
100%
chevydog11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Dionys -- As it happens, politics is politics; this is real life now. In any political contest, a candidate will say what he/she thinks is necessary to be elected. No knock on anyone; that 's just the rather sordid nature of the occupation. Whether what is said is actually believed can run anywhere along the spectrum from unbelief to strong belief. I (and I assume others) heard McC say things that didn't sound like him. I'm not familiar with Obama (who is?) ; but I wouldn't be surprised at all if some of the same was heard in his camp.
Reply
Now GWB at the time of the election was immensely unpopular. So candidate Obama's tactics included painting McC as another Bush (remember McSame?). This in spite of the two of them being considerably different people. Nothing unusual here, just standard politics-- yucky, but that's politics by nature I'm afraid. McC's unlike him statements were meant to pull in voters from the right; candidate O'babma's, from the left.
Anyway, when all was said and done, everyone heard what they wanted to hear and candidate Obama was elected. Now he has to govern. It doesn't surprise me that some of his more leftish constituency seem to be dismayed because he doesn't now seem to be as far along their path as they thought he was. At the risk of being very cynical-sounding, nothing is impossible if you don't have to do it yourself.
Seems to me that at this juncture we need is something that works. IMHO, ideology (of either the left or right) is going to be more a hinderance than a help. Obama seems to me to be a decent type, certainly not the devil incarnate, though he's woefully inexperienced (again not a problem to those who never have had to lead anything) and doesn't mesh with all my beliefs. So smile and cheer up. Lack of hosannas doesn't necessarily mean hostility. -
-
-
-
-
-
33%
crespi11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
BigBadJohnSatan-
Reply
I guess you haven't been watching Bush's exit speeches where he says one thing and then someone shows the older footage of Bush saying exactly the opposite. Many times.
THAT is lying, again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again.
WATCH BUSH'S OLD SPEECHES AND PRESS "BRIEFINGS" THEN WATCH HIS LEGACY TOUR INTERVIEWS.
If you like lies so much...
-
-
-
-
65%
pc2511 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/11/wsj-obama-ma...
Reply
FTA
Clinton, who famously (or, rather, not famously) endorsed coercive interrogation two years ago in ticking bomb scenarios provided there’s some oversight mechanism like FISA review. Alan Dershowitz had the same idea, going so far as to propose “torture warrants” for exceptional cases. If The One does in fact load up his cabinet with old Clinton hands like Emanuel and Lawrence Summers at Treasury, and if it’s true that he’s made taking out Bin Laden a top priority, some variation on the Billy Jeff plan would be an obvious way to let him maneuver in extracting info from “difficult” subjects on Osama’s whereabouts or other pressing matters.-
-
80%
frctm511 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Torture is ineffective for yielding intelligence. A far more reliable method is confidence building. There is no reason to pursue a policy that doesn't deliver results that can be relied upon. Those who advocate torture frequently do so under some perverse notion that it is getting tough with terrorists. This is not about revenge but about interdiction and effectiveness. The previous administration was obtuse and more concerned with projecting an image of toughness than with upholding our values or obtaining results. It plays well to a certain audience but is not an effective tool for fighting terrorism.
Reply-
100%
slate11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I think the best way to get any Muslim prisoner to talk without bodily is to threaten them with force feeding them bacon and ham.
Reply
No injuries would occur and more than likely they would talk instead of be defiled.
This isn't a bigoted remark, just a notion. Do you think it would work? Yes or no?
Other religions may have similar things that could be done to get them to talk.-
80%
frctm511 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
No, I don't think this would be affective. Any form of coercion or humiliation is likely to be met with resistance or contempt. Such a practice would be interpreted as anti-Muslim and would be a propaganda victory for the Muslim extremists. One of our best interrogators in Iraq never used coercive techniques. The most effective tool is to gain trust and confidence of the detainee. The important thing to keep in mind is that these interrogations are not about revenge but preventing other attacks and gaining actionable intelligence. Torture is not effective for this purpose and it is contrary to our principles as a country and a people. It degrades the victim but also the perpetrator. American must maintain the moral high ground in this struggle. I hear so many people say "Well they don't treat our people any better". To this I have to say, why would we want to be like them? Should we have constructed concentration camps during world war two and herded Germans into these for gassing? Most calls for torture are made for emotional reasons and not rational ones.
Reply-
100%
slate11 months, 3 weeks ago
-
67%
crespi11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Slate-
Reply
I once had the idea of tranfusing the Muslim terrorist with Jewish woman's blood and telling them they are now unclean in the eyes of Allah and now can never go to martyr Heaven.
People got mad at me for some reason.
I really thought it might work... -
75%
frctm511 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You miss the point. Torture is not effective and gaining trust is. The exact method of obtaining confidence is a matter for the trained professionals to decide and probably unique for every situation. I am not an interrogator but I am simply relating what I have heard in an interview with this particular interrogator and the consensus view among experts in the field of intelligence. The gas chamber comment is just to make the point that what our enemies do does not justify emulation. I am not comparing ham and bacon to gas chambers. People who advocate torture or other extreme responses are motivated by anger or revenge. We should not be in the business of revenge. The use of torture by our intelligence community is not warranted for any reason. It isn't effective for obtaining intelligence and it isn't consistent with our principles.
Reply-
100%
slate11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
People who advocate torture or other extreme responses are motivated by anger or revenge.
Reply
On the contrary it's about information to stop future attacks happening, not anger or revenge.
Would you not want the government to do everything they can to stop your town from a 9/11 type attack or worse?-
100%
frctm511 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yes. That is why they should not engage in torture since it is not effective. But beyond that, we still must place limits on what we mean by everything they can. You reach a point where the cure is worse than the disease. There is an inherent risk to living in an open society that values due process and individual liberty. I would rather live with the risk of another 9/11 than live in a police state or a perpetual state of fear and paranoia.
Reply-
100%
slate11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I would rather live with the risk of another 9/11 than live in a police state or a perpetual state of fear and paranoia.
Reply
Really? so for you to feel that way you'd have no problem risking the lives of others?
Interesting.
Can I ask do you have family? If so are you willing to chance their fate to fell superior to those that may do them harm?-
100%
frctm511 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There are trade offs in every equation. Living in a police state carries its own risks. Aside from that, the threat from terrorism pales in comparison to the threat from heart disease. I am not suggesting we don't need to pay attention to this threat, but there is a difference between vigilance and hysteria. No matter how many security measures we take, we can't guarantee that another terrorist attack will not occur and at some point these measures themselves become a threat to our quality of life. Giving too many police powers to the government becomes a slippery slope. The odds of dying in a terrorist attack are much smaller than dying in a traffic accident. There is no reason to be obsessive about this. I never said we should do nothing, I just don't believe that torture has any legitimate role in fighting terror. It is contrary to our principles as a nation. The precedent for this was set by George Washington himself. Every time we drive a car, we risk the lives of others but we manage risk. The value of mobility that the car provides more the offsets risk of death that it brings in national traffic fatalities. Do you drive a car? If you do, you have no problem risking the lives of others as well. The risk is acceptable in proportion to the pay off. You abide by this principle and so do I. We just differ in its application.
Reply -
-
-
0%
HannibalBarca11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I visited Washington DC in thee late 60's and had no problem walking down Penn. Ave., try it now,,,while it may not be a police state it is a highly controlled city,,as are many others, this is in my life time.
Reply
To those that are younger,,,this controlled city is the norm for them;, just wonder what it will be like when they reach my age....I can hear them say,,,when I was younger we only had cement traffic controls or something similar.
Yes freedoms have been taken away, it is there to see....are they necessary,,,probably but I don't like em, and more will come,,,,but at a snails pace, not over night unless another 9/11 happens
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
65%
pc2511 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA
Reply
For Obama, who repeatedly insisted during the 2008 presidential campaign and the transition period that “America doesn’t torture,” a classified loophole would allow him to back up his vow to end harsh interrogations while retaining a full range of presidential options in conducting the war against terrorism.........How is Obama upholding his vow to end harsh interrogations if he’s not ending harsh interrogations? All he’s doing is scaling it down from the level of official policy to an ad hoc contingency, which makes it even more arbitrary and potentially abused.-
-
-
-
75%
crespi11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
4thchance-
Reply
Are you echoing Bush's comment "the Constitution is just another GODDMANED piece of paper?'
Your inapproproiate resopnse to unfounded speculation kind of reminds everyone of that phrase used by the outgoing President who swore on the Bible to "uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States..."
In the future I would reccomend some OTHER curse phrase for your inappropriate rage.
-
-
-
-
-
-
100%
slate11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Why are you worried about the negs? Heck you and I can agree on one post and then we can neg other posts.
Reply
I think that 'maybe' the Obama is Hitler could well be a tit for tat thing since now the roles are reversed since the election.
Welcome to the other side of the coin. I actually like not having to defend the actions of someone I voted for on a daily basis for a change.
BTW what do you consider Paling around?
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
58%
RedRiverJ11 months, 3 weeks ago
-
61%
pc2511 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I think he is all talked out after the campaign, besides it gets harder and harder to lie, or lets use the politically correct term "bend the truth" and expect the left to continue to believe you after they have seen you to back track on campaign promise after campaign promise. The next one is coal.........
Reply-
50%
4thchance11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well, Obama has a brisk wake up call coming very soon. He will no longer be able to avoid the TOUGH QUESTIONS. After he's sworn in, then he's going to be FORCED to stop hiding and will be forced to answer the goddamn questions for once! Then things will be getting interesting....
Reply-
33%
jakesguile11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Indeed, perhaps a few stupid people will realize he has nothing to hide, and their faces will be so beet-red with anger and frustration and embarassment that their hair catches fire and their brain explodes.
Reply
You might want to splurge on an enema 4th, you wouldn't want to get brain up your buttcrack now, would you?-
60%
4thchance11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Bambam has MUCH to hide and lie about. No need to beleive me, you will soon learn that all on your own.
Reply
By the way,
What's up with your fixation on the rear end of other men anyway?
Are you one of those stinkin', well, lets be PC about this, GAY GUYS?
-
-
-
-
RRconComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned
-
-
-
-
53%
nostalgia11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA:
Reply
Rev. Richard Killmer “We don’t need to be able to torture and we don’t need to engage in any interrogation techniques that are not humane. And unless we have absolute clarity that these interrogation techniques will not be used"
Killmer is going to wait a very long time to get "absolute clarity" from Obama on anything
Wiggle, wiggle, squirm, squirm, twist, twist and spin, spin are more like it-
67%
wtagg11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
So please elaborate how this is any different from our previous presidents.
Reply
Again, the best the complainers can do is believe that it will be as equally bad as before. The US voted for the new boss just like they voted for the old boss. Your Obama complaints are about the things that allegedly made you happy with Bush. Now that's irony.-
-
50%
wtagg11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Then why are you worried about what hasn't happened yet? Will it happen, Quite possibly, maybe even probably. Has it happened yet? No.
Reply
Now let's talk about the fiscal policies of the current president. Has it happened? Yes. Now that in practice is hypocrisy. The best you have with Obama currently is future hypocrisy. In the end, my point is that they are the same and you have done nothing but to point out that politicians seems to excel in that arena.
Funny that the american public is so willing to support hypocrisy that the evidence in the voting record would point out that you are 100% wrong in hypocrisy being the worst crime. Evidence would point to it being an accepted attribute of a politician.
"How quickly one forgets when their guy or gal is involved."
Seems that you have already forgotten considering your man that is currently in office.-
100%
slate11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Oh yeah fro 3 more days,,, then Obama will continue in Bush's footsteps,,,,,,, via the Clinton Administration, which also used strong coercive techniqques to garner information.
Reply
Is this the 'change' Obama talked about and you lauded him for?-
33%
crespi11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Still pushing Neocon rhetoric speculation against Obama while ignoring the current obvious real trangressions of Bush/Cheney, I see...
Reply
Obama could give his inauguration wearing a yamulka and in white-face and it couldn't match Bush's hypocracy and lies.-
100%
slate11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Now hold up,, I haven't ignored everything Bush has done,,,,,, you guys are already turning a blind eye to what Obama has done in his transition.
Reply
- The Clinton Administration redox,,,,,,
- Hawkish Cabinet Members
- One Cabinet Member having to bow out in shame before he even started.
- One hasn't paid his taxes! Good Gawd the CRY out of your lips when you found out a mere plumber was delinquent on his taxes, especially after asking 'that' question of Obama? Now this guy is going to be the head of the IRS and enforce the rules and put 'even' you in jail for doing the same thing?
- Then the real kicker....... Sandy the Burglar?
Ah yeah Rhetoric all huh?
I got yer Rhetoric.-
50%
wtagg11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You seem to purposefully ignore one fact that I have repeated to you many times.
Reply
I voted for Ron Paul.
Again, Obama hasn't done anything yet. On Monday, go for it. Until then, deal with the president you voted for and is in office. A liberal.-
100%
slate11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I was replying to Crespi if you didn't notice...... Errrrrrr I didn't vote for a liberal. BTW Bush will be in office on Monday and Paul is still a hypocrite,,,,, he puts pork in bills then votes against the same bill because it has pork in it.
Reply
How many votes did Paul get on election night besides yours?-
Neutral
wtagg11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If you have voted for McCain or Bush, you voted for a liberal, as defined by their actions. Just because someone tries on a hat that says conservative doesn't mean they are a conservative.
Reply
"he puts pork in bills then votes against the same bill because it has pork in it."
Is that worse than putting pork in a bill and voting for it?
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
PsychoHosebeastComment removed: Spammer, Abusive8 Replies
-
64%
GLee11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You call it a 'loophole' and I call it 'protection of Americans'. Don't be nieve and think this 'interrogation' thing is going away or that by closing Gitmo there won't be any terrorist detention facilities outside of the US. Certain people will always do what is needed to protect this country. Be 'certain' of that..... what will be and needs to be done is keeping these little secrets secret. That will keep Obama 'clean' in the eyes of his 'people'.
Reply-
50%
wtagg11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Certain people will always do what is needed to protect this country. "
Reply
Just as certain people will continue to use the same rationale to do things that do not protect this country. Yes, they are also high ranking government officials. Including presidents.-
100%
slate11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well let's see, 6 years and not another attack on our soil after 9/11. Who would have thought that possible six years ago right after we woke up from the shock of that day?
Reply
Let's see how Obama does. I wish him well in his endeavors and hope hs can continue that streak. I hope he understands what's at stake and does what's deemed necessary to accomplish that goal.
God Speed MY president. I support you but I'm watching, if it's PROVEN (not just accused) that you were or are untruthful or hypocritical I will call you on it as you and others on the left have done for Bush.-
Neutral
wtagg11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Well let's see, 6 years and not another attack on our soil after 9/11."
Reply
Though such a statement can be made, it doesn't necessarily mean that actual attacks were demonstratively thwarted. Of course, it can be stated that an attack did occur during his watch. If you want to pursue the idea that it wasn't Bush's responsibility, the 93 attack has to be pushed back to Bush the 1st's responsibility. Either way, there's a Bush that that allowed an attack on US soil.
How many attacks not on US soil are the responsibility of Bush's?
I would think that you should be vigilante with any president, left, right, center.
-
-
-
-
64%
k9kssr11 months, 3 weeks ago
-
50%
gwhiddon11 months, 3 weeks ago
-
54%
nostalgia11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
How many headlines have you seen about this?
Reply
Bailed-Out Banks Donating To Obama's Inauguration
Citibank executives, who are expected to ask for another billion-dollar federal bailout on top of the $45 billion in rescue funds they received in November, are trying to buy the goodwill of Barack Obama -- or they just want to help the president-elect throw the best inauguration party in history.
Of the hundreds of banks and firms which have received bailout money, Citibank
employees have contributed the most to Obama's inauguration fund -- at least $113,000 as of Wednesday.
Among those contributions is $50,000 from Ray McGuire, Citi's co-head of global investment banking, and $50,000 from Louis Susman, the recently-retired vice chairman of Citigroup.
Other bailed-out banks, which have contributed to the inauguration fund, include Goldman Sachs ($44,500), JPMorgan Chase ($30,600), and Wells Fargo ($2,450).
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/14/bailed-ou...-
83%
DenCuddy11 months, 3 weeks ago
-
-
-
-
-
100%
wtagg11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yes. If the admin doesn't spend the funds, they never get spent. So the admin is the last barrier to spending. They can choose not to spend. So, when it comes to actually writing the check, it is the admin. Congress deposits the money into the account that the check will be drawn from.
Reply
Are they both to blame? Certainly. Are the two candidates from the rep and dem parties to blame. Certainly. Did I vote for someone who supported the bailout. No.
You?-
100%
slate11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yes I did, considering that I was told the countries financial industry would collapse I thought it was a bitter pill that needed to be swallowed.
Reply
Now I am against the bailouts after finding out what the truth is. You gonna sue me or call me bad names for that mistake? Or maybe just gloat some?-
50%
wtagg11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Please feel free to cite a bad name I've called you. It seems to me that you are frustrated. Finding out later is better than not finding out.
Reply
You either regulate or you don't. Both systems have good and bad. You can't mix them because it disables the checks and balances within the system. The only thing we are doing currently is rewarding those that failed. It is exactly like providing a check to someone who isn't working which I know you don't support.
I'm not gloating. You think I supported and voted for Obama. You've stated as much. I have to constantly remind you that I didn't. My candidate was branded a kook. It really makes me wonder about all the other candidates and what they really represented.
The status quo. Of course, that includes the president elect.
Hypocrisy, as we have discussed elsewhere, is rampant with the faction that lost the election. They are complaining that the president elect is allegedly going to continue the policies that they supported. It makes one have to wonder if it isn't about the actions of the man, but about just the man.
Stop believing what you are told and come to a conclusion using your own logic and rationale.
You've done your share of gloating. -
-
-
-
80%
nostalgia11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Doesn't matter what the administration requests
Reply
Appropriations are entirely the responsibility of Congress under the constitution
The Republican Congress was entirely responsible for overspending the first 5 years under Bush and the Democratic congress was entrely responsible for the overspending the last 2 years - including the first $350 billion of the bailout
So are you blaming Obama for asking Bush to request the second $350 billion??
The Senate already voted and authorized it. The House votes next week - under cover of the inauguration most likely
If it passes the total responsibility is with Congress
They failed in their oversight function with the first $350 billion on top of authorizing it
Think they are going to do any better this time?? The Senate didn't seem to care
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
75%
slate11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Bush is called a war criminal over some of his decisions (gitmo, etc), Obama won't be.
Reply
I think you are right about that. Obama will be given every chance possible and things that he does that mirror Bush will be considered 'different'.
-
-
43%
LABELDUDE11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The only fair way to do this is to have the U.S.A. use, in each case, the exact same methods used by the country of origin of the individual in custody. That way, U.S.A. liberals can whine and shout about the methods used with U.S. Citizens. All others captives will be comfortable and certainly respect the methods used by their own countries and our liberals can concern themselves with the U.S.A. Citizens and maybe Glomal Worming, too..
Reply-
-
-
stalemateComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
-
-
86%
DenCuddy11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I'll ask him when I see him today.
Reply
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation/politics/b...
I will be there and let Obama know about PC25's sedition. LOL! -
60%
4thchance11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What this means is that Obama promised to stop the torture, but he will only make it appear that he's stopping it. Behind the scenes it will still be allowed. That is not what Obama promised. Obama did promise change. I guess one needs to pay very close attention to the meaning of the word change. This is exactly why we/the media should have been MUCH more forceful that Obama explain the details of his plans. The media seemed to refuse to ask Obama any tough questions, now we see why. This is why Obama would avoid Fox News reporters, because those reporters would be asking him the tough questions that Obama simply refused to answer and or was never asked. I beleive this is just the beginning of Obama NOT making good on his pie in the sky promises. You Betcha, CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN...what a freakin JOKE! Oh well, live and learn...
Reply
OK Dems, let me have it with all your name calling and negative ratings.-
-
-
100%
wtagg11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"What this means is that Obama promised to stop the torture, but he will only make it appear that he's stopping it. Behind the scenes it will still be allowed. That is not what Obama promised. Obama did promise change."
Reply
Compared to the current practice, it is change.
Maybe you would get better ratings if you used better logic. I get great ratings and I am a gazillions times more conservative than you, but then again, you aren't conservative.
-
-
50%
MILITA11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I AM INCENSED THAT OBAMA IS ABOUT TO BECOME
Reply
PRESIDENT AND HE IS NOT CONSITUTIONALLY ELIGIBLE
TO BE PRESIDENT BECAUSE OF THE ISSUE OF HIS
BIRTH CETIFICATE. THE SUPREME COURT HAD A TIGER
BY HIS TAIL AND DID NOT HAVE A PLAN AND BACK-UP[
PLAN FOR DEALING WITH HIS TEETH. THEY ARE ALREADY
TALKING ABOUT AMENDING THE CONSTITUTION TO GIVE
HIM TWO MORE TERMS. GOD HELP US ALL.
PHYLLIS KUNZ
PHYLLIS KUNZ-
67%
jakesguile11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Wow, six minutes. And I thought that 90-minute a$$hole the other day was bad.
Reply
Please please please do us all a favor and never reproduce. I have a fun game you can play, it's called mutilate-the-genetalia.
The Supreme Court threw the thing out because it was a stupid, friviolous lawsuit with no grounding in real life. He couldn't have run in the FIRST F*CKING place if he wasn't a US citizen. He could run and THEREFORE he is a US citizen, SIMPLE as that. Do you REALLY think this country would let something like that slip through the cracks? For Nine Months? If it was true? We had Hillary, we'd have gone with the safe bet (in case you think it was a conspiracy to keep it covered up) There is no POINT to it, you DEFY logic. Please, go slap your Special Ed teacher, they're obviously underqualified.
-
-
60%
4thchance11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If I knew that Obama was going to go down this road, I probably would have voted for him.
Reply
Looks to me he's not going to change much of anything really. Looks alot like the Bush plan to me.
Heck, perhaps Obama may end up being a good president after all!
OK Dems, let me have it with all your name calling and negative ratings.-
-
-
-
100%
wtagg11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"If I knew that Obama was going to go down this road, I probably would have voted for him.
Reply
Looks to me he's not going to change much of anything really. Looks alot like the Bush plan to me.
Heck, perhaps Obama may end up being a good president after all!"
Thanks for making my point that you are a liberal.
-
-
peterj54Comment removed: Spammer
-
-
FrauBlucherComment removed: Retracted by user2 Replies
-
55%
4thchance11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here's what I think happened, why Bambam Obama is now back peddling on his promises.
Reply
Once he was briefed by the CIA/FBI on security and the terror threats we face, Obama finally gets it. Now he realizes he can NOT do what he thought he could do. Hey, I'm trying to give Bambam the benefit of the doubt and a way out here. But I expect you Dems to call me names and give me lots of Negs just the same.
I think our Bambam is very naive is what I think, but that's what we get for electing someone who has no experience. LIVE & LEARN... -
67%
xddy4ux11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This isn't about keeping Bush's Policy, it's about violating the Geneva Accord signed after WWII. That's what NATO is trying to get back to. Obama isn't going to boldly violate this. Bush got NATO and the UN looking a bunch of fools, supporting his stupid (S)hit. They are depending on Obama to bring back integrity. And he will.
Reply -
43%
noliberlasman11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
WHAT IS WITH AOL AND ALLL THE LEFT WINGS NEWS OUT THERE IT SEEMS YOU CANT GET ENOUGH OF THIS MAN I FOR ONE AM SICK OF IT
Reply
YOU SHOULD TALK ABOUT THE HATE FULL CHURCH THIS JOKE WENT TO ABOUT BILL AIRS ALL THE OTHERS THIS MAN AND HIS WIFE WERE HANGING OUT WITH
I FOR ONE AM TELLING AOL AND ALL THE REST OF THE SICK LEFT
THIS IS WHY PEPOLE HAVE LEFT YOU AS A ISP WHY NEWS PAPERS ARE GOING OUT
I DONT CARE FOR THIS MAN HE TALKS A GOOD LINE OF ****
BY THE WAY HILTER TALK REAL GOOD AND LOOK WHERE IT GOT THE GERMAN PEPOLE.
INSANE PEOPLE THAT FOLLOW THIS MAN YOU ALL FOOLS
IT SICKEN ME AS A AMERCAN TO SEE THIS
WHEN FREEDOM SPEACH IS GONE LET SEE HOW MUCH YO UWORSHIP THIS
MAN-
-
100%
jakesguile11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Caps lock my friend, that anger will kill you..... and dude, AOL lost people because they're neoconservative pieces of sh*t like yourself. I for one am sick of hearing you prattle on. Please, please, please find an insane asylum somewhere to drop dead unnoticed in.
Reply
-
-
-
43%
noliberlasman11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
BY THE WAY ALL YOU BUSH HATERS
Reply
TELL WHY THIS GUY IS NOT GET RID OF SOME OF BUSH
TOP SECURITY PEPOLE
MAYBE BUSH DID A GOOD JOB
SAFE COUNTRY HA AFTER THE CLINTON AND HIS CLOWNS GUTED THE CIA
THANK YOU GWB FOR KEEPINF USE SAFE
YOU LEFTS R A SICK BUNCH-
67%
wtagg11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually, as nostalgia points out above, it is congress that approves expenditures. Thank them for reducing funding in the CIA.
Reply
Quite frankly, I don't think more money would have helped an apparent project management issue.
Also, when the CIA provides some info, you need to listen to it for the info to be effective.
Please allow your dad to get back on the computer.
-
-
60%
crespi11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually, after Clinton captured 5 out of 6 of the 1993 WTC bombers we had no more terrorist attacks on American soil during his administration.
Reply
SO CLINTON'S RECORD ON THAT PARTICULAR POINT IS EXACTLY AS GOOD AS BUSH'S.
You also might want to get checked for rabies...or at least a hearing test.... -
-
67%
nepetro11 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Of course course he'll keep the option open, he's not going to let innocent Americans die because of a few vocal lefty's, it would be political suicide. I don't care if he parses his words to satisfy non-Americans (that includes leftist fanatics) about how he'll do it, as long as he does what he has to in order to keep us safe.
Reply -
-
67%
icono111 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This is turly to good to be true;
Reply
FTA
"...a classified loophole..."
WTF is 'a classified loophole'? Is this,'a classified loophole', something that actually exists or is this cryptic word smithing disguised as PC speak.
As for torture;
"All he’s doing is scaling it down from the level of official policy to an ad hoc contingency, which makes it even more arbitrary and potentially abused."
Well yes. When you go from 'policy' to 'ad-hoc' the oversight gloves are off. This leaves room for all kinds of stuff to happen. -
LibertyKnightComment removed: Spam
loading ...
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.