Obama's Gitmo - WSJ.com »
Posted By pc25 7 months, 3 weeks ago in NewsHelen Thomas: Why is the president blocking habeas corpus from prisoners at Bagram? I thought he taught constitutional law. And these prisoners have been there . . .
Robert Gibbs: You're incorrect that he taught on constitutional law.
You know we live in interesting times when Helen Thomas is going after Barack Obama. Miss Thomas was asking the White House press secretary last week why detainees at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan should not have the same right to challenge their detention in federal court that last year's Supreme Court ruling in Boumediene v. Bush gave to Guantanamo's detainees.
Read Full Story at online.wsj.com »
242 Views Share Story 28 Comments Report
Who Also Submitted: All »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 28 (view all)
-
-
60%
jaspersneed7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The Left won't bother to spin it: they will allow water-carriers for the status quo like the WSJ's editorial board to spin it for them.
Reply
FTA: "Put simply, the U.S. needs the ability to detain people we know to be dangerous without the evidence that might stand up in a federal criminal court. Because we can't say when this war will end, moreover, we also need to be able to detain them indefinitely."
After basically recounting everyone's conflicting positions and declaring them all, including Glenn Greenwald, who routinely assails the WSJ's perfidy, to be "right", McGurn descends into fatuous fantasy-land in concluding the U.S. "needs the ability" because...... well, because it needs the ability. He doesn't say why. He doesn't need to. It's the "war on terror"....... "We don't know when it will end"..... it's a "new kind of combatant"......It's.... it's..... it's "put simply".
The Obamanites and the "left" needn't worry about spin on this issue. The Neocons have had 8 years of practice and, feckless opportunists that they are, will happily continue at it for the new gang in charge.
-
-
-
-
75%
nostalgia7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Obama stated at a March 30, 2007 fundraiser that "I was a constitutional law professor, which means unlike the current president I actually respect the Constitution."
Reply
LOL the Grand Poobah was not telling the truth?
Shocking, absolutely shocking
And I recall a liberal right here on Propeller telling me that Obama was a constitutional scholar because he had been a constitutional law professor! A liberal on Propeller lying - what is the world coming to??
-
-
-
-
73%
stephen-johnson7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
During the presidential campaign last year, Obama made such a big deal about closing Gitmo that one would have thought that his braintrust had a solution to the problem that they could hit the ground running with after the election. No such luck - we have to wait until next year. And somehow, Bagram has slipped under the faithful's radar.
Reply
The situation in Bagram is a mirror image to Gitmo - without the mirror, that is.
Sooner or later, the country will tire of a president who is always hopping on Air Force One, in full campaign mode, and ask him to stay put.
"He can run, but he can't hide"
-Joe Louis. -
57%
Pecossam7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My Dear Fellow Propeller-Heads:
Reply
Robert Gibbs to Helen Thomas: "You're incorrect that he (Obama) taught on constitutional law."
Well, well, well. What do the Obamamites think about THAT? Perhaps that's the reason he never authorized the release of the articles he wrote while he was editor of the "Harvard Law Review": THERE WERE NONE TO RELEASE?! I believe either that is the case OR his articles leaned so far to the LEFT that their release would GUARANTEE he'd NEVER step into the White House as America's President. It would explain MUCH about "THE ONE", wouldn't it? And it always seemed out of character for a purported Professor of Constitutional Law to so cavalierly IGNORE and DISREGARD the Constitution. This marks Mr. "57 states" as a living, walking, breathing LIE (as evidenced by all of his backpedaling on the issues since taking office and his INABILITY to address the public coherently WITHOUT his teleprompter or a prepared statement). Imitation is said to be the most sincerest form of flattery, and if so, Obama pays tribute to former President George W. Bush nearly everyday as far as economic policies (T.A.R.P. for one).
Ah, the poor Eden-Minded Obamamites were DUPED by their messiah, "THE ONE", which is what happens when one falls for promises of a path to UTOPIA. And we CONSERVATIVES tried to warn them, but all they could think to do in reply was to laugh at us and call us names. I'd laugh now at their collective folly, but the situation OBAMA is exacerbating daily is TOO DIRE for laughter. America thanks YOU, Obamamites, for making a serious situation WORSE! And all because most of you had a bad case of the "Government Gimmes".-
67%
ind067 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
As with doctors and lawyers there exists a complex "chain of command" or power structure within academia, most of your professors in a typical department do not have the official title of professor, but complicated seniority based designations like 'guest lecturer' or 'junior associate professor' with only the top tier being actual full professors. As their pay is based on these job descriptions as well as their ability to teach what they damn well please, especially some seminar they just dreamed up on a topic they've been doing research on (which allows them to get paid for what they would do as a hobby), you'll find most professors are very touchy about these titles, despite the fact that the general title for a university of college instructor is professor, much the same as you call the intern who treats you 'doctor', because he or she IS a doctor, just a doctor with the OFFICIAL designation of 'intern'.
Reply
Pesident Obama referred to himself as a 'professor', which he was, though his official academic level designation was 'senior lecturer'. No one has been duped, any more than you could consider yourself duped and/or lied to if your lawyer said he was a "lawyer" and not a "senior partner".
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/was_barack_o...
-
-
75%
k9kssr7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Quote by Glenn Greenwald FTA: "But these actions -- these contradictions between what he said and what he is doing, the embrace of the very powers that caused so much anger towards Bush/Cheney -- are so blatant, so transparent, so extreme, that the only way to avoid noticing them is to purposely shut your eyes as tightly as possible and resolve that you don't want to see it, or that you're so convinced of his intrinsic Goodness that you'll just believe that even when it seems like he's doing bad things, he must really be doing them for the Good."
Reply
Sound like anyone we know?
So, if he didn't teach CONSTITUTIONAL law, what did he TEACH (I see no point in arguing the semantics of professor vs. lecturer)? And why have we been lead, all this time, to believe that was what he taught? Why the subterfuge? He's had more than 2 years to correct the information.
Flip-flop, flip-flop, flip-flop.-
Neutral
kobzikov7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Sound like anyone we know?"
Reply
Yep, I'm actually fairly impressed with what he has done so far, after all Republicans said that he was just like Bush and he already proved to be a lot better on both the detainment and torture issue. I didn't vote for Obama for him to lead even on the issues of following the Constitution. I voted for him, because Obama can be forced to do the right thing through public pressure.
"So, if he didn't teach CONSTITUTIONAL law, what did he TEACH (I see no point in arguing the semantics of professor vs. lecturer)? And why have we been lead, all this time, to believe that was what he taught? Why the subterfuge? He's had more than 2 years to correct the information."
He taught Constitutional law.
"His schedule from the school shows him teaching two or three classes in the fall and winter terms — usually Constitutional Law III: Equal Protection and Substantive Due Process; Voting Rights and the Democratic Process; and Current Issues in Racism and the Law."
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/20...
The point here is what jaspersneed said, Gibbs is either misinformed or lied, but he cut her off so that he didn't have to answer the question about the administration's position.
-
-
-
KlarissaComment removed: Spam
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.