If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   Obama hits a new low in those who don't have an opinion of him. 59% hate him. 41% love him. 0% have no opinion   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 628
    More: Interesting, President Obama, GfK, disapproval  
•       •       •

3608 clicks; posted to Main » on 27 Mar 2014 at 10:27 AM (17 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



628 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-27 03:46:58 PM

gja: Evil High Priest: gja: Epic Fap Session: gja: Lord_Baull: gja: Cute, but your dumb is showing.
By allowing that place to remain open and operating he IS being tyrannical.
Try again, with more licking of the politician of your choices nuts.

[inigomontoya.jpg]

Oh, meme as an argument. Good. Try growing up.

Do you believe that the president has unilateral authority to close the prison at Gitmo?

I believe that he needs to not stop pushing the issue until something gets done.
And that includes making all possible attempts to get it done. Not what has been done.
Don't be so obtuse as to say there would be total authority needed to make this happen without complete quorum on both sides.

The relevant law is the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA). This statute confirms the president's power to wage war against al-Qaida and its associates, which was initially given to him in the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) passed shortly after 9/11. The NDAA also authorizes the president to detain enemy combatants, and bans him from transferring Guantanamo detainees to American soil.

He could, if he wanted to, just let them all go. Is that what you'd like?

Send them home. Away from us. We know who they are. We know who to watch for.
We also need to not be so fast and loose with human rights violations.
Being so blatantly duplicitous is what costs us 'face' with other countries.


"The NDAA does not, however, ban the president from releasing detainees. Section 1028 authorizes him to release them to foreign countries that will accept them-the problem is that most countries won't, and others, like Yemen, where about 90 of the 166 detainees are from, can't guarantee that they will maintain control over detainees, as required by the law. "

Next?
 
2014-03-27 03:47:28 PM

Nutsac_Jim: cameroncrazy1984: Deep Contact: Agent Nick Fury: cameroncrazy1984: Agent Nick Fury: Deep Contact: JusticeandIndependence: Deep Contact: Actually liked him in the beginning of his first term. Now can't stand looking at him. Lying sack.

I don't really know what you're upset about.  The audit is STILL under review, nothing has been settled permanently, but Issa needs to stfu about thing he knows nothing about, and perhaps you could see that democrats want it looked into as well.  But republicans don't seem too concerned about looking at everything, just the one thing.


But, you'd rather bleat.

Yes.  2 out of 535.  Dems are all over getting to the bottom of the IRS fiasco.


Your concern is noted.
 
2014-03-27 03:48:49 PM

gja: I did all one citizen could


You should probably get more "like minded individuals" to work with you.
 
2014-03-27 03:50:57 PM

LazyMedia: CivicMindedFive: Carn: 59% hate the politician they imagine Obama to be.  If he had an R next to his name and weren't quite so brown, he'd be the second coming of Ronnie St Reagan.  He's pretty close on the spectrum.

What Obama policies or directive are Reaganesque?  Evidence needed.

Making nuclear disarmament a major foreign policy plank. Using  Keynesian deficit spending to get out of a recession. Expanding employer-provided health insurance coverage. Apologizing and paying reparations for past U.S. wrongdoing.

Oh, wait, you asked for Obama policies. Never mind.

/If Teabaggers actually knew what Reagan did in office, they'd call him a socialist.


That is the thinnest gruel just about ever.  You have two things which are flatly unrelated and two which are meh.  So, signing a bi-partisan COBRA bill into law, signing a moderately bi-partisan Japanese reparations bill (with no apology seen anywhere), and his keystone very un-keynsian tax cuts are proof you offer.   Not to mention the first point while ignoring SDI.  No wonder you progs are so delusional.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-27 03:51:28 PM

Epic Fap Session: gja: Epic Fap Session: gja: Epic Fap Session: gja: Lord_Baull: gja: Cute, but your dumb is showing.
By allowing that place to remain open and operating he IS being tyrannical.
Try again, with more licking of the politician of your choices nuts.

[inigomontoya.jpg]

Oh, meme as an argument. Good. Try growing up.

Do you believe that the president has unilateral authority to close the prison at Gitmo?

I believe that he needs to not stop pushing the issue until something gets done.
And that includes making all possible attempts to get it done. Not what has been done.
Don't be so obtuse as to say there would be total authority needed to make this happen without complete quorum on both sides.

Did you run your Weeners through some sort of Sarah Palin quote generator to come up with this absolute gibberish?

Coming from you that is comical. You are so far out there most need binoculars to find your position.

I don't believe the president has the authority to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay without the cooperation of Congress. Since House Republicans refuse to cooperate with any such undertaking, criticizing the president for it is sort of disingenuous. It's like criticizing the Denver Nuggets for not signing Lebron James during the offseason.


As EHP has pointed out he COULD release them. The detail of requiring they maintain control over them to me is less a problem than the stain of our improper detention and the human rights violation it represents.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-27 03:52:45 PM

Satan's Bunny Slippers: gja: I did all one citizen could

You should probably get more "like minded individuals" to work with you.


We did, to be sure. We are likely all on a 'list'. None of us care about that. We like to annoy and demand these assholes earn their money.
 
2014-03-27 03:52:58 PM

gja: Triple Oak: gja: When you take a job like his you know it's a rough ride and there will be things that are hard to do.

How about House Majority Leader? Pretty close, especially considering hierarchy to the presidential position.

Those hard votes like immigration reform, properly negotiated budgets and global sanctions that don't involve war, why aren't those getting done?

It's a hard thing to do, doing a job like that. No excuses.

If you think Guantanamo Bay still being open is Obama's fault for pressing the issue instead of the obstructionist congress for outright rejecting everything he does and supports, you've probably eaten too much paste to reenter reality.

And they should get thrown out on their asses. Let me be clear about my complete and total disgust for all politicians, and their machine.
The obstructionists should be cast out. And ridiculed. And made to account for their acts and the resultant damage.



Clearly, both sides are equally bad. Republicans for not letting Obama do what he campaigned on, Obama for not passing legislation. For whom shall I cast my ballot?
 
2014-03-27 03:53:49 PM
We should start any discussion on the politics tab with this:  If you voted for any ticket that contained Sarah Palin, your opinions mean nothing.  You've lost all credibility.
 
2014-03-27 03:53:51 PM

Ned Stark: Get back here with those goalposts, mate.


I don't think you know what "moving the goalposts" means. I'm expanding my prior gripe about Americans with dumb opinions to include your silly attitude, which I forgot. I'm not changing my opinion on the other group, though.
 
2014-03-27 03:54:26 PM

gja: Let me be clear about my complete and total disgust for all politicians


You hate all politicians, but insist on coming to a politics-focused website to discuss your feelings?
 
2014-03-27 03:56:48 PM

Stuart Wolfe: Wendy's Chili:
Her reluctance to testify doesn't make your lies true.

So her reluctance to testify means - what? Hmm. I'm gonna go with she didn't want to confess under oath that what the IRS has been doing would make Nixon blush for $500, Alex. And the fact that so many of Obama's far-loony supporters, the ones in O-Bot status, see nothing suspicious about it really is a bit worrying. The level of Blind Faith you start seeing in these guys is almost getting to religious levels.

But in any event, when that Bastion of Conservative Thought CNN says something is wrong, why criticizing Obama must be a lie.http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/03/opinion/ken-boehm-irs-scandal-inv estigat ion/

I got links. You got nuthin'. Game over.


That's an opinion piece from a right-wing think-tank, you moron.
 
2014-03-27 03:57:02 PM

hokiethug1992: We should start any discussion on the politics tab with this:  If you voted for, or intended to vote for or did not vote for but supported, any ticket that contained Sarah Palin, your opinions mean nothing.  You've lost all credibility.


Don't want to leave out the special kids that weren't old enough or didn't get Daddy Limbaugh's approval to vote in 2008.
 
2014-03-27 03:58:31 PM

Epic Fap Session: I don't believe the president has the authority to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay without the cooperation of Congress. Since House Republicans refuse to cooperate with any such undertaking, criticizing the president for it is sort of disingenuous. It's like criticizing the Denver Nuggets for not signing Lebron James during the offseason.


So, the first two years of Obama's administration.. when he likely would be attempting his first act as president,
who controlled Congress?
 
2014-03-27 03:59:35 PM

Epic Fap Session: I don't believe the president has the authority to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay without the cooperation of Congress. Since House Republicans refuse to cooperate with any such undertaking, criticizing the president for it is sort of disingenuous. It's like criticizing the Denver Nuggets for not signing Lebron James during the offseason.


Hey, be fair. Many Democrats don't want Gitmo closed, either, and NEITHER DO MOST AMERICANS. The we-want-Gitmo-closed club is pretty exclusive. Gitmo is for Obama kind of what allowing gays in the military was for Bill Clinton. He gave it a shot, and the voice of the great American asshole said NO!
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-27 03:59:57 PM

Lord_Baull: gja: Triple Oak: gja: When you take a job like his you know it's a rough ride and there will be things that are hard to do.

How about House Majority Leader? Pretty close, especially considering hierarchy to the presidential position.

Those hard votes like immigration reform, properly negotiated budgets and global sanctions that don't involve war, why aren't those getting done?

It's a hard thing to do, doing a job like that. No excuses.

If you think Guantanamo Bay still being open is Obama's fault for pressing the issue instead of the obstructionist congress for outright rejecting everything he does and supports, you've probably eaten too much paste to reenter reality.

And they should get thrown out on their asses. Let me be clear about my complete and total disgust for all politicians, and their machine.
The obstructionists should be cast out. And ridiculed. And made to account for their acts and the resultant damage.


Clearly, both sides are equally bad. Republicans for not letting Obama do what he campaigned on, Obama for not passing legislation. For whom shall I cast my ballot?


No, that's not accurate. R's are worse, D's do have culpability, though. In the end they are ALL politicians and that makes them crap (mostly).
Vote your conscience. Vote your values. Vote your beliefs. But vote. Be involved. Make noise. Make them shift uncomfortably at the sight of your name on a letter or email, the sound of your voice on the phone, or seeing you in a crowd in front of them.
 
2014-03-27 04:02:16 PM

Nutsac_Jim: Epic Fap Session: I don't believe the president has the authority to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay without the cooperation of Congress. Since House Republicans refuse to cooperate with any such undertaking, criticizing the president for it is sort of disingenuous. It's like criticizing the Denver Nuggets for not signing Lebron James during the offseason.

So, the first two years of Obama's administration.. when he likely would be attempting his first act as president,
who controlled Congress?


Effectively, Joe Lieberman. He pretty much had veto power over anything passing the Senate, because of the cloture rules. Not exactly a friend of civil liberties for Muslims, the Liebs. He had plenty of friends, too, among conservative Democrats.
 
2014-03-27 04:04:40 PM

Satan's Bunny Slippers: Deftoons: Jeez, I wonder if this has anything to do with the disaster that is Obamacare or his half-hearted efforts on NSA spying.  Hmmmmmm...

Yes, because Daily Caller and Snowden are the wurd.

girrof ya buggah


You don't even need those links to see that insurance premiums are spiking for most while the NSA still has power to spy on citizens despite Obama's half-hearted effort on NSA's bulk collection practices.  But hey, keep calling bias enough and someone will believe ya, right?
 
2014-03-27 04:05:20 PM

LazyMedia: Nutsac_Jim: Epic Fap Session: I don't believe the president has the authority to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay without the cooperation of Congress. Since House Republicans refuse to cooperate with any such undertaking, criticizing the president for it is sort of disingenuous. It's like criticizing the Denver Nuggets for not signing Lebron James during the offseason.

So, the first two years of Obama's administration.. when he likely would be attempting his first act as president,
who controlled Congress?

Effectively, Joe Lieberman. He pretty much had veto power over anything passing the Senate, because of the cloture rules. Not exactly a friend of civil liberties for Muslims, the Liebs. He had plenty of friends, too, among conservative Democrats.


So its Republicans fault because Joe Lieberman the Republican refused to cooperate?
 
2014-03-27 04:06:47 PM

skozlaw: Ned Stark: Get back here with those goalposts, mate.

I don't think you know what "moving the goalposts" means. I'm expanding my prior gripe about Americans with dumb opinions to include your silly attitude, which I forgot. I'm not changing my opinion on the other group, though.


No, you started whining about liking "most" of something but not liking that thing as being somehow hypocritical. As thouggh it is inherently impossible to assign different weight to different facts. A profound failure of logic that should earn you a second year of kindergarten.

And now you're arguing against some imaginary egoist upset that they didn't get a personal phonecall on the matter from the president. This is textbook goalpost moving.
 
2014-03-27 04:07:43 PM

Nutsac_Jim: Epic Fap Session: I don't believe the president has the authority to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay without the cooperation of Congress. Since House Republicans refuse to cooperate with any such undertaking, criticizing the president for it is sort of disingenuous. It's like criticizing the Denver Nuggets for not signing Lebron James during the offseason.

So, the first two years of Obama's administration.. when he likely would be attempting his first act as president,
who controlled Congress?



Jesus, not this shiat again. Conservatives have the memory of a wet ferret.
 
2014-03-27 04:11:21 PM

Evil High Priest: gja: Evil High Priest: gja: Epic Fap Session: gja: Lord_Baull: gja: Cute, but your dumb is showing.
By allowing that place to remain open and operating he IS being tyrannical.
Try again, with more licking of the politician of your choices nuts.

[inigomontoya.jpg]

Oh, meme as an argument. Good. Try growing up.

Do you believe that the president has unilateral authority to close the prison at Gitmo?

I believe that he needs to not stop pushing the issue until something gets done.
And that includes making all possible attempts to get it done. Not what has been done.
Don't be so obtuse as to say there would be total authority needed to make this happen without complete quorum on both sides.

The relevant law is the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA). This statute confirms the president's power to wage war against al-Qaida and its associates, which was initially given to him in the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) passed shortly after 9/11. The NDAA also authorizes the president to detain enemy combatants, and bans him from transferring Guantanamo detainees to American soil.

He could, if he wanted to, just let them all go. Is that what you'd like?

Send them home. Away from us. We know who they are. We know who to watch for.
We also need to not be so fast and loose with human rights violations.
Being so blatantly duplicitous is what costs us 'face' with other countries.

"The NDAA does not, however, ban the president from releasing detainees. Section 1028 authorizes him to release them to foreign countries that will accept them-the problem is that most countries won't, and others, like Yemen, where about 90 of the 166 detainees are from, can't guarantee that they will maintain control over detainees, as required by the law. "

Next?


If only there were this thing called diplomacy...

Personally, I find Gitmo to be an excellent topic for differentiating the partisan from those who can think critically about the behavior of politicians irrespective of party affiliation. There are so many aspects where the former showing their willingness to take things at face value when it aligns with their particular world-view.
 
2014-03-27 04:11:58 PM
Epic Fap Session:

I don't believe the president has the authority to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay without the cooperation of Congress.

There's a lot of things he doesn't have the authority to do without Congress.

Too bad he doesn't realize it.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/01/29/348241/obama-vows-to-close-g ua ntanamo-again/
 
2014-03-27 04:17:26 PM

The Numbers: Evil High Priest: gja: Evil High Priest: gja: Epic Fap Session: gja: Lord_Baull: gja: Cute, but your dumb is showing.
By allowing that place to remain open and operating he IS being tyrannical.
Try again, with more licking of the politician of your choices nuts.

[inigomontoya.jpg]

Oh, meme as an argument. Good. Try growing up.

Do you believe that the president has unilateral authority to close the prison at Gitmo?

I believe that he needs to not stop pushing the issue until something gets done.
And that includes making all possible attempts to get it done. Not what has been done.
Don't be so obtuse as to say there would be total authority needed to make this happen without complete quorum on both sides.

The relevant law is the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA). This statute confirms the president's power to wage war against al-Qaida and its associates, which was initially given to him in the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) passed shortly after 9/11. The NDAA also authorizes the president to detain enemy combatants, and bans him from transferring Guantanamo detainees to American soil.

He could, if he wanted to, just let them all go. Is that what you'd like?

Send them home. Away from us. We know who they are. We know who to watch for.
We also need to not be so fast and loose with human rights violations.
Being so blatantly duplicitous is what costs us 'face' with other countries.

"The NDAA does not, however, ban the president from releasing detainees. Section 1028 authorizes him to release them to foreign countries that will accept them-the problem is that most countries won't, and others, like Yemen, where about 90 of the 166 detainees are from, can't guarantee that they will maintain control over detainees, as required by the law. "

Next?

If only there were this thing called diplomacy...

Personally, I find Gitmo to be an excellent topic for differentiating the partisan from those who can think critically about the behavior of ...


Diplomacy with who, exactly? Countries or origin? (Yemen is out, see above) Third parties? Nobody wants these people.
 
2014-03-27 04:22:59 PM
Obama: Peace at any price.

It's just like what the Democrats wanted. He's just doing what Jesus would do.
 
2014-03-27 04:25:32 PM
As I pointed out previously, the power of the President to pardon or commute sentences is absolute under the constitution, with no review or approval needed by Congress or the courts.  Obama could shut down Gitmo at any time if he's willing to let everybody there go free.  He's not willing to do so, but that choice is with him, not with Congress as he claims.
 
2014-03-27 04:26:42 PM
It's getting awfully concerny in here.
 
2014-03-27 04:28:13 PM

Geotpf: As I pointed out previously, the power of the President to pardon or commute sentences is absolute under the constitution, with no review or approval needed by Congress or the courts.  Obama could shut down Gitmo at any time if he's willing to let everybody there go free.  He's not willing to do so, but that choice is with him, not with Congress as he claims.


I'm sure none of you patriots would be screaming bloody murder about Obama releasing his Muslim buddies to kill Americans should he choose to do so.
 
2014-03-27 04:30:36 PM

Geotpf: As I pointed out previously, the power of the President to pardon or commute sentences is absolute under the constitution, with no review or approval needed by Congress or the courts.  Obama could shut down Gitmo at any time if he's willing to let everybody there go free.  He's not willing to do so, but that choice is with him, not with Congress as he claims.


There's that pesky NDAA again..

"The NDAA does not, however, ban the president from releasing detainees. Section 1028 authorizes him to release them to foreign countries that will accept them-the problem is that most countries won't, and others, like Yemen, where about 90 of the 166 detainees are from, can't guarantee that they will maintain control over detainees, as required by the law. "
 
2014-03-27 04:36:06 PM

LazyMedia: bdub77: Part of Obama's problems appear to be related to foreign policy: The poll shows Americans disapprove of his handling of the situation in Ukraine 57-40 and disapprove of how he handles relationships with other countries 58-40.

Oh they answered that question in the survey, with 45% saying the current sanctions 'about right' and another 10% actually saying they were too strong. 55% of the country thought the sanctions were either about right or too strong.

Then they were asked these questions:

Expanding sanctions against Russia so that they target the Russian economy, including its energy businesses 
Support - 47%
Neither Support nor Oppose - 37%
Oppose - 14%
Refused - 3%

Taking military action against Russia to prevent it from annexing other areas
Support - 13%
Neither Support nor Oppose - 37%
Oppose - 47%
Refused - 3%


Providing military support to nations targeted by Russia
Support - 23%
Neither Support nor Oppose - 40%
Oppose - 34%
Refused - 3%

Providing financial support to nations targeted by Russia
Support - 22%
Neither Support nor Oppose - 41%
Oppose - 34%
Refused - 3%


What if you ask an American a pointed question like "How would you handle the Ukrainian crisis?" Can we at least see the absolute retardation that comes out of their mouth?

In summary, Americans are clueless f*cking idiots.

If Fartbongo would just stop being such a spineless absolute tyrant mom jeans pussy despot, he could use his time machine to go back and use mind control rays on Vladimir Putin, which would have prevented the Ukrainian mess in the first place. Probably could increase our medal count at Sochi, too. But he's too busy playing golf and undermining the Constitution.


Mom Jeans Despots is the name of my surf punk fusion band
 
2014-03-27 04:41:03 PM

Evil High Priest: Nobody wants these people.


And how is it, do you suppose, that we came to build a base for them on Cuba in the first place? Do you think Cubans *wanted* their country to be an unpleasant holiday resort for suspected terrorists?
 
2014-03-27 04:44:34 PM

The Numbers: Evil High Priest: Nobody wants these people.

And how is it, do you suppose, that we came to build a base for them on Cuba in the first place? Do you think Cubans *wanted* their country to be an unpleasant holiday resort for suspected terrorists?


According to Fox News, President Obama decreed it open the day after his inauguration via unconstitutional, impeachable, executive orders.
 
2014-03-27 04:44:40 PM
I wish Grizzly Adams was still president
 
2014-03-27 04:45:20 PM

The Numbers: Evil High Priest: Nobody wants these people.

And how is it, do you suppose, that we came to build a base for them on Cuba in the first place? Do you think Cubans *wanted* their country to be an unpleasant holiday resort for suspected terrorists?


Let's hear your plan, then. Whose arms do we twist, metaphorically speaking? And keep in mind the pesky NDAA law thingy. (Somalia could jump up and down saying they'll take our money, but that pesky law won't allow it.)
 
2014-03-27 04:53:20 PM

Nutsac_Jim: LazyMedia: Nutsac_Jim: Epic Fap Session: I don't believe the president has the authority to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay without the cooperation of Congress. Since House Republicans refuse to cooperate with any such undertaking, criticizing the president for it is sort of disingenuous. It's like criticizing the Denver Nuggets for not signing Lebron James during the offseason.

So, the first two years of Obama's administration.. when he likely would be attempting his first act as president,
who controlled Congress?

Effectively, Joe Lieberman. He pretty much had veto power over anything passing the Senate, because of the cloture rules. Not exactly a friend of civil liberties for Muslims, the Liebs. He had plenty of friends, too, among conservative Democrats.

So its Republicans fault because Joe Lieberman the Republican refused to cooperate?


I already said that Republicans and Democrats (and the American public who backed them) share the blame. The only guy whose fault it WASN'T is Obama.
 
2014-03-27 04:54:14 PM

Evil High Priest: The Numbers: Evil High Priest: Nobody wants these people.

And how is it, do you suppose, that we came to build a base for them on Cuba in the first place? Do you think Cubans *wanted* their country to be an unpleasant holiday resort for suspected terrorists?

Let's hear your plan, then. Whose arms do we twist, metaphorically speaking? And keep in mind the pesky NDAA law thingy. (Somalia could jump up and down saying they'll take our money, but that pesky law won't allow it.)


Why do idiots keep asking "okay, then what's your plan?" or "what would you do about Ukraine, smarty pants?"

Nobody here is running for President.

But Obama ran saying he had answers to all these complex questions but has proven to have been lacking in this area - "I will close Gitmo and I will reset relations with Russia".

Now all we hear is "He's doing his best, not his fault, fark Republicans."

You were sold a bill of goods and are too proud to admit it, I get that, it's human nature.
 
2014-03-27 04:56:01 PM

kidgenius: bdub77:
What if you ask an American a pointed question like "How would you handle the Ukrainian crisis?" Can we at least see the absolute retardation that comes out of their mouth?

In summary, Americans are clueless f*cking idiots.

What? Is "nuking the Kremlin" not a proper response to the Ukraine thing? It shows that America is willing to flex a little muscle.


Let's annex Cuba.
 
2014-03-27 05:02:09 PM
I think Obama has been a pretty good president all things considered.
 
2014-03-27 05:02:37 PM
Turns out, it's a difficult subject. But with some people, there is no such thing as nuance.

Here's some interesting reading, if you're into that kind of thing.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/17 7/ close-the-guantanamo-bay-detention-center/
 
2014-03-27 05:09:28 PM

Evil High Priest: Turns out, it's a difficult subject. But with some people, there is no such thing as nuance.

Here's some interesting reading, if you're into that kind of thing.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/17 7/ close-the-guantanamo-bay-detention-center/


I won't click on that link since politifact.com has already been pointed out in this thread as being a tool of the Republican Party so if I agree or disagree it doesn't matter.
 
2014-03-27 05:18:28 PM
ok, here's the relevant entry for you then.

Executive Order to close Gitmo

Updated: Thursday, January 22nd, 2009 | By Robert Farley

On his second full day in office, President Obama issued an executive order to review the disposition of prisoners being held at the naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and ordered that the detention facility be closed within a year.

According to the administration, closure of the facility is the ultimate goal.  The order establishes a review process with the goal of disposing of the detainees before closing the facility.

According to the White House, "The Order sets up an immediate review to determine whether it is possible to transfer detainees to third countries, consistent with national security.  If transfer is not approved, a second review will determine whether prosecution is possible and in what forum.  The preference is for prosecution in Article III courts or under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), but military commissions, perhaps with revised authorities, would remain an option.  If there are detainees who cannot be transferred or prosecuted, the review will examine the lawful options for dealing with them.  The Attorney General will coordinate the review and the Secretaries of Defense, State, and Homeland Security as well as the DNI and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff will participate."

The order also requires that conditions of confinement at Guantanamo, until its closure, comply with the Geneva Conventions.

"The message that we are sending the world is that the United States intends to prosecute the ongoing struggle against violence and terrorism and we are going to do so vigilantly and we are going to do so effectively and we are going to do so in a manner that is consistent with our values and our ideals," Obama said after signing the order.

The executive order clearly comports with Obama's campaign pledge to close Gitmo, and now sets the timeline for one year. But there is still work to be done, and until the detention center actually closes, we'll keep the status at In the Works.

Sources:
Whitehouse.gov, Executive Order: Review and Disposition of Indiviuals Detained at the Guantanamo Bay Naval base and Closure of Detention Facility , Jan. 22, 2009
 
2014-03-27 05:26:57 PM

Evil High Priest: ok, here's the relevant entry for you then.

Executive Order to close Gitmo

Updated: Thursday, January 22nd, 2009 | By Robert Farley

On his second full day in office, President Obama issued an executive order to review the disposition of prisoners being held at the naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and ordered that the detention facility be closed within a year.

According to the administration, closure of the facility is the ultimate goal.  The order establishes a review process with the goal of disposing of the detainees before closing the facility.

According to the White House, "The Order sets up an immediate review to determine whether it is possible to transfer detainees to third countries, consistent with national security.  If transfer is not approved, a second review will determine whether prosecution is possible and in what forum.  The preference is for prosecution in Article III courts or under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), but military commissions, perhaps with revised authorities, would remain an option.  If there are detainees who cannot be transferred or prosecuted, the review will examine the lawful options for dealing with them.  The Attorney General will coordinate the review and the Secretaries of Defense, State, and Homeland Security as well as the DNI and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff will participate."

The order also requires that conditions of confinement at Guantanamo, until its closure, comply with the Geneva Conventions.

"The message that we are sending the world is that the United States intends to prosecute the ongoing struggle against violence and terrorism and we are going to do so vigilantly and we are going to do so effectively and we are going to do so in a manner that is consistent with our values and our ideals," Obama said after signing the order.

The executive order clearly comports with Obama's campaign pledge to close Gitmo, and now sets the timeline for one year. But there is still work to be ...


But I can't believe that's true.

Politifact.com gave it's 2013 Lie of the Year award to Barrack Obama for saying "If you like your healthcare plan you can keep it."

cameroncrazy1665, Satan's Bunny Diaper, Lord_Bing, and Slaves4Dark all say he never lied and only teabagging Bush lovers say he did.

Who should I believe?
 
2014-03-27 05:29:20 PM

Nutsac_Jim: I'd start with supporting Ukraine.


Okay, so first you'd do exactly the same thing as Obama.

Declaring you are going to ship Natty Gas to Ukraine in lieu of Ukraine shipping Russian gas. Support Ukraine taxing any remaining Russian gas coming in, because Ukraine just lost all those revenue generating ports..etc.

How exactly is is possible to the US to ship enough natural gas to replace what they get from Russia? By saying this all you are doing is demonstrating complete ignorance of the situation, the logistics involved and geography.

Ship maybe 5000 mortors to ukraine, in case they want to prevent border crossings.


Assuming you mean mortars, are you under the impression that the Ukrainian army lacks mortars? Do you even know what a mortar is? I'm not sure how you think a short range indirect fire weapon prevents border crossings. Are you trying to say that 5000 mortars would somehow stop the Russian army?

Maybe thinking about curtailing utilities shipped to ukraine, or taxing them some more.

What utilities? What does this even mean?
 
2014-03-27 05:31:07 PM

Wendy's Chili: Stuart Wolfe: Wendy's Chili:
Her reluctance to testify doesn't make your lies true.

So her reluctance to testify means - what? Hmm. I'm gonna go with she didn't want to confess under oath that what the IRS has been doing would make Nixon blush for $500, Alex. And the fact that so many of Obama's far-loony supporters, the ones in O-Bot status, see nothing suspicious about it really is a bit worrying. The level of Blind Faith you start seeing in these guys is almost getting to religious levels.

But in any event, when that Bastion of Conservative Thought CNN says something is wrong, why criticizing Obama must be a lie.http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/03/opinion/ken-boehm-irs-scandal-inv estigat ion/

I got links. You got nuthin'. Game over.

That's an opinion piece from a right-wing think-tank, you moron.


CNN now promotes right-wing thought. Oh good grief. Do you care to argue the facts in the piece like a man, or simply using names like a second-grader?  We already know speculating as to why Lois Lerner is acting the way she is and what she's hiding is so frightening that all you have is - well, nothing.
 
2014-03-27 05:46:09 PM

Thrag: Maybe thinking about curtailing utilities shipped to ukraine, or taxing them some more.

What utilities? What does this even mean?


I don't know.  What do you think most people think of when they pay utilities every month?

80% of this comes from Ukraine, electricity and water.

If they want to leave so badly, they can get their own.  No more damanding you move out and daddy still has to pay for your college costs.
 
2014-03-27 05:49:54 PM

Lord_Baull: Whatchoo Talkinbout: ChipNASA: [i.imgur.com image 504x360]

Wow, just wow. True, but wow.


I think we've found ChipNASA's alt. Or his mom.


Hardly, just not stuck in your limited mindset.
 
2014-03-27 05:50:06 PM

Agent Nick Fury: But Obama ran saying he had answers to all these complex questions but has proven to have been lacking in this area - "I will close Gitmo and I will reset relations with Russia".

Now all we hear is "He's doing his best, not his fault, fark Republicans."

You were sold a bill of goods and are too proud to admit it, I get that, it's human nature.


He said a lot of things. He's had a lot more accomplishments than failures. I'm still pretty satisfied with my vote.
 
2014-03-27 06:00:55 PM

Nutsac_Jim: Thrag: Maybe thinking about curtailing utilities shipped to ukraine, or taxing them some more.

What utilities? What does this even mean?

I don't know.  What do you think most people think of when they pay utilities every month?

80% of this comes from Ukraine, electricity and water.

If they want to leave so badly, they can get their own.  No more damanding you move out and daddy still has to pay for your college costs.


I notice you completely failed to respond to any of my other points.

You are still making no sense at all. How is "curtailing utilities shipped to Ukraine" supporting the Ukraine? How is cutting off electricity and water from Ukraine (we'll just ignore the fact that this makes no farking sense to begin with) supporting them? Did you mean cutting off utilities to Crimea? If so, how exactly is Obama supposed to do that?
 
2014-03-27 06:04:57 PM
dl.dropboxusercontent.com
 
2014-03-27 06:12:56 PM

Stuart Wolfe: But in any event, when that Bastion of Conservative Thought CNN says something is wrong, why criticizing Obama must be a lie.http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/03/opinion/ken-boehm-irs-scandal-inv estigat ion/

I got links. You got nuthin'. Game over.

That's an opinion piece from a right-wing think-tank, you moron.


CNN now promotes right-wing thought. Oh good grief. Do you care to argue the facts in the piece like a man, or simply using names like a second-grader?  We already know speculating as to why Lois Lerner is acting the way she is and what she's hiding is so frightening that all you have is - well, nothing.


You gotta be trolling, or have you never heard of an editorial? This one happened to be authored by Ken Boehm, the chairman of the National Legal and Policy Center, a right-wing think tank.
 
2014-03-27 06:14:31 PM

LazyMedia: Agent Nick Fury: But Obama ran saying he had answers to all these complex questions but has proven to have been lacking in this area - "I will close Gitmo and I will reset relations with Russia".

Now all we hear is "He's doing his best, not his fault, fark Republicans."

You were sold a bill of goods and are too proud to admit it, I get that, it's human nature.

He said a lot of things. He's had a lot more accomplishments than failures. I'm still pretty satisfied with my vote.


Yep, this.  There are issues where I don't approve of what Obama has done, and issue where I want him to go forward, but on balance, I still think he's probably about a B+ president so far, if he makes it the end of his terms without any major flubs or scandals, that could rise.

That said, it doesn't really matter, because in both of the races he won, the opposition chose to not run a serious, credible candidate.
 
Displayed 50 of 628 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report