What is Obama waiting for? LET'S GET OUT!

[Jhhnn]

I would prefer him to either do what he promised, or come out and say he made promises without understanding the complete picture, and now he sees he cannot keep these promises.

I would love to see his explaination as to why he cannot wait a few days until signing laws, like he promised (and immediately violated wrt the Obamacare law). That would be some creating dancing.

Cite that promise.

I would also like to hear his explaination as to why the commander-in-chief cannot order the military to move military prisoners to a new location and close a military prison.

Ignorance is bliss- Google "Congress blocks transfer of detainees"

Is it too much to ask that a president do what he promised to do? Apparently, you are fine with being lied to about easily done things, I am not.

Is it too much to ask that you realize the President is not omnipotent?

If that's all Repubs have to complain about, then Obama has done a great job, and they're utterly desperate.

Shucks- I remember GWB campaigning on a "Stay at Home" foreign policy, and we wuz gonna have hydergin, while we wuz goin' to Mars! Not to mention that Ronnie decried the then $1T national debt before he tripled it...

 

[cybrsage]

Cite that promise.

The sunset before signing promise.

As I noted two months back, the Obama Administration has failed to make good on its promise for "Sunlight before Signing" -- a promise that the text of all non-emergency legislation would be made available on the White House website for five days before the President would sign it. So have things improved since then? Nope. As the Cato Institute's Jim Harper notes, the Administration only fulfilled its "Sunlight before Signing" pledge one one of the first eleven bills the President signed into law. That's less than 10 percent. On the bright side, there's plenty of room for improvement.

http://volokh.com/posts/1240847775.shtml

That was posted a few months after he took office. Promise was easily kept, he simply had to wait to sign legislation. He did not do it, making it a broken promise.

Ignorance is bliss- Google "Congress blocks transfer of detainees"

INTO the US. You may not have noticed, but the US is not the only country on the planet. I am serious, there really are other countries out there..


I deleted the rant which did not answer the question. I will repost the question:

Is it too much to ask that a president do what he promised to do?

 

[cybrsage]

The article then goes on to talk about that Obama sided with Republicans to further weaken civil liberties in 2009 and in 2010 signs into law the same Patriot Act unchanged. It was so bad that the NY Times wrote a scathing editorial about it:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/08/opinion/08thu1.html

Obama has all the bad portions of Bush, and then his own extra bad portions added ontop of it.

 

[leper84]

Bush, Obama, Romney, Gingrich, Santorum, Clinton, Reagan ect. all bow to the same money masters.

Still think he's too crazy?

 

[cybrsage]

They all bow to some old guy holding up a t-shirt?

 

[ky54]

They all bow to some old guy holding up a t-shirt?

Or, as Don Henley said, " That tired old man we elected king."

 

[Jaskalas]

Yep, just like we did in Japan and Germany.

Industrial nations that had a military to rival ours. First class countries. Not third world abject poverty where religious zealots are intent on killing their own people for the audacity to live a better life.

The world has changed since the World Wars. Islamic terrorism is quite potent against a gentle occupation. We are NOT in 1940s Germany or Japan. Takes stupid people to think they can be treated the same. You built something over there for them and they'd rally around and use the tools / supplies provided. The Taliban just blow it up, or burn it to the ground.

In Germany and Japan our enemy surrendered. Our enemy today will never surrender. So we must never treat their countries as something to occupy, but instead must treat them as something to destroy.

 

[chucky2]

Well, they'd surrender if we treated their country like we treated WWII Japan/Germany. Instead, we pussyfoot around, don't destroy the will of their culture to resist us, and then occupy with far far less troops than needed (not because we can't muster the troops, because Politicians in the end make those troop level calls, and it is politically untenable now for the American people to have that many troops deployed).

In short: We try and run our wars the way we run our current American culture..."cheaply" and with as little real effort as possible. Oh...and it's not over in 15 minutes?!?! Must mean someone screwed up...quick, political points, political points!

 

[Jhhnn]

The sunset before signing promise.


http://volokh.com/posts/1240847775.shtml

That was posted a few months after he took office. Promise was easily kept, he simply had to wait to sign legislation. He did not do it, making it a broken promise.




INTO the US. You may not have noticed, but the US is not the only country on the planet. I am serious, there really are other countries out there..


I deleted the rant which did not answer the question. I will repost the question:

Is it too much to ask that a president do what he promised to do?

I'll concede the part about the signing of bills. Like I offered, however, if that's all there is, Repubs are trying to make mountains out of molehills. Bills having last minute amendments need to go through conference committee, so any that don't have generally been posted for weeks on the congressional site.

Gitmo is different. We can't transfer detainees to some other countries in violation of our own pre-existing law, and we'd need to find somebody to take them. That's obviously a lot easier said than done, and making a case against many of them in anything resembling an honest exercise of law is apparently impossible, otherwise it already would have been done.

 

[ky54]

In Germany and Japan our enemy surrendered. Our enemy today will never surrender. So we must never treat their countries as something to occupy, but instead must treat them as something to destroy.

My point was related to no military occupations work. Obviously there are two recent examples in our history that did. I'm not trying to relate Afghanistan to Japan or Germany although Japan was certainly more suicidal than the Taliban and were willing to sacrifice their whole population. How many islands did we take where we had to kill every single Japanese? It took TWO nukes to get them to submit and that was after we fire-bombed their cities to ashes couldn't do it. The situation, as you rightly point out, is much different in Afghanistan. The population is hardened against us. They were way before we ever set foot in the country. As I have said before I'm all for leaving. Our reasons why we should leave are probably very different.

 

[cybrsage]

I'll concede the part about the signing of bills. Like I offered, however, if that's all there is, Repubs are trying to make mountains out of molehills. Bills having last minute amendments need to go through conference committee, so any that don't have generally been posted for weeks on the congressional site.

Obama has decided he does not want to follow this easily followed promise. He broke it as quickly as he possibly could.

Gitmo is different. We can't transfer detainees to some other countries in violation of our own pre-existing law, and we'd need to find somebody to take them. That's obviously a lot easier said than done, and making a case against many of them in anything resembling an honest exercise of law is apparently impossible, otherwise it already would have been done.

I agree about charge them and punish or release. There was a cocophony of errors in the first few attempts to do so, with the courts ruling each time the people being held could not have a military tribunal to see if they should be brought to trial or immediately released. This kept a lot of them there in limbo.

Obama can transfer them to an aircraft carrier in a heartbeat and have an empty prison. He has decided to keep the base filled instead. It is smart thing to do, since the prisoners are best kept there than anywhere else. All Obama needs to do is say "you know, I did not have all the information when I made that promise and now that I have it all, I see that Bush was right to keep prisoners in the prison at Gitmo" but this would require Obama to admit he was wrong.


EDIT: No president keeps all their promises. When the promises are easily kept but the president does not bother to keep them, I call them out...when they are harder (and stupid to keep), I call out the president if he does not admit he was wrong about the promise.