how about do what he said he was going to do when he campaigned for president? how about not continue the bush policy of indefinite detention or holding people w/out charging them w/ a crime. how about not using evidence gained under torture to convict suspected "terrorists". you either charge these people with a crime and give them their day in court or you let them go. again, you obama apologists do not have a leg to stand on - obama has embraced this policy w/ open arms - he now owns it. i didnt go to any fancy-pants "law school", but i know how to comprehend what i read, which is more than can be said for you. and who is talking about the gold standard? please try to stay on topic samuel. inquiries into what i like to do at night, where i go, what i like to eat...and now you want to know what my highest level of education is? im flattered, but ive already told you that you are not my type, so forget about it law-boi.
I'm asking you a very, very simple question. Hint: you don't need to go to law school to answer it. I'm not asking about campaign promises or glenn greenwald or anything remotely related to it. I'm asking, since the current state of the universe includes a ban on expending federal funds for moving them to the US, what - short of open defiance of the law, precisely you propose the administration to do about these prisoners?
i already answered your query samuel. dont they teach reading comprehension at the university of phoenix online law program? basically you are admitting that your president obama is a p***y who is unable to do what he promised, even when he had a democratic majority in congress. you admit that he does not have the courage to stand up for what he believes in. a president's success is determined in part on whether or not they are able to get their agenda through - obama has failed in that regard on many levels and clearly does not deserve a 2nd term. bho aint no james k. polk, who was such a badass that he only needed 1 term to do everything he wanted.
And what was your answer? I don't see anything - do you think he should act explicitly in defiance of congress? Find some sort of administrative work-around through the gray area of Executive Orders? Some sort of war powers-type action? Suggestions? Anything? You're long on condemnations here about what should have happened - I find them about as incredibly uninteresting as one of your horrendous e-slapfights with glynch about whether or not the libertartian Koch brothers are sufficiently worthy of the V.S.O.P libertarian designation - even though I may in fact agree with a portion of them. What I find more interesting here is a forward-looking "where do you go from here" assessment. You have a public forum to air your view, don't be afraid to do so.
the answers you seek are already there grasshopper. pull that university of phoenix law degree out of your ass and try reading a little slower next time.
I just re-read every single word of your posts for the third time - here let me show you: This passage contains nothing on the point of a going-forward policy re: closure of guantanamo. This doesn't really solve the detention problem, though the bolded sentiment is one I can get behind and have advocated (and what actually occurred with respect to some detainees). This passage contains nothing on the point of a going-forward policy re: closure of guantanamo, it otherwise speaks for itself and is kind of beneath you. (honestly? Boi? Is that french or are you 12? The last time I saw the word "boi" was in Avril Lavigne's classic early 2000's ballad "Sk8r-boi", a timeless classic of tween angst that shall not long be forgotten?). This passage contains nothing on the point of a going-forward policy re: closure of guantanamo.
actually, that post contains everything on the point of going forward policy. you even bolded the key element of the going forward policy. charge them with a crime and give them their day in court or let them go. we have laws in this country and obama has chosen to ignore them with his executive orders to continue indefinite detention and military commissions. sorry, but you cant blame congress or the evil republicans for what your obama has done. the first step going forward would be for bho to get up infront of the american people and apologize for conducting himself more like gwb than than the person he promised to be when he was running for president. he should rescind his executive orders regarding indefinite detention and military commissions. he should throw out all evidence gained under torture and stop threatening to withhold intel on terrorist activities from other countries that do throw out evidence gained under torture. the problem going forward is that obama has made bush-era indefinite detention/military commissions his official policy - he is the one that has made it difficult to solve the problem. as has been pointed out to you several times, obama sought out new laws on 'indefinite detention' in may 2009, before congress enacted laws against transferring detainees. i realize that like the bush supporters your hyper-partisanship is preventing you from seeing things clearly, but the fact is that obama now owns these unamerican policies. im sorry to criticize your precious obama, but i try to be consistent in my beliefs - i was against all this stuff when bush was president and when obama came in and continued his policies i was still against it. i dont care about the little R or D infront of peoples names - i care about what they actually do.
that passage contained nothing on the point of a going forward policy b/c i was answering a direct question you asked that had nothing to do w/ going forward policy. you were asking about my educational background for some reason. try to pay better attention next time lawboi. and ill ask again, what does the gold standard have to do with anything in this thread samuel? or my educational background for that matter? if i said i was a high school drop-out would that change the content of what i am saying in any way? again, i was responding to a post of yours that had nothing to do w/ going forward policy. reading comprehension lawboi...try it sometime.
So in conclusion, you don't have an answer to the question I posed 5x. That's fine, I actually think the reason for that is that there is no easy answer. I certainly don't have all the answers. You could have just said that and saved us both some time, and yourself a bit of face, rather than digging up old posts for some insecurity-based interweb jihad and posting "lawboi" a lot.
i answered your question the first time you asked it. sorry if you arent as smart as you like to tell others you are, but its all right there for you. now i have asked you a few questions in this thread and you have not answered one. seems kind of snobby, but typical of you to go around demanding others answer your queries while ignoring ones they pose to you. you notice that when you initially started arguing w/ me, or "e-slapfighting" as you call it, you were crying about me blaming obama and trying to say it was all the evil republicans fault. when this pathetic argument of yours fell apart you turned to your current line of questioning on what i would like to see done now. despite the fact that you have not answered one single question i have posed to you, i was kind enough to answer your query the first time you asked it. you sure like to pretend you do lawboi. why would i want to do that - this is a blast! the only one embarrassing them self here is you lawboi. i am fortunate enough to be one of the select few that you like to start "e-slapfights" with, as you call them, and everytime you do i make you look like a total fool. i would actually feel bad if it was anyone else, but i enjoy seeing people w/ your smug attitude get their come-uppins. you are the one constantly going around engaging in "interweb jihad" with me so perhaps the insecurities lie with you, lawboi. and you are the one "digging up old posts" about "e-slapfights" with glynch and the gold standard, neither of which have anything to do with this thread. again, everytime you try this i end up making you look like a fool...but you keep coming back for more - its great entertainment for me so please dont ever get discouraged samuel - keep up the fight!
So I stopped reading here. Can you quote or link me to it? Maybe I missed it. I'm not asking to embarrass you or to indulge in a point by point internet self-********ingfest - I am just interested as a gentleman and a scholar to find a solution to what I consider a problem (and apparently something that you do too in between all of your diatribes)
back for more samuel? my name must be brokeback mountain b/c you just cant quit me, can you? i know your reading comprehension skillz are very, very poor but this is embarrassing, even by your standards. you would like that wouldnt you lawboi?
So... you're down to making random queer/***/gay/homo jokes now? This is like MFW territory. For the most part, though I'm sure there are exceptions I think I outgrew that phase (and this is coming from a very immature person) back in the late 90's. FWIW I have lots of people close to me and my family who are gay and, while goofy taunts like this don't bother me at all, I think we all know who is "embarrassing" here and it doesn't involve me.
I know no one believes I am not a republican and that I voted against Bush twice but blaming republicans for this is silly and partisan.
Obama said he could get it done in a year. He had a majority in congress during that year and another, and didn't get it done. The reason is, it was not that important to him. His obvious number one goal was healthcare. Politically he could have made it happen, he didn't.
Unlike the healthcare debate this was mostly bipartisan right? The problem was no congressman wanted the PR of bringing super villians to their district?
mostly Republican & Lieberman -led, but yeah most of the dems in the senate were utter cowards on this.
