15 Oct

Well…..duh

                                       

2009-01-22c
U.S. President Barack Obama while signing executive orders about the closing of the military prison at the U.S. military base in Guantanamo, Cuba, in the Oval Office on second official day at White House in Washington, January 22, 2009.
REUTERS/Larry Downing

The White House is only now admitting to this?

With little hope for meeting President Obama’s deadline for closing the terrorist prison at Guantanamo Bay, a new message is emerging from the administration: Disregard our timetable.

“We’re not focused on whether or not the deadline will or won’t be met on a particular day,” said White House press secretary Robert Gibbs.

Maybe they shouldn’t have had the big photo-op EO signing, then.

Benchmarks…timetables…..broken campaign promises from the Pied Piper of Hope and Change….oh well.

Shutting the prison at Guantanamo Bay was a key Obama campaign promise.

“He’ll catch it from the liberal Left but not from anyone else,” said Susan MacManus, a political scientist at the University of South Florida. “I don’t think it hurts him too much, because the public wants to keep that prison open.”

Oh, he may be catching it from the looney left; but the right’s not going to let him off the hook either on this, just because he couldn’t check Guantanamo off from his agenda wish list. After all, his heart is still in the wrong place on this.

Another unresolved issue is how and where to prosecute those ready for trial.

The American Civil Liberties Union wants them tried in U.S. federal courts, and not in tribunals, which have different rules for testimony, evidence and appeals.

“With the closure of Guantanamo must also come the end of the policies that the prison has come to represent, such as indefinite detention without charge or trial,” said Jameel Jaffer, director of the ACLU National Security Project. “It would be unacceptable to close Guantanamo only to institute the same policies elsewhere.”

Guantanamo remains the least bad option.

Meanwhile, a Michigan town is lobbying to give Gitmo detainees a home; while the ones who are “the worst of the worst” return to the battlefield; and on occasion, return to a home of a more permanent nature.

This entry was posted in Baracks Broken Promises, Guantanamo. Bookmark the permalink. Thursday, October 15th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
| 40 views

9 Responses to Well…..duh

  1. Patvann says: 1

    I just can’t get over how easily this Administration can lie to everyone, and simply spew out any and all “reasons” to cover their butts. It’s remarkable.

    Susan McManus is wrong in stating that only the Left will be upset. The middle-indies who may or may not have wanted it closed, will see this as yet another in a long line of miscalculations, lies, and obfuscations, just as the Right sees it.

    ReplyReply
  2. proof says: 2

    I think Michigan would be a grand place to house the detainees. It would give the desperately mismanaged state some badly needed jobs and would demonstrate to the detainees that once again, Democrats’ promises and good intentions actually resulted in worse conditions for them than under the Bush administration.

    ReplyReply
  3. Toothfairy says: 3

    “We’re not focused” says it all. What a rare moment of candor for old Gibbsey.

    ReplyReply
  4. elroy says: 4

    To be just like Olbermann, I suggest Flopping Aces have a header beginning Jan 1st.

    “Today the first ….. day the current POTUS stated Guantannamo Bay would be closed.”

    ReplyReply
  5. BarbaraS says: 5

    Yeah, Michigan. Home of a majority of Obots. I hear the housing in Detroit is cheap too. Median housing at $7,500. Thinkof the money the government can save by putting them into this area. Let’s see how long the obots support this idiot after several hundred citizens have been killed by these murderers. Then again, isn’t this the home of the most murderers in the country or does Chicago have that title?

    ReplyReply
  6. Madalyn says: 6

    I say send them to Chicago. Obama seems to know all the criminals there. Why not add some terrorists to his cabinet. He has done everything he can to destroy our country. This would not come as a surprise. Is it possible he could be hit by one of the busses he is throwing people under? God, how I wished.
    Madalyn

    ReplyReply
  7. Patvann says: 7

    I hereby volunteer to house them in my shed in the backyard.
    I can not promise they will be on time for court, though.

    I can however guarantee my dogs will be fully exercised.

    ReplyReply
  8. IndieDogg says: 8

    I recommend somewhere nice, particularly with Winter coming in. Perhaps Cheboygan, MI, right up there on the tip of the Upper Peninsula, across a frozen slip of lake from Canada. In a tent. Enjoy.

    ReplyReply
  9. Slatrat says: 9

    Se. Bob Bennet has just informed me that he has introduced legislation that would require the 2010 census to ask for every respondent’s citizenship status. The purpose of the bill is to ensure that apportionment of Congress is based soley on those people who are legal residents of the United States. It may surprise some people to know that the Census Bureau doesn’t plan to ask this question on the next census form. Currently, apportionment of our congressional representation is based on total population-including illegal residents. This deprives citizens of the United States of their right to representation that is fundemental to our Republic.

    That is entirely unacceptable.

    In the current system, states with a high concentration of illegal residents are actually rewarded with more congressional seats. Experts estimate that California will receive between five and nine extra seats in Congress based on the population of their illegal residents, and an estimated eight states with low illegal counts will lose a congressional seat they would otherwise have under accurate apportionment.

    Congress has a sworn duty to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Therefore, the Census Bureau must be instructed to discount the presence of illegal residents when allocating the number of representatives in a state.

    This is a battle for the fundemental principals of representation upon which our nation was founded.

    Everyone who reads this thread please contact your Senator and Congressman and voice your concerns. It could be another nail in the coffin of our great country.

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

 

Switch to our mobile site