On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 11:50 PM, denstar <[email protected]> wrote:
250 prisoners in Gitmo, eight black sites we know of in Europe with unknown prisoners. The US has been trying for years to do something with them. No country will take them, most can't be tried in US courts because we didn't read them their rights or gather evidence on the battlefield. To think Obama solved this dilemma in one day is a leap of faith. Just the fact that he gave himself a year shows he needs an extension on that homework. >>> Your idea of "safe" is a sad one, my friend. >> >> Sad? No US attacks for seven years is sad? > > Is that how you gauge safety? Then, yes, that is sad. I know I > haven't felt very safe... sorta a deep fear, not the simple one of "oh > no, I could die"... but one of "our core values, what's happening to > them" (much worse than death). You're in NM, probably not one of the top 40 states for an attack. So what's you're fear, some tech will listen to you're phone call by accident thinking you're chatting with al Qaeda and find out you want to cop an eight ball? Or are you freaked because for 90 seconds we made KSM shit himself and saved hundreds if not thousands of lives because of it. It's not inhumane what we did to him, it's inhumane what he did to everyone in the world that watched the events of that day. > I'm not sure if I got this comment or not, but, if I did: I'm tired > of the last 8 years, man. The polarization, the lack of > communication, the (to put it lightly) lack of transparency. Polarization was done by the press and people like you that are dead set against anything Bush did but seem to be OK with it when the Dems do it. Did you see how Obama is treating the press? After they bent over backwards to get him elected. He calls them in advance telling them which ones can ask questions? Remember the outrage when Bush moved Helen Thomas back a row? Then Obama stared down the Politico reporter for daring to ask an unscripted question? The question about breaking his own lobbing rule on day one. Faith baby. > Obama has a lot of "credit" to spend, but instead of being all one > sided (IMO) he's put his money where his mouth is, using teamwork and > whatnot. Yay! A president who doesn't want to be the end all, be > all. How refreshing. Teamwork? When discussing the stimulus with republicans he said: "I won the election." > ??? Yes, lets hope his ideas fail, that would be so cool! ??? Do you want him to spend another $Trillion on pork disguised as stimulus that won't even be spent for two years? > I love to be open to ideas. The ideas that I hear Rush espousing, > tho, for instance: come on, they're stale, and predicable. He uses > opinion like it's fact. Who the fsck is he to judge other people? > (Which is kinda funny, cuz, like, who the fsck am I to judge him, > right? I'm not judging tho, just opinionating. He's free to be what > he wants to be, and I'm like, way down for that, so... yeah. =]) So you're saying Obama shouldn't be judged as president? If he is the commentators need to be vetted? Don't attack the messenger and all that. > A lot of power is in perception. I'm not saying it's the end-all, > be-all, but, how does that saying go? 90% attitude? With all his > followers, just think what Rush could do to bring the country > together! He could even be all smart, and bust an "SLC Punk" type > deal, where he gets his ideas /in there/ instead of dashing them > against the sides, as it were... You want him to say what you want to hear, I think he's saying what you need to hear but refuse to. > Not so. Some of your acrobatics quite impress me. You've made good > arguments. But what I'm getting at is beyond "good arguments"... > maybe it's about principals. We see things different and you need to stop being so critical of my vision. > To some extent the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, > but there's this semi-magical thing about America, where we viciously > protect the idea that everyone should have, well, a fair shake, sorta. > That 50,000 people don't outweigh 1 person, sorta. Yeah, mob rule sux and that the vibe I'm getting from the medias love affair with Obama. If they start asking real questions then I'll fell better. > It's probably because I'm a little bit beyond good and evil. When I > say "Good", I mean "the side of the argument I am currently > supporting". Or something like that. :) > Why not be constructive? Wouldn't it be cool if they were thinking of > solutions that would work with the direction the President wants to > go? Doesn't seem too un-American so far (unlike torture), so why not > give it a shot? Maybe try to make it work, even. The love affair with Obama is sickening and FoxNews is the only one asking real questions. And that bothers you. > If there's one thing I'm sure of (wait, let me run the numbers > again... yup), it's that there's always a way. > > When you have buy-in it *is* generally a little easier, and more > likely to succeed, long-term. You lost me. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:286446 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
