My main concern about Obama is that he's clearly refused to commit himself on
withdrawing from Iraq. In any case, a campaign promise to "do something"
doesn't mean he'll actually do it. The erosion of constitutional rights is
part of the general crackdown needed to make continued war possible. a
authfriend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- In
FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> In a message dated 11/9/07 9:54:23 A.M. Central Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> his first move would be to call in his attorney general and have
> him/her review everything Bush has done in light of its impact
> on the Constitution. He would then reverse every decision which
> had eroded it. (Obama taught constitutional law for 10 years.)
>
> He didn't have any specifics or ideas as to where he would start?
>
> He only had a few minutes to field questions and there were lots
> of them.
>
> I would think somebody with ten years experience teaching
> constitutional law could rattle off, in a couple of seconds,
> a couple of the more egregious examples he would reverse.
> But.... maybe not.
I'm sure he could have. But he may have assumed,
probably quite correctly, that in a crowd where
such a question would come up in the first place
that everyone would already be all too aware of
the more egregious examples, at the very least,
so he didn't really need to spell them out and
would make better use of his limited time by
answering other questions.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
