President Obama settles a DU dispute

A few weeks ago, there was a little debate here between those who told President Obama to "stop saying you banned torture" and those who claimed he had never said that.

I honestly have no idea whether or not Obama said this, but one thing is definitive now. He said it today:

OBAMA (5-21-09):


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/21/us/politics/21obama.text.html

Sounds like Obama wants to keep us safe, end torture, and still have the sheeple think is is equally as insane as Cheney in regards to doing whatever illegal thing it takes to keep us safe.

What are the mechanisms that have been set in place to guarantee such thing?

Does this mean "banned for as long as I'm President"? Or banned in a definitive way?

Will we have criminals again in our future? Media is not helping bury it.

As long as we have the freedom to vote in the wrong people, we'll have the risk of voting in the evil people who by their station will be able to abuse their power.

It's the price we pay for freedom.

I can't imagine any mechanism that couldn't be changed or ignored later.

how can anyone guarantee that power will not be abused in the future? Will Obamas ghost come and strike down any future tyrants?


Bush broke the law when he tortured. President Obama put a stop to those practices.

?

the reality of the situation.

The fact is that Obama got handed the keys to the car after it had its windows and windshield smashed, a potato stuffed in the exhaust pipe, its tires slashed, doors taken off by passing cars, paint poured on the hood, and it was wrapped around a telephone pole.

Repairing the car's gonna take a damn long time and it's going to cost a lot of fucking money. Sen. Feingold is absolutely right--you cannot expect, CANNOT expect the damage from the last eight years to be undone in a week, a month, 6 months, or even a year. It will probably take longer than his four-year term--and if he gets eight years it might take longer than that too.

And it's not just foreign relations. He got handed an economy in shambles, a nation without healthcare, a shitty public education system, a corrupt Justice Department that I am sure he will flush out soon, a bitchy media, and a contrarian, lazy Senate and House that despite being full of Democrats loves nothing more than to tell the President why he sucks.

I think that might call for prioritization, don't you?

what Russ Feingold has to say on the subject, too.

Muchas Gracias, Adelante~

that was #1324.

The difference between a nation in which torture can be said to be banned and a nation in which torture can still occur is huge.

Which is why this rhetoric-only treatment of our core values is so damaging.

As http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/tapped_archive?month=05&year=2009&base_name=a_delicate_balance&2">Adam Serwer suggests, "far more dangerous" than bushcheney.

--

...that you "restore" the right of habeas corpus -- which cannot cease to exist but merely be violated.

So if you refuse to enforce the law or respect constitutional rights, you pay lip service and rationalize.

--

Mainly people arguing he can't banned something that was illegal in the first place.