Obama's new Gitmo policy is a lot like Bush's old policy

[Botany]

Source: Washington Post

By Dana Milbank
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, March 8, 2011

He began his presidency with a pledge to close the military prison at Guantanamo Bay within a year. Within months, he realized that was impossible.
And now he has essentially formalized George W. Bush's detention policy.

With Monday's announcement that the Obama administration will resume military tribunals at Gitmo, conservatives rushed out triumphant I-told-you-sos.
Liberal supporters were again feeling betrayed. Administration officials had some 'splainin' to do.

And so they assembled some top-notch lawyers from across the executive branch and held a conference call Monday afternoon with reporters. The ground
rules required that the officials not be identified, which is appropriate given their Orwellian assignment. They were to argue that Obama's new detention policy
is perfectly consistent with his old detention policy.

snip

Not only had he revoked his pledge to close Gitmo within a year, but he also had contradicted his claim that the policy "can't be based simply on what I or the executive
branch decide alone." His executive order did exactly what he said must not be done, in a style pioneered by Obama's immediate predecessor in the Oval Office.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/07/AR2011030704863.html

---

I worked for Obama because he promised to close Gitmo and stop bush's tax cuts
for the rich. THIS SUCKS :grr:

[Avant Guardian]

1. Another broken promise

Face it, only the GOP gets what it wants with this guy, screw everyone else.

[Botany]

3. not true Obama has gotten a hell of a lot done but this is a kick in the teeth

n/t

[pocoloco]

8. You are fucking right!!

Wall Street bailout.

Insurance industry windfall!

Fucking Nobel Peace prize while fighting two wars!!

And yet people still complain??

Ever wonder why???

[dennis4868]

11. I agree...

Obama should have never given himself the nobel peace prize....that was a bad decision by Obama....WTF? During the 2008 campaign he promised to put more soldiers on the ground in Afghanistan and he has done alot to get out of Iraq as promised...not sure what you are talking about other than you are keeping to the 24/7 hate Obama fest at DU.....

[No Elephants]

44. What on earth does the nobel peace prize have to do with anything.

Do you really believe they gave him a peace prize a minute and a half after he became President because they thought he had earned it by campaigning on making Afghanistan the longest war in U.S. history?

As they said at the time, sometime the awarding of a peace prize is "aspirational," meaning the Committee gives it in hopes of influencing future behavior, rather than as a reward for past behavior. However, in this case, the Committee hoped wrong, like so many Americans who voted in hope for change from Bush. Hell, even the artist who did the campaign poster is fed up.

Best can be said about that Nobel Peace Prize is Obama had the grace not to keep it because he knew the Committee's hopes about perhaps influencing his future behavior were as misplaced as my hopes were when I donated to his campaign.

[dennis4868]

9. It's not a broken promise....

it is a broken promise for those who think that Obama is a king and does not need congress to do anything....but that's not reality....that's the DU narrative.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[liberation]

29. Yes We Can...

... Tell You Why He Can't.

[Igel]

54. I both disagree and agree.

It is a broken promise. It's a promise that he ought not to have made: It was an "aspirational" promise, a "I hope to" promise. Such statements ought not be elevated to the status of promise. In this case, he meant, "I intend to close Gitmo" and instead placed in jeopardy his character and word.

He's old enough and responsible enough to be held accountable for his words. "I will close Gitmo within 1 year" followed by not closing Gitmo within 1 year makes him either naive or overreaching. Neither are good. I personally like a bit of humility.

On the other hand, he was certainly a bit wet behind the ears. He confused the man with the office, whether he really believed it or just knew that a lot of his supporters desperately wanted to believe it. But the office has limitations in terms of formal power, and in terms of political power, in terms of money. Obama ran into all three. More than once in my short life I've seen people (sometimes liberal, sometimes conservative) come along and snort, "I can do it better than those cretins! Give me a chance to show how superior (or righteous) I am." Then, in the event, they realize that it's not a matter of brilliance or superiority or righteousness. It's simply a matter of what's possible given the fiscal, political, organizational constraints, and those often count much more than who holds the office. The policy of the new guy looks a lot like the policy of the old guy--except that a lot of time and effort gets wasted in realizing this; in fact, they have the same goals with minor differences in ranking, differences squelched by all the constraints. Then in the end, all that's left is to point out the huge difference that the new guy actually meant--"Why, just look! We use bold, progressive, forward-thinking Geneva instead of the old, conservative New Times Roman in our newsletter!"

Eh.

[Buzz Clik]

4. That is SO true.

The GOP was desperate for a health care bill, and they got it.

The GOP wanted DADT to be canned, so he bowed to their wishes.

The GOP ordered Obama to quit defending DOMA, and that is just what he did.

Boy, you really got it right!!!111111111

[dennis4868]

7. Congress would not fund the closing...

of Gitmo....so what is Obama to do....should he pay for it out of his own pocket.....you do understands that Obama is not a king and needs congress' approval for funding the closing of Gitmo, right?

[mike_c]

38. I'm tired of hearing the same old lame excuses....

So we need a president who will stand up for human rights, not one who sits down when Fox News tells him to.

[emilyg]

43. Thank you.

[midnight]

53. I think Obama's status of being a King might be pushing it, but

those signing statements can get the job done, if I'm not mistaken?

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

2. The difference is... Obama is playing political chess. He's a master chess player!

Too bad he's playing for the other team.

[dennis4868]

10. yep.....

the other team just loves all of this: www.whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com

what utter bullshit that comes out of DU these days!

[Buzz Clik]

15. Yeah. There's all that. What else you got?

thx.

[Buzz Clik]

16. What team are you on? I'm serious. What is your objective?

[liberation]

30. Who cares about teams?

The peons in chess are the first pieces to go in order to protect the royal pieces, regardless of what team they belong to.

[frylock]

37. this right here is the problem..

people treating politics like its some fucking big 10 rivalry.

[Psephos]

33. Well, I certainly feel rooked. n/t

[dennis4868]

5. Obama's policies....

here are the exact opposite of Bush'd....Obama wants to close down Gitmo but Congress will not fund it so what else he is supposed to do....yes, I know the "narrative" here is too blame Obama for everything and he is a king and does not need congress to do anything but that's not reality.

[ArcticFox]

23. He had Congress for 2 years

Y'all need a new excuse.

[jeff47]

41. No, Democrats had Congress for 2 years

Obama is not king of the Democrats. The Democratic congress passed a bill with a veto-proof majority that blocked Obama's plan to shut down gitmo.

It is not possible to underestimate the cowardice of "moderate" Democrats.

[No Elephants]

45. Ah yes. A Democrat who is POTUS, head of the Democratic Party and in control of the DNC

has no influence over a Democratic Congress. Please.

[jeff47]

50. You got one of the 3 right. (nt)

[ArcticFox]

52. Cowardice is but a symptom of a much larger problem

Cowardice is evident at the top of the executive branch. It is sitting on its ass claiming it can't move without 60 votes in favor in the Senate. It extended the Bush tax cuts (originally passed through reconciliation w/o 60 votes in favor) rather than tell the truth to the public. It is "looking forward" in order to avoid a fight over the morality of Iraq, Afghanistan, the Nation's handover of TRILLIONS of dollars to the uber-rich (and the Federal Reserve's handover of TRILLIONS MORE), the large banks' thievery of everyone's savings, hopes and dreams. Cowardice prosecutes a man for stealing a chicken to feed his starving children while letting various bankers cart off billions of dollars of other peoples' money.

But name-calling doesn't really solve anything. In order to solve our problems, we need to stop blaming each other and start looking to the real causes of our predicament. Look up, not sideways. Your neighbor didn't cause you to lose your job. The poor guy begging for quarters on the corner didn't convince you to take out a half-million dollar loan to pay for a house worth a hundred thousand and then foreclose on your ass when you couldn't keep paying half your income for a home you could no longer sell. That was all done by the guys on top, who you will never meet if they can help it.

The problem is that there are a small number of incredibly wealthy people in this country, in this world, that they have purchased the allegiance of the vast majority of government officials, that they own the vast majority of media outlets, and that the vast majority of us peons have bought into the materialistic and ignorant culture they are peddling. Until the poor and disadvantaged people at the bottom can get at that wealth and break it up and distribute it throughout society, the problem will continue and things will only get worse.

[OnyxCollie]

26. Why hasn't Obama replaced the politicized US Attorneys?

You know, the ones who serve at the pleasure of the President.

If Congress was blocking his nominations, he could have made recess appointments.

So, why are they still there?

Dance for me. I find it entertaining.

[liberation]

31. Yes We Can...

... Tell You Why He Can't.

LOL

[chill_wind]

6. Recommended. The article cuts right through the crap.

Not for the irony-impaired, however.

K & R.

[dennis4868]

12. "he promised to close Gitmo"

YOU DO UNDERSTAND THAT IT COSTS MONEY TO CLOSE GITMO? And you do understand that congress will not fund this, right?

[frylock]

35. something he should have considered before making such lofty promises

[dennis4868]

13. Not sure if facts mean anything any more here but....

U.S. Congress blocks Guantanamo closure
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Congress+blocks+Guantanamo+closure/4019815/story.html#ixzz1Fy447aSD

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Botany]

18. I am not anti Obama

I know that things are complex but rightly or wrongly this does not paint
President Obama in a good light.

[dennis4868]

22. of course it does not....

but the facts have to mean something....if Obama wants to close down Gitmo, has a plan for it, but Congress will not fund it, what else is the president is supposed to do? I don't think Obama is that wealthy to afford the costs of closing down Gitmo. And of course there are many here at DU that will jump on Obama over this because that's what they do regardless of what the facts are.

[frylock]

36. he clearly did not have a plan..

he couldn't even rally the DEMOCRATICALLY CONTROLLED congress to vote for one of his major planks. weak fucking sauce.

[No Elephants]

47. What was his plan for it again?

A U.S. prison was able and eager to take them, as was the whole town where the prison was located.

Are you suggesting the Commander in Chief could not have found enough $$ in his Defense Budget to re-locate the prisoners?

Wanting political cover from Congress does not equal needing Congress. And, please remind us, how hard did Obama fight for funding? See also Reply 45.

[No Elephants]

46. Please see Replies 23 and 45.

[Frisbee]

17. More of that change we can believe in. eom

[BlueJac]

19. Obama=disappointment.....

again and again.

[ArcticFox]

20. Does anyone still believe in this joke?

Most of what he does is a lot like Bush.

[DirkGently]

24. There is NO excuse for the existence of this American gulag. NONE. It is CRIMINAL.

[BobbyBoring]

39. I think that says it all

No excuse for Gitmo, No excuse for detaining people with out charges.

Why aren't these new champions of the constitution screaming about this?

[DirkGently]

40. Unbelievable that Americans could be so easily frightened into allowing this to be done in our name.

And no, Obama does not get a pass for not ending it.

[blackspade]

25. The reversals just keep on coming....

[swilton]

27. Old News

[Playinghardball]

28. Dennis Kucinich for President!!

America's Most Courageous Congressman...by far!!

[Psephos]

32. No debate necessary. Listen to him promise to close Gitmo in these vids.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8USRg3h4AdE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQXZoM__vU0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32ePb4X6JNQ

The cynicism of this plus the Bush tax cut extension is breath-taking.

[coalition_unwilling]

34. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. - n/t

[jeff47]

42. Wow! I didn't realize that we elected a king

Here I thought Congress had a say. I mean, they passed a bill with a veto-proof majority that blocked Obama's plan to close gitmo. But surely he could just wave his hand and do whatever he wants.

"Moderate" democrats are busy wetting themselves under the bed. They cowered when the GOP made an issue out of closing gitmo, and screwed over Obama.

To blame it on Obama is to ignore the real problem - crappy "Democrats" who need to be primaried out of Congress. Btw, they're thrilled that you're pissed at Obama instead of them.

[No Elephants]

48. Please see Replies 23 45 and 46.

[jeff47]

51. Please see my replies to 23, 45 and 46 that were already there when you posted this. (nt)

[Number23]

49. "Btw, they're thrilled that you're pissed at Obama instead of them."

SOP around here. Very little thought/furrowing of brow needs to go into blaming everything on the president.