Login  
 
 
Go Back   Chamber of Secrets > Forum Archives > Non Harry Potter Archives

The Obama Administration



 
 
Thread Tools
  #21  
Old January 22nd, 2009, 3:08 am
Chris's Avatar
Chris  Undisclosed.gif Chris is offline
Custodian of Hades Vault
 
Joined: 4817 days
Location: Monoc Securities
Posts: 4,653
Re: The Obama Administration

Regarding the "slow down there, let us review things" directives / executive orders sent out by Obama, I think it's a smart move for another reason. Simply put, he's in charge now. Anything done that's under the president's purview is now under HIS purview - not Bush's. So, he should take the time to make sure that he knows what's being done in his name. If he's going to have to answer for what was done, he better know what was done first


__________________
RLF_Icons (signature)

In case I forget: Opinions posted in the US Political Discussion forum are posted as a member and not as a moderator


Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask and he will tell you the truth. - Oscar Wilde

We're all human, aren't we? Every human life is worth the same, and worth saving. - Kingsley

Sustainability should be a part of what we do every day.
Sponsored Links
  #22  
Old January 22nd, 2009, 3:32 am
Wab's Avatar
Wab  Undisclosed.gif Wab is offline
The Next Great Adventurer
 
Joined: 5992 days
Location: Mornington Crescent
Posts: 15,280
Re: The Obama Administration

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grymmditch View Post
"Enemy combatants" are not Prisoners of War and as such are not entitled to those protections, and because there's no "doubt", that they don't belong to any of the 4 categories as stated. For starters, they're like the pirates of old, who traditionally belonged to no nation.
The declaration was illegal as anyone who know point one about international law knows.

"The 'special military commission'...is not a court at all. It is an extension of the executive power of the President, a prerogative body as unacceptable today as the Star Chamber of the Stuart kings was unacceptable."

That's from Geoffery Robertson, QC, a jurist with incomparable experience in international law. And I'd take his considered opinion above just about anyone else's.

By calling a pause to the hearings Obama will have the opportunity to take advice from people other than the cabal who were involved in setting up the system in the first place.


__________________
A patriot is someone who wants the best for his country, including the best laws and the best ideals. It's something other people should call you -- you shouldn't call yourself that. People who call themselves patriots are usually liars. -- Donald Woods

You got what anybody gets . . . You got a lifetime. -- Death of the Endless
  #23  
Old January 22nd, 2009, 3:46 am
PLIMPY's Avatar
PLIMPY  Female.gif PLIMPY is offline
Sixth Year
 
Joined: 5825 days
Location: Florida
Age: 35
Posts: 1,238
Re: The Obama Administration

I'm not sure this is the place to address this, but I will do it quickly. I am not a Constitutional scholar, but here is my humble analysis (too long and yet, not long enough to fully address the issue). First, "enemy combatant" as it is used presently in the United States is a concept made up by the President Bush to not have to call the people Prisoners of War, and I'm sorry, but these people fall under some sort of law and classification.

International Law seems to agree with me. The ruling on the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia seems to include a mention of a commentary on the fourth Geneva Convention, which states "[e]very person in enemy hands must have some status under international law: he is either a prisoner of war and, as such, covered by the Third Convention, a civilian covered by the Fourth Convention, or again, a member of the medical personnel of the armed forces who is covered by the First Convention. There is no intermediate status; nobody in enemy hands can be outside the law. We feel that this is a satisfactory solution – not only satisfying to the mind, but also, and above all, satisfactory from the humanitarian point of view."

And while I suppose we aren't technically bound by international rulings, the Supreme Court did hold that they were entitled to some rights in Boumediene v. Bush / Al Odah v. United States (please see my comment on equal protection to follow).
Quote:
Originally Posted by from wiki because do you know how difficult it is to find a good quote in the SCOTUS rulings?
The majority found that the constitutionally guaranteed right of habeas corpus review applies to persons held in Guantanamo and to persons designated as enemy combatants on that territory. If Congress intends to suspend the right, an adequate substitute must offer the prisoner a meaningful opportunity to demonstrate he is held pursuant to an erroneous application or interpretation of relevant law, and the reviewing decision-making must have some ability to correct errors, to assess the sufficiency of the government's evidence, and to consider relevant exculpating evidence link
Quote:
Originally Posted by USNAGator91 View Post
How, Plimpy, do the military tribunals break the Geneva Convention? Those folks you talk about aren't US citizens and their status is far from determined. It's pretty interesting to see how President Obama will deal with these prisoners considering how much of a nightmare the court trial of the so called 20th hijacker went.
I'll admit I was a bit hasty in my posting this morning before I ran off to work, but I said that they broke the Geneva Convention because Hamdan v. Rumsfeld did. They upheld a lower court ruling that said:
Quote:
the law of war includes the Geneva Convention (III) Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Aug. 12, 1949, [1955] 6 U. S. T. 3316, T. I. A. S. No. 3364 (Third Geneva Convention); that Hamdan is entitled to the full protections of the Third Geneva Convention until ad-judged, in compliance with that treaty, not to be a prisoner of war; and that, whether or not Hamdan is properly classified as a prisoner of war, the military commission convened to try him was established in violation of both the UCMJ and Common Article 3 of the Third Geneva Convention because it had the power to convict based on evidence the accused would never see or hear.
And it appears after this law they created the Military Commissions Act of 2006, but I've yet to figure out how that makes the Geneva Convention consideration go away (and part of that law was overturned in the ruling I listed at the start of my post).

Quote:
Originally Posted by pensieve_master View Post
Right. I wish people would remember that these thugs are not entitled to the rights that US citizens have. Obama must tread carefully here. If he goes as far as the ACLU and liberal supporters would like, which is to drop the charges (and thus to release them unpunished), I believe the backfire will be a lasting stain on his presidency.
While not entitled to all rights of US citizens, according to the Equal Protection clause in the 14th Amendment " All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. " As far as I'm concerned, once they were our prisoners, if they were not titled POWs and put under Geneva Convention protections, they became entitled to all equal protections under the laws of the United States.

On another topic, I think it is nice to see Obama at least attempt to address (if only briefly) a number of the things he talked about doing in his presidency on his first day in office. From the Guantanamo order (which will take a long time to sort out) to the senior staff pay freezes (mostly symbolic, but a nice gesture). If nothing else, it sets a good tone.


__________________


What happens to a plimpy that comes to the Breakfast Club?
Search Tutorial ~ Search Engine ~ Forum Rules ~ Ask the Staff
  #24  
Old January 22nd, 2009, 4:06 am
AkiraTakahashi  Male.gif AkiraTakahashi is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 4101 days
Location: N. Minnesota
Age: 33
Posts: 40
Re: The Obama Administration

Quote:
1. What do you think President Obama's priorities will be for the first 100 days?
Given that he's already changed the White House homepage to pro-abortion and pro-gay marriage, I'd say that he'll just piddle around in the small stuff for a while. I actually don't expect change.

Quote:
2. What major policy shifts from the Bush Administration can you see occurring under the Obama Administration?
Not enough. He'll close Guantanamo Bay, although that's not really a policy, and he hasn't actually mentioned any of the other "secret" prisons. He just knows that more people are aware of that one than the ones that exist in Germany, France, etc.

Let's see, he'll get the government more involved in our lives. He already is working towards some socialist, almost Nazi-Germany type programs, such as a civilian "military" that pretty much screams thought police to me! It also screams Gestapo.

Quote:
3. Where do you personally feel that Obama Administration should be directing most of its attention in the proceeding months/years?
Giving the boot to the IRS would be a big first step. Without an income tax American tax payers would be able to keep more money for themselves, and they'll spend that on consumer goods, which will in turn help the market to pull out of its recession.

Of course, we can't fund our Empire and police the world if we get rid of the income tax, so we'll have to bring everyone home. Every base that stands on the soil of other sovereign nations needs to be brought down (over half of them were never meant to be permanent anyway), the troops returned home and placed along our borders to stop illegal immigration, drug traffic, and other illegal activities, and also a lot of government programs will have to be sacrificed. This will ensure our liberty, it will keep us from inciting hatred around the world (promoting demacracy through intimidation is a bad idea), and it will straighten up the economy.

Of course, this means that all Americans will have to really stick together. Obama talks about this, but we all know that his supporters would rather sit back and wait for him to wave a magic wand over the nation.

Quote:
4. How should the Obama Administration tackle the following Middle-East situations:
(a) - Iran and it's Nuclear ambitions
(b) - Israel/Palestinian peace process
(c) - Iraq & Afghanistan
(d) - Oil dependency
Energy resource isn't technically a government resource. It should be handled privately.

As for the Middle-East situation, I'll talk about that in the next response below.

Quote:
5. How should the Obama Administration tackle other foreign relation issues:
This is how the Obama Administration should handle all foreign issues. Take Jefferson's advice for "honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none." We should talk, negotiate, and trade with nations, but stay out of their internal affairs. Unless it is a direct threat to our national security, we shouldn't be involved. We don't need to force our way of thinking on others.

In the Bible, Jesus said the best way to change the world was through example. If you live the way you're supposed to, people will want to imitate that. This is perfectly acceptable on a federal level as well. Keep our affairs in order, keep our nation and people free, and the rest of the world might want to imitate our democracy. Change through force is a terrible thing, intimidation doesn't work, and it will come back to bite us in the butt if we keep it up.

Quote:
6. How should the Obama Administration tackle the following domestic issues:
(a) - Economic crisis (bailouts etc)
I already touched upon this one. Get rid of the income tax, a whole truck load of government programs, all our excess foreign troops and basis (not just Iraq), and use the troops to defend our borders.

We live in a welfare state as well. The government subsidizes a lot more than we realize, and it's killing us. This didn't start with the bailouts, but with certain states rewarding illegal behavior by paying for illegial aliens' health care, education, etc.

For a while the federal government was even subsidizing birth control for college girls! Yeah, like we need to encourage that kind of behavior!

A note on the bailouts, we should just stop this. Go back to the gold standard so that we cannot live beyond our means as we have been doing since the creation of the Federal Reserve. It's devaluing our dollar through the inflation it causes and needs to stop. Do this and everything I've already mentioned and we're on our way back to a healthy economy. No, you won't get your free handouts, but that's not the purpose of government.

Quote:
(b) - Unemployment
This isn't a federal government problem. If state governments want to address the issue, they're free to do so. However, this is primarily an economic problem. Fix the inflation issue and do all the stuff I previously mentioned and once the market looks a little more optimistic, then jobs will naturally begin opening up. You can't expect jobs to come rolling in when the market is this unstable.

Quote:
(c) - Stem cell research
Again, the federal government shouldn't be involved in this.

Quote:
(d) - Social security
Another government program that is little more than a perilous house of cards. It feeds our welfare state, and it threatens to collapse in on itself sometime within the next few decades.

"Seniors hope the system will hold together for the remainder of their lives, while younger working people hope government will somehow fix things before they retire. Not surprisingly, Congress has chosen to ignore the problem until it becomes acute. It’s hard to sell voters on austerity today to avoid a relatively distant crisis. Politicians usually operate on the opposite principle, by promising great things now and leaving the bills for others to pay later.

...Congress has never required that Social Security tax dollars be kept separate from general revenues. In fact, the Social Security “trust fund” is not a trust fund at all. The dollars taken out of your paycheck are not deposited into an account to be paid to you later. On the contrary, they are spent immediately to pay current benefits, and to fund completely unrelated federal programs. Your Social Security administration “account” is nothing more than an IOU, a hopeful promise that enough younger taxpayers will be around to pay your benefits later. Decades of spendthrift congresses have turned the Social Security system into a giant Ponzi scheme, always dependent on new generations. The size and longevity of the Baby Boom generation, however, will finally collapse the house of cards." (Lew Rockwell

The major problem is that Congress spends too much. There's a whole lot of trivial spending going on, a bunch of unnecessary programs being funding, as well as an Empire and war to be paid for, and it's done partially through Social Security. It is either a failed program that needs replaced, or government needs to get their spending priorities in order and save lots of money.

(e) - Healthcare

It amazes me how so many people don't seem to think the government isn't already very involved in our healthcare programs. Once upon a time, hospitals were run primarily by the churches. The people who could afford to pay were required to, and the people who were poorer had their costs cut or were free. Now, the quality of care was rather good actually and promoted good doctor-patient relationships.

So, who runs our mainstream medical care? Does the name Big Pharma ring a bell? Most of their drugs are deadly, and they won't take any "cure" or "treatment" that won't rake in the big bucks for them, even if there is evidence that said cure or treatment will save lives or extend them. This way of thinking promotes expensive, though sometimes dangerous, drugs, and it forces them on the doctor, thus straining doctor-patient relationships. I could write a book about the stranglehold the pharmaceutical companies have on our medical care and the corruption within, but too many people have already done just that.

The problems we face today are not the result of too little government intervention, but rather too much. Higher costs are not primarily the result of our crappy economic situation, but rather from the current government mandates.

"The HMO Act of 1973 requires all but the smallest employers to offer their employees HMO coverage, and the tax code allows businesses – but not individuals – to deduct the cost of health insurance premiums. The result is the illogical coupling of employment and health insurance, which often leaves the unemployed without needed catastrophic coverage." (Lew Rockwell)

Quote:
(f) - Education
Again, this isn't an issue for the federal government. Let's just get rid of the Department of Education, it just causes problems. Education should be an issue for the states. Parents have the freedom to choose what sort of education they want their children to get, whether it be homeschooling, private, or public schooling, and they have the right to say what their child should be learning.

Also, as a quick note, if it's a state issue the competition between school will be greater, I think, thus promoting higher standards. I wish I still had the article in my local newspaper that one of my former teachers wrote about how government standards are actually causing schools to fail, not saving them. It undermines individual attention, and more teachers are busy trying to diagnose students like doctors instead of educating them.

Quote:
(g) - Defence spending
Again, bring all our troops home, dismantle our bases (this will help a lot of nations rather than hinder them), and place our troops on our borders instead. Read my earlier responses for a detailed answer.

Summed up, we need to spend what we need to to remain secure, but we shouldn't go beyond that. No Empire, no policing the world, etc.

Quote:
(h) - Patriot Act / domestic spying
Toss this **** right out the window. I'm pretty sure they pulled this right out of Orwell's book.

Quote:
7. What are the main roadblocks to any of the Obama Administration's key policies that you foresee?
Ummm, they suck. Not all of them, but most of them. This isn't change, it's expanding what's already there. There will be a little change - enough to keep people happy by creating the illusion that big change is happening, but that'll be it.

I also intend on writing to Congress everytime another looney bill makes its way into Congress in an attempt to stop the Administration in its tracks.


__________________
"I was born with a silver spoon in my mouth, but they had to remove it immediately to make room for my foot!" -- James of Team Rocket
  #25  
Old January 22nd, 2009, 4:13 am
Chris's Avatar
Chris  Undisclosed.gif Chris is offline
Custodian of Hades Vault
 
Joined: 4817 days
Location: Monoc Securities
Posts: 4,653
Re: The Obama Administration

Quote:
Originally Posted by Akira
So, who runs our mainstream medical care? Does the name Big Pharma ring a bell? Most of their drugs are deadly, and they won't take any "cure" or "treatment" that won't rake in the big bucks for them, even if there is evidence that said cure or treatment will save lives or extend them. This way of thinking promotes expensive, though sometimes dangerous, drugs, and it forces them on the doctor, thus straining doctor-patient relationships. I could write a book about the stranglehold the pharmaceutical companies have on our medical care and the corruption within, but too many people have already done just that.
The drug companies have had some problems with some drugs, but I'm in position to know, and many of the charges here are false. Most drugs aren't deadly, and those that have serious side effects are usually for diseases that are themselves deadly.

Also, proof of other secret prisons? Or proof that Obama wants to start a Civilian military that sounds suspiciously like Big Brother? Links are appreciated.


__________________
RLF_Icons (signature)

In case I forget: Opinions posted in the US Political Discussion forum are posted as a member and not as a moderator


Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask and he will tell you the truth. - Oscar Wilde

We're all human, aren't we? Every human life is worth the same, and worth saving. - Kingsley

Sustainability should be a part of what we do every day.
  #26  
Old January 22nd, 2009, 4:15 am
Lord Godric's Avatar
Lord Godric  Male.gif Lord Godric is offline
Squee-worthy
 
Joined: 5366 days
Posts: 4,524
Re: The Obama Administration

Quote:
Originally Posted by PLIMPY View Post

On another topic, I think it is nice to see Obama at least attempt to address (if only briefly) a number of the things he talked about doing in his presidency on his first day in office. From the Guantanamo order (which will take a long time to sort out) to the senior staff pay freezes (mostly symbolic, but a nice gesture). If nothing else, it sets a good tone.
I agree so much, it's at least great to see him try to keep the promises that he made.


  #27  
Old January 22nd, 2009, 5:08 am
Ali's Avatar
Ali  Male.gif Ali is offline
TheWizard
 
Joined: 6463 days
Location: UK
Age: 33
Posts: 1,822
Re: The Obama Administration

Quote:
Originally Posted by pensieve_master View Post
Mitchell's a good Lebanese boy, though the Israelis shouldn't be too upset because he's a Christian.
Oh believe me, that has not stopped them from "voicing their concerns" whenever someone laments the terms "illegal settlements" or "occupation" with regards to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

ETA: Well what do you know...

Quote:
Foxman: George Mitchell is too ‘fair’ and ‘even-handed’ to serve as Middle East envoy.

The media is reporting that former Sen. George Mitchell, who handled the Northern Ireland peace process, is being eyed by the Obama administration to be a top diplomatic envoy to the Middle East. In 2001, Mitchell produced a report on the Middle East which recommended that Israel freeze all its settlement activities. Without a freeze, a cessation of violence would be “particularly hard to sustain,” he argued. While Mitchell’s impending appointment is earning a great deal of praise, the Anti-Defamation League’s Abe Foxman complains the diplomat is too fair and balanced for the post:
“Sen. Mitchell is fair. He’s been meticulously even-handed,” said Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League. “But the fact is, American policy in the Middle East hasn’t been ‘even handed’ — it has been supportive of Israel when it felt Israel needed critical U.S. support.”
“So I’m concerned,” Foxman continued. “I’m not sure the situation requires that kind of approach in the Middle East.”
People like Foxman have been sabotaging peace deals (two state solution) for decades now. They are only concerned about one thing. What is good for Israel/jewsish people; or how we can continue expanding Israel. Other issues are secondary.


__________________
^^^ Please keep in mind that my opinions are mine only and do NOT reflect those of the CoS Staff.

~ http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov

  #28  
Old January 22nd, 2009, 5:32 am
AkiraTakahashi  Male.gif AkiraTakahashi is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 4101 days
Location: N. Minnesota
Age: 33
Posts: 40
Re: The Obama Administration

Quote:
Originally Posted by chparadise View Post
The drug companies have had some problems with some drugs, but I'm in position to know, and many of the charges here are false. Most drugs aren't deadly, and those that have serious side effects are usually for diseases that are themselves deadly.

Also, proof of other secret prisons? Or proof that Obama wants to start a Civilian military that sounds suspiciously like Big Brother? Links are appreciated.
I'm also in a position to testify about the use of drugs, but even professionals argue amongst themselves. Drug pushers readily admit to downplaying their side-effects in order to sell the drug. A lot of them have serious side-effects, but it can be difficult to win in court. The charges aren't false, and I'm not entirely sure what sort of drugs you're referring to. Anyone checked out the psychiatric industry lately, although that's hardly considered medical in my opinion. I left that field a long time ago.

You should really check out a book called RDA: Rats, Drugs and Assumptions. Our Daily Meds is another good one, although I'm not far into it.

The civilian military is addressed here. You can see the video of Obama's speech here.

As for secret prisons, they are covered here. I don't have time to search out more sites, so I may come back to this later.


__________________
"I was born with a silver spoon in my mouth, but they had to remove it immediately to make room for my foot!" -- James of Team Rocket
  #29  
Old January 22nd, 2009, 5:36 am
lindaluna  Female.gif lindaluna is offline
Banned
 
Joined: 5357 days
Location: The OC, CA
Age: 55
Posts: 4,434
Re: The Obama Administration

Didn't know much about George Mitchell - sounds like a great pick.

How Ordinary Americans plan to Serve from 23.6:    


    



Also I'm very impressed by Obama hiring the guy that won the Supreme Court case against the military tribunals to be #2 in the Solicitor General's office Neal Katyal. He argued Hamdan v Rumsfield . Superstar of law.



Last edited by lindaluna; January 22nd, 2009 at 5:41 am.
  #30  
Old January 22nd, 2009, 6:43 am
PLIMPY's Avatar
PLIMPY  Female.gif PLIMPY is offline
Sixth Year
 
Joined: 5825 days
Location: Florida
Age: 35
Posts: 1,238
Re: The Obama Administration

Quote:
Originally Posted by AkiraTakahashi View Post
Let's see, he'll get the government more involved in our lives. He already is working towards some socialist, almost Nazi-Germany type programs, such as a civilian "military" that pretty much screams thought police to me! It also screams Gestapo.
Obama was talking about volunteerism and advocating Americorps, a program that allows people to volunteer in exchange for money for college. This was a program President Bush encouraged people to join as well (and I believe was actually set up by President Clinton). For Obama it is all part of the country needing to help itself, and we're all better off if everyone pitches in. FactCheck.org to the rescue!


__________________


What happens to a plimpy that comes to the Breakfast Club?
Search Tutorial ~ Search Engine ~ Forum Rules ~ Ask the Staff
  #31  
Old January 22nd, 2009, 8:32 am
ComicBookWorm's Avatar
ComicBookWorm  Female.gif ComicBookWorm is offline
The Next Great Adventurer
 
Joined: 5760 days
Location: Embedded in my sofa
Posts: 16,292
Re: The Obama Administration

Quote:
Originally Posted by AkiraTakahashi View Post
Giving the boot to the IRS would be a big first step. Without an income tax American tax payers would be able to keep more money for themselves, and they'll spend that on consumer goods, which will in turn help the market to pull out of its recession.
And then we'll have to board up the White House and empty the Congress. Instead of the red white and blue flag, we'll have to fly a white flag since we won't have any means of protection. As pacifist as I am I don't think that disbanding our army will keep us very safe in a dangerous and violent world. I don't see this as a realistic suggestion since we do have to fund government. Anarchy is not exactly practical in a country of 300 million people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AkiraTakahashi View Post
Not enough. He'll close Guantanamo Bay, although that's not really a policy, and he hasn't actually mentioned any of the other "secret" prisons. He just knows that more people are aware of that one than the ones that exist in Germany, France, etc.
Actually he has mentioned them during his campaign. That's extraordinary rendition and he is against it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AkiraTakahashi View Post
I already touched upon this one. Get rid of the income tax, a whole truck load of government programs, all our excess foreign troops and basis (not just Iraq), and use the troops to defend our borders.
How are we funding troops without an income tax?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AkiraTakahashi View Post
Most of their drugs are deadly
Do you have any documentation for that claim?

Quote:
Originally Posted by AkiraTakahashi View Post
Given that he's already changed the White House homepage to pro-abortion and pro-gay marriage, I'd say that he'll just piddle around in the small stuff for a while. I actually don't expect change.
I'm having trouble linking the idea that he is pro-choice with the assertion that he will just piddle around with small things. The two are unrelated concepts. He has always been pro-choice so it is hardly a surprise that he would state so. He's also been actively constructing a financial stimulus package for a couple of months now. How many presidents have we had that were working on major legislation before they took office? I expect that his first 100 days will be a mix of big moves like the stimulus package and smaller moves like reversing some of Bush's executive orders.

And I looked very hard but didn't see anything about same-sex marriage. His position has been civil unions (or some equivalent). He opposes a ban on same-sex marriage, and he should since that would be discriminatory. I wish he would state outright support for gay marriage but that has not been his position.


__________________

Sometimes dreams do come true

Last edited by ComicBookWorm; January 22nd, 2009 at 8:53 am.
  #32  
Old January 22nd, 2009, 12:05 pm
Klio's Avatar
Klio  Female.gif Klio is offline
Winning Teamster
 
Joined: 4434 days
Posts: 3,647
Re: The Obama Administration

Well..... just a quick note:

Apparently http://www.whitehouse.gov/ has changed a lot! I only ever visited for a quick glance in past years, but it seems that the old version actually excluded lots of things from searching, while the new version is fully searchable.

I am curious what they'll do with it. The campaign website was very impressive, I think.


BBC comments on the new whitehouse website


__________________

haiku by Silwe Elessan

Proud to be in Ravenclaw
I served on the campaign which got Hermione and Neville elected as co-ministers of Magic
  #33  
Old January 22nd, 2009, 12:18 pm
Ali's Avatar
Ali  Male.gif Ali is offline
TheWizard
 
Joined: 6463 days
Location: UK
Age: 33
Posts: 1,822
Re: The Obama Administration

Gitmo: The Facility Will (Eventually) Close, But the Detentions Will Continue

Quote:


A newly drafted executive order by President Barack Obama will fulfill a campaign promise to close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay. The order will, once the new president gets around to signing it, require the facility to close within a year. The facility where detainees were held often on little if any evidence was a symbol of America’s post-9/11 hysteria and the excesses of presidential power during the Bush Administration. Its closing will remove the symbol, but a clean break from the policy remains elusive.
The detentions will continue, they will just do so at a handful of yet-to-be-determined military bases in the United States. The Obama Administration has enough support across Europe to allow it to release some of its most embarrassingly innocent detainees into third party nations, and it intends to try some, in a method different from the Bush Administration’s war tribunals, but likely far short of the domestic legal system.
Yet that new legal system isn’t even in place yet, and its unclear what the Obama Administration intends to do with those detainees that it doesn’t intend to release, yet which had such flimsy evidence that even the Bush Administration didn’t dare to try to charge them with any crimes. The short answer is likely that they will do what the Bush Administration did, just in a less conspicuous place, and with a lot less of the baggage that their predecessors had.


__________________
^^^ Please keep in mind that my opinions are mine only and do NOT reflect those of the CoS Staff.

~ http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov

  #34  
Old January 22nd, 2009, 1:28 pm
PLIMPY's Avatar
PLIMPY  Female.gif PLIMPY is offline
Sixth Year
 
Joined: 5825 days
Location: Florida
Age: 35
Posts: 1,238
Re: The Obama Administration

According to the Associated Press, Obama is likely to issue an executive order today to close Guantanamo within the year. In response to members of Congress who ask who would want these people in prisons near them, John Murtha has apparently said they are welcome to send some to prisons in Pennsylvania.


__________________


What happens to a plimpy that comes to the Breakfast Club?
Search Tutorial ~ Search Engine ~ Forum Rules ~ Ask the Staff
  #35  
Old January 22nd, 2009, 3:03 pm
pensieve_master  Male.gif pensieve_master is offline
Sixth Year
 
Joined: 4792 days
Location: Gryffindor House
Age: 54
Posts: 1,026
Re: The Obama Administration

Quote:
Originally Posted by PLIMPY View Post
According to the Associated Press, Obama is likely to issue an executive order today to close Guantanamo within the year. In response to members of Congress who ask who would want these people in prisons near them, John Murtha has apparently said they are welcome to send some to prisons in Pennsylvania.
Glad I don't live in PA and don't have Murtha as my rep. I used to respect that guy. What was I thinking?

Wonder how Murtha's constituents will feel if those guys are released and end up living next door.


__________________
"History teaches that when you become indifferent and lose the will to fight, someone who has the will to fight will take over." -- Arthur "Bull" Simons

  #36  
Old January 22nd, 2009, 3:24 pm
The_Green_Woods's Avatar
The_Green_Woods  Undisclosed.gif The_Green_Woods is offline
Always Indy's Girl
 
Joined: 4735 days
Posts: 6,026
Re: The Obama Administration

I would be most interested to see Obama's foreign policies on Pakistan, the Middle East and especially Israel.

He supported Israel when he visited it last year, saying that Israel had the right to defend herself. Now with the Israel/Gaza war, and the number of people killed, he has a very real problem on his hands IMO.

Obama's comments in Sderot in July 2007"The first job of any nation state is to protect its citizens. If somebody was sending rockets into my house where my two daughters sleep at night, I'm going to do everything in my power to stop that. And I would expect Israelis to do the same thing," said Obama.


http://www.sderotmedia.com/bin/content.cgi?ID=177&q=3
---------------

Albright on Pakistanmy own sense is Pakistan has everything that gives you an international migraine. It has nuclear weapons, it has terrorism, extremists, corruption, very poor and it’s in a location that’s really, really important to us. And now with this issue with India…” said former U.S. secretary of state Madleleine Albright.


Pakistan, today is very defiant and to deal with them is going to be very, very difficult IMO, equal to the Israel/ Middle East tensions.

Pakistan's government has a profound internal division between the military and the civilian, which have alternated in power since the country was born from the partition of British India in 1947. It is this military insubordination that creates most of the country's serious political problems. Washington worries too much about other things in Pakistan and too little about the sheer power of the military. United States analysts often express fears about an internal fundamentalist challenge to the chiefs of staff. The main issue, however, is not that Pakistan's military is too weak, but that it is too strong. And that is complicated by the fact that elements within the military are at odds, not just with the civilian government, but also with each other.


http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature...2/12/pakistan/

http://iaoj.wordpress.com/2008/12/06...onal-migraine/


__________________
The man who, in my opinion, won the war against Voldemort for Harry Potter and the Light! Severus Snape!

There is nothing of which every man is so afraid, as getting to know how enormously much he is capable of doing and becoming - Soren Kierkegaard

Spotlight on Snape and Molly

:indy:
  #37  
Old January 22nd, 2009, 3:28 pm
Hes's Avatar
Hes  Female.gif Hes is offline
Embroidered by imaginatio
 
Joined: 5548 days
Location: One second out of sync
Age: 38
Posts: 5,979
Re: The Obama Administration

Quote:
Originally Posted by pensieve_master View Post
Glad I don't live in PA and don't have Murtha as my rep. I used to respect that guy. What was I thinking?

Wonder how Murtha's constituents will feel if those guys are released and end up living next door.
Isn't more likely that they would be brought back to their country of origin if they are ever released? To me it seems very unlikely that ex-prisoners of that nature, who aren't American citizens will be set loose in American streets.


__________________


"I'm a leaf on the wind...watch how I soar."

"Chickens come home to roost."

"It's okay...I-I'm a leaf on the wind."


Loveliest Care Bear. Expert Sig Changer

Last edited by Hes; January 22nd, 2009 at 3:34 pm.
  #38  
Old January 22nd, 2009, 3:30 pm
Midnightsfire  Undisclosed.gif Midnightsfire is offline
Member of the Order
 
Joined: 6447 days
Posts: 9,435
Re: The Obama Administration

Quote:
Originally Posted by AkiraTakahashi View Post
He already is working towards some socialist, almost Nazi-Germany type programs,
Hello...Naziism and Socialism are two opposing ideals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AkiraTakahashi View Post
Giving the boot to the IRS would be a big first step. Without an income tax American tax payers would be able to keep more money for themselves, and they'll spend that on consumer goods, which will in turn help the market to pull out of its recession.
Yeah we don't need such small things like an infrastrcture, military, fire dept, emrgency services, etc,
Quote:
Originally Posted by AkiraTakahashi View Post
Of course, we can't fund our Empire and police the world if we get rid of the income tax, so we'll have to bring everyone home.
Empire? See the prior admin.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AkiraTakahashi View Post
This will ensure our liberty, it will keep us from inciting hatred around the world (promoting demacracy through intimidation is a bad idea), and it will straighten up the economy.
Promoting democracy be invading other countries tends to irritate the civilian populace of said country.
Not that the current admin stated in any way they intend to promote Democracy through intimidation. On the contrary actually.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AkiraTakahashi View Post
Energy resource isn't technically a government resource. It should be handled privately.
Like Enron? Lol!
Quote:
Originally Posted by AkiraTakahashi View Post
This is how the Obama Administration should handle all foreign issues. Take Jefferson's advice for "honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none." We should talk, negotiate, and trade with nations, but stay out of their internal affairs. Unless it is a direct threat to our national security, we shouldn't be involved. We don't need to force our way of thinking on others.
Oh! Your speaking of the Bush Administration! You are in the wrong thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AkiraTakahashi View Post
Change through force is a terrible thing, intimidation doesn't work, and it will come back to bite us in the butt if we keep it up.
Hmm...That should be in the Iraq Thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AkiraTakahashi View Post
I already touched upon this one. Get rid of the income tax, a whole truck load of government programs, all our excess foreign troops and basis (not just Iraq), and use the troops to defend our borders.
Anti-tax people are freeloaders. They either fail to recognize the benefits they receive from taxes or just expect those things to be provided to them for free.
Move to Darfur or Rwanda. You'll soon see what taxes pay for.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AkiraTakahashi View Post
For a while the federal government was even subsidizing birth control for college girls! Yeah, like we need to encourage that kind of behavior!
Nice. More hyperbole..and about a prior administration. [staff edit]


Quote:
Originally Posted by AkiraTakahashi View Post
This isn't a federal government problem. If state governments want to address the issue, they're free to do so. However, this is primarily an economic problem. Fix the inflation issue and do all the stuff I previously mentioned and once the market looks a little more optimistic, then jobs will naturally begin opening up. You can't expect jobs to come rolling in when the market is this unstable.
But millions of people losing their jobs and losing their homes, the US Dollar becoming worthless, are some of those things that the Federal government tends to get a little nervous about.
Keep in mind this is a government of the people, by the people, for the people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AkiraTakahashi View Post
So, who runs our mainstream medical care? Does the name Big Pharma ring a bell?
Ah..lobbyists. I have no problem seeing them go away. We may have an agreement here about Pharmaceutical companies.
FYI: Lew Rockwell is a disgruntled Libertarian who found out the hard way that deregulated markets don't work. But then I suspect most Libertarians are disgruntled after the market went to the abyss and took their ideas with them. Re: Capitalist Fools

Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Green_Woods
Pakistan, today is very defiant and to deal with them is going to be very, very difficult IMO, equal to the Israel/ Middle East tensions.
I agree. I think if Obama misteps, Pakistan could well mire hiim as Iraq had with Bush.


__________________
All fighters are pig-headed some way or another: some part of them always thinks they know better than you about something. Truth is: even if they're wrong, even if that one thing is going to be the ruin of them, if you can beat that last bad out of them... they ain't fighters at all.

---Eddie Scrap-Iron Dupris (Million Dollar Baby)

Last edited by Hes; January 22nd, 2009 at 3:37 pm.
  #39  
Old January 22nd, 2009, 3:47 pm
AkiraTakahashi  Male.gif AkiraTakahashi is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 4101 days
Location: N. Minnesota
Age: 33
Posts: 40
Re: The Obama Administration

Quote:
Originally Posted by ComicBookWorm View Post
And then we'll have to board up the White House and empty the Congress. Instead of the red white and blue flag, we'll have to fly a white flag since we won't have any means of protection. As pacifist as I am I don't think that disbanding our army will keep us very safe in a dangerous and violent world. I don't see this as a realistic suggestion since we do have to fund government. Anarchy is not exactly practical in a country of 300 million people.
No we won't. We lived fine for many, many years without the IRS, and we can do it again, and we were always perfect safe and prepared for attack. The army won't be disbanded, we just won't be shoving our ideals into other peoples' faces. If it's on our borders, then our borders will be protected. We don't have to run the world! That's not our job. We'll have our protection in the homeland.

"There’re sources of revenues other than the income tax. You have tariff, excise taxes, user fees, highway fees. So, so there’s still a lot of money. But the real problem is spending. But, you know, we lived a long time in this country without an income tax. Up until 1913 we didn’t have it."

Quote:
Originally Posted by ComicBookWorm View Post
Actually he has mentioned them during his campaign. That's extraordinary rendition and he is against it.
Well, that brightens my day. He won't be absolutely horrible. Still, it doesn't change the fact that I disagree with a lot of his policy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ComicBookWorm View Post
How are we funding troops without an income tax?
The same way we did prior to 1913. Besides, if our troops are here, protecting us, the cost to support them will be a lot less because we won't be running bases all over the world.

If you really want a history of the income tax, check out this documentary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ComicBookWorm View Post
Do you have any documentation for that claim?
I posted the titles of some books in an earlier post on this thread. Check them out. Otherwise, I'll have to search out some websites, but they aren't nearly as detailed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ComicBookWorm View Post
I'm having trouble linking the idea that he is pro-choice with the assertion that he will just piddle around with small things. The two are unrelated concepts. He has always been pro-choice so it is hardly a surprise that he would state so. He's also been actively constructing a financial stimulus package for a couple of months now. How many presidents have we had that were working on major legislation before they took office? I expect that his first 100 days will be a mix of big moves like the stimulus package and smaller moves like reversing some of Bush's executive orders.

And I looked very hard but didn't see anything about same-sex marriage. His position has been civil unions (or some equivalent). He opposes a ban on same-sex marriage, and he should since that would be discriminatory. I wish he would state outright support for gay marriage but that has not been his position.
But the government is not allowed to interfere with either abortion or gay marriage on a federal level. The government can't dictate the whole country! The new We the People Act will put a stop to that kind of dictatorship if it's passed. If he states outright support for either abortion or gay rights, that's his opinion, and it doesn't speak for the whole country. I'm not saying that I'm against gay marriage, but I am against a federal ban for it or a federal okay for it.

"In the United States, civil marriage is governed by state law. Each state is free to set the conditions for a valid marriage, subject to limits set by the state's own constitution and the U.S. Constitution."

As for the stimulus plan, it was pretty much in action by the time he took office. Sure, he can pump all the money into the market that he wants, all it's going to do is devalue the dollar, cause inflation, and do nothing for the deficit.

And by "piddle around in the small stuff" I mean that in the face of a financial crisis, undeclared wars, and all the other **** going on this country, the last things that needs to be examined are abortion and gay marriage, which are handled perfectly well by the states.


__________________
"I was born with a silver spoon in my mouth, but they had to remove it immediately to make room for my foot!" -- James of Team Rocket

Last edited by AkiraTakahashi; January 22nd, 2009 at 4:02 pm.
  #40  
Old January 22nd, 2009, 3:51 pm
The_Green_Woods's Avatar
The_Green_Woods  Undisclosed.gif The_Green_Woods is offline
Always Indy's Girl
 
Joined: 4735 days
Posts: 6,026
Re: The Obama Administration

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hes View Post
Isn't more likely that they would be brought back to their country of origin if they are ever released? To me it seems very unlikely that ex-prisoners of that nature, who aren't American citizens will be set loose in American streets.
I don't know if the US can afford to send them back.

The new administration's greatest challenge in closing the facility is what to do with the inmates the U.S. government believes are truly dangerous, but cannot be tried.

Many of the remaining 94 Yemeni inmates fall into this category. Obama is likely to reject a form of indefinite detention inside the U.S. – so where do these captives go? Since Al Qaeda has gained a foothold in Yemen, exemplified by the bombing of the U.S. embassy in Sanaa in September, there is fear about sending them home.

Then there are those from countries like Syria and Algeria who are cleared for release, but won't be sent home due to fears they'll be tortured or killed. Obama must accept these men in the U.S. or secure the co-operation of third nations


http://www.thestar.com/SpecialSections/article/572710

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=4711397


__________________
The man who, in my opinion, won the war against Voldemort for Harry Potter and the Light! Severus Snape!

There is nothing of which every man is so afraid, as getting to know how enormously much he is capable of doing and becoming - Soren Kierkegaard

Spotlight on Snape and Molly

:indy:
 
Go Back  Chamber of Secrets > Forum Archives > Non Harry Potter Archives

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:28 am.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Original content is Copyright © MMII - MMVIII, CoSForums.com. All Rights Reserved.
Other content (posts, images, etc) is Copyright © its respective owners.