Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page:  « First  ‹ Previous  3 4 5 6 7  Next ›  Last »  (7 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Shellly
12:10 PM on 04/16/2009
he can't go left on every issue..
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
ThomasMc
Christian morality is an oxymoron.
12:09 PM on 04/16/2009
How true. Partisan Dems are as guilty of ignoring Obama's faults as partisan Repugs were of ignoring Bush's.
12:32 PM on 04/16/2009
Psuedo-liberals masquerading as progressives could take a note from Bill Maher.

"Be loyal to the principles, not the person. We already learned the hard way with Bush."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grvpyepkD2o
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
shockmagog
Infrared hair, UV shades, SPF 110 dome.
12:32 PM on 04/16/2009
Dissent among the Dem ranks belies your argument.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
vesaversa1
Semper Fi
12:05 PM on 04/16/2009
This Colbert fellow is so dam intelligent i sometime wonder why he waste his time doing comedy . This man make you think even the tiny brain conservatives should get what he's trying to say.
12:35 PM on 04/16/2009
it's the best use of his skills. gets the point across better than dry commentary.
12:02 PM on 04/16/2009
Never trust a pasty white guy who wears a coat & tie. Has that man ever been outside in the sunshine?
12:01 PM on 04/16/2009
Colbert is the best...sooo funny...

http://pitchbendpost.blogspot.com/
11:56 AM on 04/16/2009
Be patient.

You have no idea how much legal booby trap the Rove-Cheney-Bush Admin did to ensure that Gitmo & Bagram will be running.

DOJ & Obama are working to untangle this and drafting policies so that these kinda of fanatic-idealogue legal garbage will not be repeated. The Congress was also a partner on the Rovian tactics. ...sad but true.

So be patient.

And, don't assume silence from Obama DOJ means no action. Remember the Somali pirates.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Shashi0224
12:06 PM on 04/16/2009
I trust President Obama...I'll watch and keep my eyes open, but I trust his intelligence and his desire to adhere to our Constitution, something he knows very well.
I truly admire and thank President Obama and will definitely give him the well-earned benefit of the doubt at this point.
12:12 PM on 04/16/2009
Co-sign. He will be as careful dismantling the Bush mistakes as Bush was ruthlessly Draconian in taking away rights.

This is intricate material and there is no "ON/OFF switch. IT DEMANDS DUE DILIGENCE.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cloudmaker
11:51 AM on 04/16/2009
As an ardent Democrat, I think Obama is a great president a brilliant leader,
and inspiring figure. But I'm with Colbert on this habeas corpus situation.
Obama is wrong. See that's what Democrats do that Republicans don't:
admit when they think their leader is wrong.
photo
christopherflynn
The wreligious wright is always rong...
12:03 PM on 04/16/2009
And I agree WHOLEHEARTEDLY!!!!!
12:22 PM on 04/16/2009
Ditto for me. I don't get this one when he specifically talked about the importance of habeas corpus for the detainees during his campaign. I can only hope that this will make sense in time, but for now I am deeply disappointed.
11:50 AM on 04/16/2009
As for me, Mr. Obama has until the next presidential election to explain the logic of this decision. I'll give in to the assumption that this is a wee bit more complicated than simply reversing previous policy. Then again, maybe not. We'll see.
12:07 PM on 04/16/2009
You're going to give him FOUR YEARS to explain?? GOOD GRIEF....Move over to the GOPers....
you're thinking just like them.
11:50 AM on 04/16/2009
Truth is truth - hypocrisy should be pointed out at all times.
11:48 AM on 04/16/2009
Yep.....The Prez has got some explaining to do on this one.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Genep34
stop the nightmare, end the GOP
12:01 PM on 04/16/2009
Agreed
11:48 AM on 04/16/2009
This debate is stupid. Both Barack Obama and George Bush is right on this debate.

Everyone DOES NOT deserve habeas corpus rights as defined by the US constitution because every person on this planet is not a US citizen.

When you are defined as an enemy combantant against the nation those rules do not apply.

If you want to debate whether the people detained are enemy combatants, that's one thing. But to say that a foreigner gets the same rights as a US citizen is ludacris.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
FrankenPC
11:54 AM on 04/16/2009
Exactly. Also, people keep forgetting the fact that Iraq is a war zone. That changes the rules entirely. Also, Obama DID NOT create that war zone. People need to lay off him about this issue.
12:08 PM on 04/16/2009
with that logic...it only takes one tiny step to the incarceration of US citizens, without cause...that's where the Bush regime was headed....
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
NoMoFearNoMoHate
12:19 PM on 04/16/2009
Neither are war zones. You cannot fight a war against terrorism.

Bush declared and end to major combat operations in Iraq almost three years ago and there has not been a sustained involved war effort in Afghanistan for more than five years.

There are no ongoing wars. We are not at war with any other uniformed nation.

So it's basic human rights - treat others as you wish to be treated or how you would wish your child to be treated.

And beyond that:

http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html

"Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law."
11:56 AM on 04/16/2009
I think even foreign citizens, when in American custody, should be afforded the same rights as Americans. After all, the Declaration of Independence speaks of "unalienable rights" endowed by the Creator. I hardly think God issues some of his children the right to appeal detention but not others.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
FrankenPC
12:11 PM on 04/16/2009
I disagree. Just like other nations and peoples refuse democracy and basic human rights, they are entitled to not participate in our system. In other words, we really can't impose our beliefs on anyone other than ourselves. Also, the "creator" part is highly questionable.

Additionally...this IS A WAR ZONE. This is a DETAINEE facility, not a prison. Not a court of law. If the war were to stop and we leave, those people are let free and the facility is shut down.

You see, prior to Geneva conventions, when a military operation was carried out, the winners would shoot the losers. Now, we have to comply with Geneva and provide a DETAINEE facility.

My god, no one get's this.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
FrankenPC
11:47 AM on 04/16/2009
Sorry to say this, but Bagram is in the middle of a war zone. Rules of engagement REQUIRE a detainee facility which adheres to the Geneva convention for detainee treatment. There is nothing about Habeas Corpus law in the convention. It's just a detention facility.

Obama didn't create this war zone. But, he will shut it down. Time people...

My god, the impatience. How long has he been in office?
11:58 AM on 04/16/2009
He's flying non-Afghan terror-suspects in from other countries. Should the president be able to scoop up people from anywhere in the world and hold them without trial? Surely not. If they're guilty, go ahead and prove it in a court of law and put them away, but when we abandon the rule of law we imperil not just the terrorists, but ourselves.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
FrankenPC
12:01 PM on 04/16/2009
I'm listening. Post proof please.
12:18 PM on 04/16/2009
"go ahead and prove it in a court of law and put them away"

That's the only sensible way to handle it. Anything short of allowing a transparent process will be deemed unfair.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
vesaversa1
Semper Fi
12:07 PM on 04/16/2009
SOME HERE JUST DIDN'T GET WHAT COLBERT WAS REALLY SAYING ,BUT I SEE THAT YOU GET IT .
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Shashi0224
11:46 AM on 04/16/2009
This exposes the difference between Democrats and Republicans. When we disagree with our President, a President we admire and support, we talk about our disagreements. The repubs NEVER spoke out against Bush....even when he tortored or broke our laws.
That's a big, important difference.
HUGE!!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
FrankenPC
12:40 PM on 04/16/2009
Yeah, it's crazy refreshing.
11:44 AM on 04/16/2009
Another disappointment. It's one thing to stand on you principles when you're a candidate in charge of nothing. It's another thing to have the courage to act on them as president after reading the morning's intelligence reports and have your balls retreat into your stomach.
12:07 PM on 04/16/2009
LOL.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
amdezurik
12:28 PM on 04/16/2009
and something completely different when the guy in charge doesn't bather to read them and just goes on vacation 10-12 times a year...to "clear brush"
11:44 AM on 04/16/2009
I am not happy that its true, however, the rights of detainees were never one of my top priorities. Stopping Torture was definitely one, however, they Did stop that.
GOP'ers should be happy because they are always for denying people any rights, and imprisoning people regardless of evidence.

However, one could also easily make the argument that he's just using that location for the time being, while legal issues are gone over, and closing of Guantanimo is completed.
Bagram is not our base. Its Afghanistan's and we are using it while we are there. Which makes it different than the agreements we normally have with semi permanent bases such as in Germany, Japan, South Korea, and Gitmo-although thats not really an agreement.