Obama vs. The Beast

[redfirebird2008]

I didn't, but all the news I read seemed to indicate his executive order to close Gitmo was met with a round of applause.

I only rely on BBC and the AP for my news. Even reputed news channels like CNN have their small biases.

Nope, reporters from the likes of ABC and CNN were grilling Gibbs on whether they were trying to endanger America by closing Gitmo. Their questions has a pretty clear agenda to them.

 

[Kelly]

I see that as, they actually felt some pressure from the American people who were sick of how the media has been conducting..."I feel a tingle up my leg when "he" speaks type of commentary from a supposed unbiased source, tends to turn people off. So we may very well see a move totally the other direction for awhile.


What I don't understand is why so many in the media just can't "give the facts" and let me make up my own mind. WELL I KNOW WHY, many in the media think that the American people are stupid, and that from both sides of the spectrum.

 

[redfirebird2008]

I wish they would ask him the tough questions on the stimulus package. The American people support closing Gitmo. But the American people don't support this stimulus bill. It's amazing how the media chooses to completely miss the boat on what the public wants to know. We want explanations on this stimulus package. We want them to logically explain why this is not a bad idea. Most of the public is pissed about it, yet the media is making a big deal over the close of Gitmo.

 

[Kelly]

Americans are for the closing Gitmo, until they find out they are going to be in a prison, in their town.

It was a symbolic gesture, and I have my doubts that in a year it will be closed. I have a stronger feeling that changes will be made "there", and it will be put to another year.

As far as a big deal to the media. Yeah, but not Gitmo in and of itself. It is the idea behind it....

*The change in torture policy...
*Closing of Gitmo

to the media is an outright slam to the Bush administration....OR, they would like for it to be, because that makes for better news.

Obama on the other hand, I believe, sees these as symbolic gestures, and he is realizing (rethinking as you will) a different look at the Bush administration. THOSE 2 THINGS were wrong, and he has shown a very strong symbolic gesture in changing them. But was ALL THAT BUSH DID WRONG, I think now that he has "all" intelligents, whether he agrees or disagrees with some of Bush's policies, he may now understand the thinking behind them. IT'S A WHOLE NEW WORLD FOR OBAMA NOW....and where he can show that he is standing by his campaign promises, he will, But, I think he is realizing that "somethings" may need "another look". These 2 particular things, did not need a new look. BUT, they may in a year. I like that kind of governing.


Here is the problem that the media will have with Obama.....HE WILL NOT, give an off the cuff answer (that is why it was very hard for me to believe that he actually asked Biden to be his Sec. of State...good lord), but I digress....the media wants answers, and they want them now, ON THE MOST FLAME WORTHY OF ISSUES. Right now, in some newspapers across our nation, the story on the front page...ABOVE THE FOLD, is "Obama ends The War on Terror"....simply because of 2 symbolic gestures. WTF?


So the media will whine about what they are not getting, but I do not think they will EVER make a derrogatory, disrespectful, namecalling statement against Obama....I could be wrong, but I don't see that ever happening.

 

[Nitehawk013]

Obama could have even had my approval on the Gitmo thing if he had come out and siad, "Look, I recognize bad things happened at Gitmo. I recognize it may have hurt our reputation around the world. I also however, realize these are dangerous people being held there. We know many of them are guilty, are terrorists and would gladly kill any of us they could. Therefore my administration will begin investigating ways to eventually close down Gitmo, but for right now and the immediate future...we cannot do that. We cannot let these criminals go free. They must be held until we can find another prison to hold them and then bring them through the court system.

Instead we got "Im closing Gitmo because our troops poured some water on them or scared them with dogs and my liberal limp wrist didn't like that".

 

[redfirebird2008]

Obama could have even had my approval on the Gitmo thing if he had come out and siad, "Look, I recognize bad things happened at Gitmo. I recognize it may have hurt our reputation around the world. I also however, realize these are dangerous people being held there. We know many of them are guilty, are terrorists and would gladly kill any of us they could. Therefore my administration will begin investigating ways to eventually close down Gitmo, but for right now and the immediate future...we cannot do that. We cannot let these criminals go free. They must be held until we can find another prison to hold them and then bring them through the court system.

Instead we got "Im closing Gitmo because our troops poured some water on them or scared them with dogs and my liberal limp wrist didn't like that".

So what exactly do you think they're going to do over the next YEAR while preparing to close Gitmo? Pay attention. The damn thing isn't being closed down immediately. He gave himself a year to figure out what to do with the prisoners. I think that's too quick of a deadline, but we'll see what he comes up with.

And if Obama's such a "limp wristed liberal," why is he bombing Pakistan without their permission? Oh, that's right. Because he knows the Pakistanis are harboring terrorists and won't do anything to take them out.

 

[danoyse]

Obama could have even had my approval on the Gitmo thing if he had come out and siad, "Look, I recognize bad things happened at Gitmo. I recognize it may have hurt our reputation around the world. I also however, realize these are dangerous people being held there. We know many of them are guilty, are terrorists and would gladly kill any of us they could. Therefore my administration will begin investigating ways to eventually close down Gitmo, but for right now and the immediate future...we cannot do that. We cannot let these criminals go free. They must be held until we can find another prison to hold them and then bring them through the court system.

Instead we got "Im closing Gitmo because our troops poured some water on them or scared them with dogs and my liberal limp wrist didn't like that".

No, not even close.

Gitmo is scheduled to close in a year. No one is opening the doors and letting everyone leave, and the people detained there will be dealt with responsibly. It's what they should have been doing in the first place.

 

[Nitehawk013]

A year will not be long enough. The terrorists will still be held there because they will not have trials for them all. What then? Let them go? Move them to prisons in country? Yeah....I really want them in our country on our soil.

 

[danoyse]

A year will not be long enough. The terrorists will still be held there because they will not have trials for them all. What then? Let them go? Move them to prisons in country? Yeah....I really want them in our country on our soil.

If they're locked up in prison, then what's the problem?

 

[Nitehawk013]

I don't want them on our soil unless they are in body bags. Simply my opinion.

 

[Addendum]

Because dirt has so much value