Guantanamo Stats

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

Bull. While Bush has certainly been interested in restoring a strong executive, calling it the "defining characteristic" for Gitmo is exceptionally obtuse.

The Bush admin detained people they identified as threats to national security. We can dicker over the criteria, but securing the nation in a time of war was the objective. And it's truly hard to argue that it hasn't been effective, by any measuring stick available to us.

"Dicker over the criteria?"

Bush played you like a virtuoso.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

The rule of law that applies to foreign born, non-American terrorists captured on the battlefield trying to kill American servicemen, is not the same rule of law that applies to you and me.



There is nothing about protecting foreign born, non-American terrorists captured on the battlefield trying to kill American servicemen, that protects me.

In the least.

Nonsense. First of all, you are assuming the following:

1. That everyone captured was foreign born
2. That everyone captured was non-American
3. That everyone captured was a terrorist
4. That everyone captured was on the battlefield trying to kill American servicemen

Each of the 4 above are demonstrably false (ironic that the study Arch posted is further evidence that each of the 4 above are demonstrably false, and you have still missed it).

When you assume that all 4 items above are true, it is easy to then conclude that it doesn't affect you or your liberties at all, and it is easy to conclude that all 4 items above are true when you don't give anyone a trial or tell them what they are being charged with, or even allow them to speak to defense counsel without the prosecuting attorney being present.

They came for the Jews...

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by tooblue

Now imagine that extended executive privilege in Obama's hands ... think about what he would do if this financial crisis continues?

lol!

Tooblue: Look at how dangerously expansive Republicans have made executive power! They have made it soooo expansive, there is no way we can trust a Democrat to hold those powers! Better to let the Republicans continue expanding on their own!

nice.

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

I'm lost. You're suggesting we shouldn't vote for anyone because whomever we put into office might abuse the newly expanded executive power?

I'm not suggesting anything and I don't buy the line that you're lost. I'm asking if you've really thought the decision to vote for Obama through?. I've read the pontifications of Cali and Ma'aki for months ... I've read your posturing in the form of posts for months ... I certainly have been exposed to the media's bias on the subject ... but what are your fears? Or, do you not have any fears about Obama?

And if you don't have any fears, well ...

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

lol!

Tooblue: Look at how dangerously expansive Republicans have made executive power! They have made it soooo expansive, there is no way we can trust a Democrat to hold those powers! Better to let the Republicans continue expanding on their own!

nice.

I never used the word Democrat or suggested this is a Dem v Repub issue. Do you struggle with reading comprehension or are you so entrenched in your dogma that every argument is framed a certain way? I'd use LOL also but I find your apparent lack of objectivity alarming, not funny.

And you mean to tell me you have no fears about what ANY individual might do with the expanded powers? I have serious concerns about McCain in regards to this issue and have voiced them -- by the way he's a Republican. And I have serious concerns about Obama, but I certainly haven't heard any of his supporters voice their concerns which for me is extremely disconcerting.

Are you really voting for Obama because he's a Democrat and he's not Bush? That's what it sounds like.

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by Archaea

I disagree and believe the executive power should be neutered, whether it be McCain or Obama. The continual expansion of executive powers is ripe for abuse.

Agreed and double agreed.

[BlueK]

Originally Posted by Tex

Frankly, I'm a fan of the stronger executive, even if it's in the hands of a nitwit like Obama (all the more reason we should not elect nitwits like Obama).

When it comes to wartime authority, a strong executive is good for the country.

Our form of government is inefficient. A strong executive, like a dictator would get a lot more things done. Now if we can do something about that annoying constitution. I have no idea what "conservative" means anymore.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Nonsense. First of all, you are assuming the following:

1. That everyone captured was foreign born
2. That everyone captured was non-American
3. That everyone captured was a terrorist
4. That everyone captured was on the battlefield trying to kill American servicemen

Each of the 4 above are demonstrably false (ironic that the study Arch posted is further evidence that each of the 4 above are demonstrably false, and you have still missed it).

I think the article is full of crap.

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

When you assume that all 4 items above are true, it is easy to then conclude that it doesn't affect you or your liberties at all, and it is easy to conclude that all 4 items above are true when you don't give anyone a trial or tell them what they are being charged with, or even allow them to speak to defense counsel without the prosecuting attorney being present.

They came for the Jews...

Weren't you the one whining about Arch-like hyperbole earlier?

Originally Posted by BlueK

Our form of government is inefficient. A strong executive, like a dictator would get a lot more things done. Now if we can do something about that annoying constitution. I have no idea what "conservative" means anymore.

More hyperbole.

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by tooblue

I'm not suggesting anything and I don't buy the line that you're lost. I'm asking if you've really thought the decision to vote for Obama through?. I've read the pontifications of Cali and Ma'aki for months ... I've read your posturing in the form of posts for months ... I certainly have been exposed to the media's bias on the subject ... but what are your fears? Or, do you not have any fears about Obama?

And if you don't have any fears, well ...

tooblue, if you don't mind I'm going to excuse myself from this exchange now.

[BlueK]

Originally Posted by Tex

More hyperbole.

Where would you draw the line on presidential power? You've said you like a strong executive. So where is the line?