[excon]

Hello:

If it weren't for the radical Supreme Court nominees Romney would make, Obama should be defeated. First off, he's a center right president.. But, he's EXTREMELY right in SOME of his policies. Here's my list:

1. He didn't close Gitmo.

2. He approved unlimited detention.

3. He's using flawed military tribunals to try the terrorists - IF that ever happens.. I'll bet not.

3. He's DEPORTED more Mexicans than Bush ever dreamed of doing.

4. He's doubled down on the war against marijuana, EVEN THOUGH he used to smoke it himself.

5. He's killing (droning) Americans contrary to the Constitution.

6. He's warring in nations without congressional approval.

7. He has given in to the Republicans in congress at EVERY opportunity.

8. He stands by letting college graduates enter the world with CRUSHING and unsustainable debt.

9. I'll think of something.

excon

[RickJ]

If by "right" you mean "correct" then I'll agree that Obama is correct in some of his policies :)

As to the numbered points (which I do not believe are "right-left" issues)

1. Good. When there are bad teachers we don't close the school. When there are bad employees we don't close the company. There was never a good reason given to close Gitmo.

2. Under certain circumstances, some individuals fall under the "unlimited detention" policy.

3. Nothing is perfect. To say that something is flawed is like saying that some water is moist.

3 (the 2nd one). I can't say that I agree or disagree. I'd like to see a link to a credible source that tells us how many people have been deported under Bush and Obama... but even if I saw it, I don't think that I could agree that POTUS is personally in charge of deportations.

4. No comment. I don't know what doubling down means. All I know is that each year, pot is being decriminalized - and even legalized - more and more. So how someone could say that Obama has "doubled" the war against pot is beyond me.

5. I have no clue about Obama killing Americans contrary to the Constitution.

6. As if Congressional approval means that it's justified?

7. We will have to agree to disagree. Without examples, a comment like "Obama has given in to the Republicans at EVERY opportunity" is equal to it's opposite.

8. This is not an issue that the POTUS can (or should try to) fix.

Obama is not unlike many of our past Presidents who

1. Make many promises when campaigning, and then
2. Blame the previous administration when they fail to keep their promises.

And

3. Spend WAY too much on JUNK, and then tell the public that they have spent less than the previous administration(s) by twisting the numbers.

The subject line of the original post was "Hope and Change".

I sure HOPE there is CHANGE.

[speechlesstx]

I'm sure hoping we can mover forward with change I can believe in instead of giving him a do-over.

[smoothy]

Hello:

If it weren't for the radical Supreme Court nominees Romney would make, Obama should be defeated. First off, he's a center right president.. But, he's EXTREMELY right in SOME of his policies. Here's my list:

As opposed to the radicals Obama "the food stamp predisent" actually DID put on the court?

1. He didn't close Gitmo.

He lied to the lefties... anyone who knows anything knows there was no practical alternative.

2. He approved unlimited detention.

Common sense... they are POW's not convicted criminals

3. He's using flawed military tribunals to try the terrorists - IF that ever happens.. I'll bet not.

As opposed to the flawed liberal courts in some places? A far better alternative. THey should be grateful they get that much.

3. He's DEPORTED more Mexicans than Bush ever dreamed of doing.

Really... most fled on their own since Obama destroyed the economy they came here to profit on.

4. He's doubled down on the war against marijuana, EVEN THOUGH he used to smoke it himself.

Really... thats news to most of us.

5. He's killing (droning) Americans contrary to the Constitution.

Nope... he's killing traitors that joined those that are at war against the USA... big difference. We killed US citizens that returned to Germany to fight against the USA in WW2 as well as Japanese that did the same thing... no outrage there?

6. He's warring in nations without congressional approval.

And yet the lefties raised hell when Bush was Warring WITH approval of congress

7. He has given in to the Republicans in congress at EVERY opportunity.

Really... you mean like Obamacare? And all the Stuff Prince Harry reffuses to allow to have a vote that the Congress already passed?

8. He stand's by letting college graduates enter the world with CRUSHING and unsustainable debt.

Nobody made them borrow all that money for Courses that have no practical job field... like Philosaphy... and a lot of Liberal arts courses that teach you nothing practical. THey borrowed the money... they are obligagted to pay it all back... plus interest. I did it... because I had the misfortune of being born white... and poor and got no help while Obama got a free ride just because of his skin color at the same time even though I had better grades.

9. I'll think of something.

excon

Keep trying...

[paraclete]

Ex I think you are confused with someone who is continuing the policies of his predecessor because he can't change anything. He has to do something so he is doing what he can. But he did pull the troops out of Iraq even if he sent some to Afghanistan and he has tried to fix health care which is definitely a non right objective.

Now we would all like to see him stand for something and win that Peace prize but it just ain't going to happen

[excon]

3. I'd like to see a link to a credible source that tells us how many people have been deported under Bush and Obama... but even if I saw it, I don't think that I could agree that POTUS is personally in charge of deportations.

4. No comment. I don't know what doubling down means. All I know is that each year, pot is being decriminalized - and even legalized - more and more. So how someone could say that Obama has "doubled" the war against pot is beyond me.

5. I have no clue about Obama killing Americans contrary to the Constitution.

Hello Rick:

The DEA along with ICE are in the executive branch of government. The president RUNS that department... That means DEA and ICE follow his instructions..

Obama is on pace to deport more immigrants through his first term than Bush did in his entire presidency. Read about here in the Business Insider.

Bush let the states decide their medical marijuana laws, and Obama promised that he would too. He LIED. Read about it here. Even Nancy Pelosi doesn't like it.

Some people think that the government can't execute an American citizen without due process of law. At least that's what the Constitution says. But, Obama droned Awlaki and his son anyway... Read about here at military.com.

excon

[tomder55]

4. Don't you know that legalizing pot is the October surprise ?
Democrats Look to Cultivate Pot Vote in 2012 - WSJ.com

[speechlesstx]

I wouldn't expect less from thew leader of the 'choom gang.'

[excon]

I wouldn't expect less from the leader of the 'choom gang.'

Hello again, Steve:

That only makes his war on pot even MORE hypocritical. If, perchance, he'd have been BUSTED, like he's BUSING people TODAY, he would NOT be president. He would NOT have gone to Harvard. He would NOT have married Michelle and have two beautiful children. He'd be just another black unemployed exconvict hanging on the streets.

How he doesn't get this, I don't know.

excon

[smearcase]

Possible # 10:
Failure to hold anybody in previous admin. Accountable for going to war by mistake, and admitted violations of the Geneva Conventions.

Maybe it should be #10 and #11 but 10 is a nice round number.

[excon]

Possible # 10:
Failure to hold anybody in previous admin. accountable for going to war by mistake, and admitted violations of the Geneva Conventions.

Hello smear:

Good 'un. Hereby ADOPTED. It's OFFICIALLY #10.

excon

[smearcase]

USN would have held you and I responsible for Geneva Convention violations, should have applied to cheney too.

[smoothy]

Possible # 10:
Failure to hold anybody in previous admin. accountable for going to war by mistake, and admitted violations of the Geneva Conventions.

Maybe it shoudl be #10 and #11 but 10 is a nice round number.

The Obama administration isn't a previous administration yet...

Bush had congresses approval... Obama never even tried to get it.

And there were not violations of the Geneva Convention... you can't pick which parts do or don't apply... they are either criminals or they are POW's... you can't have it both ways.

And incidentally... Terrorists are not entitled to Geneva Convention protections... they aren't part of a regular army.. they aren't wearing uniforms of a regular army.

In every previous war... anyone caught taking actions OUT of uniform... were not afforded those protections... and treated accordingly... usually questioned and then shot.

[speechlesstx]

Um, how can anyone be held accountable "for going to war by mistake" when the UN Security unanimously gave Iraq "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations", and they did not?

[excon]

Um, how can anyone be held accountable "for going to war by mistake"

Hello again, Steve:

So, we should LISTEN to the UN?? I thought right wingers would NEVER do what the UN wanted us to do...

I don't know how much you know about LEADERSHIP, but it's ABOUT the mistakes you make.. There AIN'T no pointing to somebody else when you're the TOP guy. It's EASY to say, it's not my fault, but it WAS. It ABSOLUTELY was, and you want to give him a pass.

Dude. As you can see, I tell the TRUTH about MY president... YOU?? Not so much.

excon

[paraclete]

Um, how can anyone be held accountable "for going to war by mistake" when the UN Security unanimously gave Iraq "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations", and they did not?

Let's not rerun that old argument. GWB made a unilateral declaration of war and attacked Iraq, UN approval was secondary. He took some cronies with him, why they were there is because they believed the B/S. Left to its own devices the UN would not have declared war because certain nations on the security council would have vetoed it in the same way they now veto intervention in Syria

[smoothy]

Democrats are incapible of grasping the concept of what a Cease Fire agreement actually means.

They actually think the Korean war ended too... and they are wrong there too.

[tomder55]

Democrats are incapible of grasping the concept of what a Cease Fire agreement actually means.

They actually think the Korean war ended too....and they are wrong there too.

Yup... that was but one of the many reasons given for the war.

[speechlesstx]

Hello again, Steve:

So, we should LISTEN to the UN???? I thought right wingers would NEVER do what the UN wanted us to do...

I don't know how much you know about LEADERSHIP, but it's ABOUT the mistakes you make.. There AIN'T no pointing to somebody else when you're the TOP guy. It's EASY to say, it's not my fault, but it WAS. It ABSOLUTELY was, and you wanna give him a pass.

Dude. As you can see, I tell the TRUTH about MY president... YOU??? Not so much.

excon

Dude, when have I been afraid to criticize my side? Never, but it's not me saying "trust the UN," it's your side that suddenly decided to say "don't trust the UN." Regardless, Bush had the authority from both Congress and the UN so exactly how do you hold Bush accountable for a "multinational force" of 41 countries for doing what was authorized?

Oh, and leaders don't lead from behind.

[tomder55]

Left to its own devices the UN would not have declared war because certain nations on the security council would have vetoed it in the same way they now veto intervention in Syria

Not quite... Left to their own devices they would not have declared war because they were in on the Oil for Food bribe gravy train .