Today’s Qs for O’s WH — 2/6/09
TAPPER: The president later today is going to be meeting with a bunch of families of terrorist victims. A lot of the people he’s going to be meeting with take issue with his decision to stop the military commissions. They say that it’s been through an extensive legal and legislative review, the Supreme Court has weighed in, and they don’t understand what concerns the president has in this process. Could you explain, what are some of the concerns the president has specifically about the military commissions?
GIBBS: Well, I think the main concern that the president has is the military commission’s failure to bring those in detention to swift justice. The president invited family members, families of those that were killed in — first in the USS Cole incident in 2000, and next in the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and wants to discuss his plan to bring about changes in Guantanamo that he believes will make this country safer and bring about the very same swift justice that they desire on behalf of those that they know that have been killed.
TAPPER: I’m sorry. How does delaying or even renewing the trials make it any swifter?
GIBBS: Well, I’d — I’d — the act that the Cole families are disappointed — the act that the Cole families were affected by happened in 2000. We’ve not yet seen justice brought now in 2009 to Mr. al-Nashiri. Judge Crawford withdrew the charges without prejudice to reinstatement of those charges. Mr. al-Nashiri remains in detention. And her decision brings all cases into compliance with the executive order that the president issued. But — but I think if you look at the number of those awaiting justice and those that have gone through the process, I think you’ll see quite clearly that very few — very few have been brought to justice. The discussion that the president looks forward to having today is part of the ongoing process with how to move forward. I don’t believe that the families affected by the terrorist incident with the USS Cole have — have seen — they certainly haven’t seen this president, and I don’t believe they saw the last president either. And the president thought it was important to listen to their very personal cares and their concerns about anything that’s involved in this process.
TAPPER: The arraignment of al-Nashiri was supposed to be Monday, but because of the executive order, the president — Crawford suspended — withdrew the charges. I still don’t understand, and — how this is going to make the justice any swifter. I understand the cases that haven’t been heard for other detainees –
GIBBS: Well, without getting into some of the specific aspects of this case, I think the president believed that the best course of action going forward to bring about the justice that both he and the families seek in this case was to go through the very process that Judge Crawford has done and the executive order that the president has signed.
***
Note: After the briefing, Gibbs emailed me an explanation that makes more sense. "The President believes that military commissions as currently constructed will be the subject of years of litigation, which we are trying to avoid as its been long enough for many of these families," he said. "The President believes that the process he’s put in place will create a firmer and more sound legal framework to move forward."
- jpt
Email
Biden Reflects on Grief, Suicidal Thoughts
Is Congress Sounding Dumber?
Why do you even bother with this guy?
I have never heard a response that was either cogent or new.
Posted by: BertieW | February 6, 2009, 3:08 pm 3:08 pm
“The President believes that the process he’s put in place will create a firmer and more sound legal framework to move forward.”
====
He hasn’t really put a process in place yet, has he jake?
Posted by: MayBee | February 6, 2009, 3:09 pm 3:09 pm
“The President believes that military commissions as currently constructed will be the subject of years of litigation, which we are trying to avoid as its been long enough for many of these families,”
Getting past the above is what has taken so long. His e-mail explanation sounds good if one reads it fast, but what is the alternative that will speed justice?
Posted by: smith | February 6, 2009, 3:18 pm 3:18 pm
Has justice been served with the military tribunals? Has justice been served by the label Enemy Combatant? Has the 911 victims been satisfied to date with any of the out comes?
The short answer is no. So why continue with it?
Fuss all you want it changes nothing.
Posted by: Thinking | February 6, 2009, 3:23 pm 3:23 pm
Jake, why do you so hate Gibbs? Your anger is getting in the way of doing your stated job. Instead of trying to slime Gibbs/Obama with gotcha’s, try to evenly report on the facts.
Posted by: matt | February 6, 2009, 3:30 pm 3:30 pm
He hasn’t really put a process in place yet, has he jake?
*********************************************
After about 15 days, no. But neither had his predecessor after 6 years of holding Nashiri, who had been aprehended in the UAE. The Military Tribunal didn’t even begin until December of ’08. Pohl and the Bush administration knew that Gitmo and their present system of detainee procedures were going to be cleaned up very soon after Obama had been elected. After all, it had been a campaign promise that necessitated quick implementation. It looks the worst on Pohl, who at the last minute implemented he proceedings, knowing full well they would be challenged. He was basically acting under a political agenda that would have only served to prolong the delay, while claiming he was acting on the behalf and interests of the family. It was dirty double dealing.
Posted by: kathy | February 6, 2009, 3:36 pm 3:36 pm
Hey Jake,
Could you post a link to that “Gallup Poll” which you cited yesterday in the press conference as showing majority of Americans oppose the Stimulus plan? All I can find are polls where majority support it. Are you allowed to make polls up, just to ask questions?
Posted by: Jon | February 6, 2009, 3:36 pm 3:36 pm
Some cynical Democrats, including me, are starting to call the Stimulus Bill “The Obama Re-Election Plan.” Today, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office released its opinion on the Stimulus Plan, aka the Muddle.
They say, “President Obama’s economic recovery package will actually hurt the economy more in the long run than if he were to do nothing, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday… CBO did project the bill would create jobs, though by 2011 the effects would be minuscule.”
Posted by: Powertorobusblind | February 6, 2009, 3:44 pm 3:44 pm
kathy:After about 15 days, no.
====
So what did Gibbs mean by “The President believes that the process he’s put in place”?
Posted by: MayBee | February 6, 2009, 3:44 pm 3:44 pm
First of all, there is no way Gibbs actually WROTE that email. He may have sent it, but surely it was written by some legal counsel within the administration.
Gibbs is a pathetic press secretary. His lack of knowledge, confidence (I don’t think he even believes what he says) and weak attempts at injecting humor to distract from his own discomfort is just plain hard to watch.
I applaud Jake as always for not allowing this new administration to think they are just too smart and too clever for the average American to figure out that they are no different than any other politician.
Posted by: julie | February 6, 2009, 3:45 pm 3:45 pm
What sorts of government spending DO help prepare an economy and its workers to make the most of the eventual recovery:
Investing in health care — expanding community health centers, health coverage for the uninsured, and family planning (fewer children means parents can work more easily).
Investing in education — better schools means graduates can DO the work that eventually will be called for (See: India. Also See: NYC’s public school system of the 1930’s and 1940’s.)
Investing in small businesses — incentives to people (NOT zillionaires who already OWN lots of capital) to start or keep going with their businesses.
REGULATING the banking system — getting rid of the diseased parts and keeping a FIRM rein on greedy profit-seekers
Posted by: what to do | February 6, 2009, 3:47 pm 3:47 pm
jon,
I don’t have the exact numbers but it was something like 37% approve it “as is”, 25% completely reject a stimulus bill and 38% want a stimulus bill, but not this one…they want it modified. So the majority of Americans are against the current bill.
Whatever your political affiliation, I can’t imagine anyone really thinks Robert Gibbs was a good choice for Obama. I think he’ll be gone in 2 months. He just is not ready for prime time. He can’t handle any questions, not just Jake’s…not any period. He muddles through answers unnecessarily and doesn’t serve Obama well.
Posted by: Lara | February 6, 2009, 3:49 pm 3:49 pm
“Could you post a link to that “Gallup Poll” which you cited yesterday in the press conference as showing majority of Americans oppose the Stimulus plan”
Yeah, all you would have to do is go to the Gallup home page. The % of people who support *this* stimulus HR1 is 38%.
Posted by: BertieW | February 6, 2009, 3:49 pm 3:49 pm
DOH-BAMA could care less about these families or terrorism.. the proof is coming out. he will be granting pardons and Social Security benefits to them shortly
Posted by: DOH-bama Cabinet of Corruption | February 6, 2009, 3:50 pm 3:50 pm
The Republicans are whipping up a new Red Scare to keep uninformed voters on their side. And the Democrats are whipping up anti-Republican hatred and grim scenarios of the Depression to keep uninformed voters on THEIR side.
And women and children are the whipping post.
Posted by: whipgibbs | February 6, 2009, 3:50 pm 3:50 pm
smith: “what is the alternative that will speed justice?”
Trials in the US under a framework approved by Congress, which has the Constitutional power to define the court system (with the exception of the Supreme Court at the top).
Posted by: jhw539 | February 6, 2009, 3:53 pm 3:53 pm
Yeah, all you would have to do is go to the Gallup home page. The % of people who support *this* stimulus HR1 is 38%.
****************************************
Hmmm……
PRINCETON, NJ — Fifty-two percent of Americans interviewed Wednesday night are in favor of Congress passing a roughly $800 billion economic stimulus package; 38% are opposed.
More misinformation from your leaders?
Posted by: Thinking | February 6, 2009, 3:57 pm 3:57 pm
BertieW: “Yeah, all you would have to do is go to the Gallup home page. The % of people who support *this* stimulus HR1 is 38%. ”
OK, I actually went to the page and the most current Gallup poll:
“As you may know, Congress is considering a new economic stimulus package of at least $800 billion. Do you favor or oppose Congress passing THIS legislation?
Favor: 52%
Oppose: 32%
No Opinion: 10%”
Gallup headlines the page on this poll “Public Support for Stimulus Package Unchanged at 52%”
(Emphasis mine) This poll asks the exact question Do you want to pass this bill, yes or no? And the answer is yes – 52% is much larger than 32%.
Posted by: jhw539 | February 6, 2009, 3:59 pm 3:59 pm
So what did Gibbs mean by “The President believes that the process he’s put in place”?
*******************************************
I don’t know. I couldn’t find that wording in the interview, except for Gibbs saying that an “ongoing process” has been put in place by executive order. He was, I assume, referring to the order 2 or 3 days after the inauguration on closing down Gitmo and initiating the trial process. The 240 or so detainees were not charged for anything the years they were there, apparently not by military tribunals or through any process.
Posted by: kathy | February 6, 2009, 4:11 pm 4:11 pm
Only two weeks into his presidency, it’s already time for President Obama to put up or shut up – to put our money where his mouth was during the campaign.
If he saddles our nation – and our children – with $1 trillion in debt for the same old, bloated, wasteful Washington spend-a-palooza while unemployment goes to double digits and the breadlines grow longer, he will not be remembered as a new Abraham Lincoln.
He will be remembered as the man who presided over the total collapse of the American economy – and the superpower status built on top of it.
Posted by: canyousparemeadime? | February 6, 2009, 4:11 pm 4:11 pm
Meanwhile as you well know the 2/1 poll says:
Question: Do you think Congress should pass Obama’s stimulus plan basically as Barack Obama has proposed it, pass it but only after making major changes, or reject the plan?
- 38% pass as proposed
- 37% pass with major changes
- 17% reject plan
- 8% no opinion
So mystery solved! 54% dont want HR1 passed.
So now we have figured out why Tapper didnt cite a poll that wasnt released until the next day.
What we dont know is why Gallup decided it was too embarrassing to keep asking people if they wanted the bill changed. Kind of odd since those are the two choices in front of the country- pass it or fix it.
Posted by: BertieW | February 6, 2009, 4:14 pm 4:14 pm
And the answer is yes – 52% is much larger than 32%.
********************************************
JHW- I think what happens is that percentages within the percentage are used. For instance, with the FOX poll, 75% wanted some form of a stimulus plan, but 38% were okay with how it is, while 37% wanted changes. Some people, including pundits, ran with the lower numbers. I would definitely be with the 37% because I want less taxes and far more stimulus. It’s a shame the two biggest expenditures are so different in size, with tax cuts around 30% and infrastructure at 10%.
Posted by: kathy | February 6, 2009, 4:17 pm 4:17 pm
kathy:I don’t know. I couldn’t find that wording in the interview,
====
It’s in Jake’s post.
I’m cutting and pasting from the email Gibbs sent Tapper.
Posted by: MayBee | February 6, 2009, 4:23 pm 4:23 pm
kathy: “I think what happens is that percentages within the percentage are used. ”
In this case, it’s a matter of the question wording. BertieW keeps citing that wanting the bill passed with changes is the same as wanting no stimulus bill (the option the minority party Republicans are currently offering – Democrats are not in the majority to pass a third round of Bush tax cuts that haven’t worked yet). I am trying to point out when the option is this bill or nothing, the results of Gallup polls are VERY clear.
Polls don’t lie when they fully cite their methodology. BertieW does lie when he misstates what the poll is saying.
Posted by: jhw539 | February 6, 2009, 4:24 pm 4:24 pm
jhw…thanks for the info on the administrations desire to try combatants in the US but be careful what you wish for
Posted by: smith | February 6, 2009, 4:25 pm 4:25 pm
The demons of the senate are saying they need the PorkPie to spend our future taxes because if American’s are given the stimulus money they will not spend it but use it to pay bills instead because they are scared (and would act too responsibly…..)
They want us to depend on them or they tell us we will be out on the streets. Is there anyone in the House or Senate that we trust to tell us the truth?
No one I trust right now.
Posted by: trust me no! | February 6, 2009, 4:27 pm 4:27 pm
“Meanwhile as you well know the 2/1 poll says:”
Fifty-two percent of Americans interviewed Wednesday night are in favor of Congress passing a roughly $800 billion economic stimulus package; 38% are opposed. These figures are nearly identical to those measured in Gallup polling last week, right before passage of the bill in the U.S. House of Representatives, and are also in line with public support in early January.
A bipartisan group of centrist senators is attempting to increase support for the legislation by shaving some of the more controversial spending items from the current set of proposals. Estimates of how much trimming will take place vary, but Gallup finds 48% in favor of a smaller stimulus package that would cut the size of the original bill by up to $200 billion.
When combining respondents’ views on the two questions, Gallup finds 72% of Americans in favor of at least one of the plans, including 27% who favor both plans, 24% who favor only the larger proposal, and 21% who favor only the smaller proposal. Thus, public support for some type of stimulus — regardless of the specific dollar amount — is high.
Posted by: Ryan C | February 6, 2009, 4:33 pm 4:33 pm
What a petulant child, he is. He wants this stimulus passed immediately so that he can go to Springfield, IL next week and play Lincoln.
Yes, he’s painting gloom, doom, snd fear on everyone’s living room walls. Maybe he’s The One who should go into his bedroom and hide in the closet.
He is the most arrogant man I think I have ever watched in action.
His life and his political career have been a game to him a game he is proud to say HE WON(because he cheated)
Who ever heard of a president saying because I won that’s why.
He got his air force one jacket looks like a halloween custom on him.
Scared me.
It really takes a flippin’ flyin’ ####### to tell the opposition that they “won” (by cheating) when they are both on the same sinking ship. Childish does not even start to cover it and STUPID is an understatement.
Obama is a trainwreck.
Posted by: Love is blind | February 6, 2009, 4:34 pm 4:34 pm
Americans maybe are waking up a little- hope they all pay attention:
The last time a bill was rushed like this, without ample time for congressional committee evaluation, etc., we found ourself in a war.
Obie is using the same type of fear tactics that Bush did.
Last night was an embarrassment- and not one mention from our friends in the MSM re: how petulant and condescending he was. Where are the republicans? WHy aren’t they calling him out on this?
One of my favorite terms- “What a disgrace”
Posted by: pay attention | February 6, 2009, 4:38 pm 4:38 pm
“In this case, it’s a matter of the question wording. BertieW keeps citing that wanting the bill passed with changes is the same as wanting no stimulus bill”
I can see why Rahm thinks education is crisis to be exploited.
They didnt ask if there should pick a different font for the bill. The survey question was “major changes” MAJOR.
ma·jor (mjr)
adj.
1. Greater than others in importance or rank: a major artist.
2. Great in scope or effect: a major improvement.
3. Great in number, size, or extent: the major portion of the population.
4. Requiring great attention or concern; very serious: a major illness.
So people would like changes “great in size, scope or extent, and the Demo’s offer to take out Gibb’s proverbial 0.02% of the bill.
15 Senators get together in a bipartisan way and try to look through the bill and fix it and Obama stamps his little foot and says “I won!”
That means he is trying to prevent just the changes that people want.
All the while playing the fear card.
Posted by: BertieW | February 6, 2009, 4:41 pm 4:41 pm
canyousparemeadime: “He will be remembered as the man who presided over the total collapse of the American economy”
No, Bush has that honor. The recession started in 2007, before Obama was even the Democratic candidate and after a pretty historic run of tax cut ‘stimulus.’
Posted by: jhw539 | February 6, 2009, 4:41 pm 4:41 pm
President Obama and the Democrats in Congress are selling soothing syrup to their political base at a price of massive inflation and agony for the future. What Franklin Delano Roosevelt said in his first inaugural address holds doubly true today: “Faced by failure of credit, they have proposed only the lending of more money.”
Democrats have, of course, always been willing to tolerate a certain level of inflation in an effort to hold down joblessness. But the lengths to which they are now going to spare us immediate pain and the implications of a doubling of the money supply in one year are beyond rational calculus.
It’s hard to believe that any administration, set of economists or political party could be this irresponsible or so focused on the next election that they are literally willing to mortgage much of the next decade to win it.
Posted by: Unbelievable | February 6, 2009, 4:43 pm 4:43 pm
I don’t know if it adds anything to include all of the uh and ah and er in the transcript, but if you do it, you ought to add it into both the question and the answer instead of just the answer. Check out the verbatim:
Um — The president later today is going to be meeting with a bunch of families — uh — of terrorist victims. A lot of the people he’s going to be meeting with — uh — take issue with his decision to stop — uh — the military commissions. They say that it’s been through an extensive legal and legislative review — uh — the Supreme Court has weighed in, and they don’t understand what concerns the president has in this process.
It is hard to listen for almost an hour to someone who fills alot of hesitant pauses with ums and ers, but it is alot better to hear someone who is actually answering the questions instead of repeating some talking point over and over again regardless whether its relevant to the question.
Posted by: Flash Override | February 6, 2009, 4:49 pm 4:49 pm
Concerned in OH: “…Bush has that honor. The recession started in 2007,”
Wrong. The Democratic congress has that honor.”
Sorry – I forgot the Republican Mantra: The buck stops with the Democrats. (Who took control of congress a whole 9 months before the recession – it must be their fault!)
Posted by: jhw539 | February 6, 2009, 4:55 pm 4:55 pm
“It’s hard to believe that any administration, set of economists or political party could be this irresponsible or so focused on the next election that they are literally willing to mortgage much of the next decade to win it. ”
Not really. Bear in mind that the Bush presidency – 6 years with a Republican Congress – added $4 trillion dollars to the debt. That is five times this stimulus package.
Posted by: jhw539 | February 6, 2009, 4:56 pm 4:56 pm
Concerned,
Funny you should mention KY – here’s a statement from the Governor there:
“I was pleased to hear details of President-elect Barack Obama’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan and his desire to help struggling states. Kentucky, like the nation, is facing a worsening recession and state government is faced with a $456 million revenue deficit for the current year. That is why I strongly support President-elect Obama’s calls for an infusion of funding for energy and education, health care and traditional and non-traditional infrastructure programs.
“Most important, however, is the timing of a stimulus package. Just as I have called upon state legislators to move quickly to reach agreement on a plan to balance Kentucky’s budget while protecting critical needs, I’m urging Congress to move quickly to pass this vital economic stimulus.”
Posted by: Flash Override | February 6, 2009, 4:58 pm 4:58 pm
Did you not know that Obama yesterday granted the KY Governor’s request for a major disaster declaration?
Posted by: Flash Override | February 6, 2009, 5:00 pm 5:00 pm
“I appreciate President Obama’s quick response to our request for a major disaster declaration following this devastating storm,” Gov. Beshear said.
Posted by: Flash Override | February 6, 2009, 5:03 pm 5:03 pm
Acting FEMA Administrator Nancy Ward has been in Kentucky since Wednesday surveying damages and assessing storm recovery efforts.
Posted by: Flash Override | February 6, 2009, 5:04 pm 5:04 pm
Some of the other governors lobbying for passage of the recovery act:
Charlie Crist R(FL)
Mitch Daniels R(Indiana)
Jodi Rell R(CT)
Posted by: Flash Override | February 6, 2009, 5:11 pm 5:11 pm
Concerned, you always get in trouble winging your whining.
You try to score political points off of the freezing kids in KY, but when you get called out, the fact that you were totally wrong on the facts is supposed to be mitigated by the fact that the Gov is Democratic?
Then you get called out on the fact that it isn’t just Dem governors that want the bill, and you say thats because kids aren’t freezing there?
I have news for you, there are plenty of people in those states who cant afford power and heat.
The country is facing a crisis and look at the political games you’re still playing.
Pathetic.
Posted by: Flash Override | February 6, 2009, 5:38 pm 5:38 pm
“Not really. Bear in mind that the Bush presidency – 6 years with a Republican Congress – added $4 trillion dollars to the debt. That is five times this stimulus package. ”
So whats your explanation about why that wasn’t stimulative?
Posted by: BertieW | February 6, 2009, 5:38 pm 5:38 pm
Please don’t stop asking real, important questions, Jake. This new Press Secretary is an IDIOT. He is completely inexperienced and arrogant.
Barack’s reign will damage our country.
Posted by: maura | February 6, 2009, 5:43 pm 5:43 pm
“No, Bush has that honor. The recession started in 2007,”
Wrong. The Democratic congress has that honor.”
And yet you blame the recession of late 2000, early 2001 on Clinton.
Posted by: Ryan C | February 6, 2009, 5:45 pm 5:45 pm
I think John Cole has it about right, given the current state of the Republican Party:
“I really don’t understand how bipartisanship is ever going to work when one of the parties is insane. Imagine trying to negotiate an agreement on dinner plans with your date, and you suggest Italian and she states her preference would be a meal of tire rims and anthrax. If you can figure out a way to split the difference there and find a meal you will both enjoy, you can probably figure out how bipartisanship is going to work the next few years”
Posted by: Flash Override | February 6, 2009, 5:47 pm 5:47 pm
Beshear asked Obama for a disaster declaration to free up federal assistance Thursday, two days after the storm hit, and Obama issued it hours later. Trucks loaded with supplies began arriving at a staging area at Fort Campbell, Ky., on Friday morning.
On Saturday, Beshear ordered all of the state’s Army National Guardsmen into action to distribute supplies, many of which came from FEMA.
“We have had tremendous and quick response from President Obama and his administration,” Beshear said Monday. “I don’t think any of our folks that have dealt with disasters before ever recall as quick a response as we got last Wednesday.”
Trina Sheets, executive director of the National Emergency Management Association, based in Lexington, Ky., said that from what she’s heard, FEMA’s response has been very good so far. Her group represents emergency management directors from all 50 states.
“The governor’s declaration request for an emergency was turned around very, very quickly by FEMA and the White House,” said Sheets, who just had her power restored Monday after four days without it. “And President Obama has spoken with the governor of Kentucky on several occasions throughout the event.”
Sheets said she hadn’t heard any complaints so far about the federal response.
Posted by: Flash Override | February 6, 2009, 6:11 pm 6:11 pm
Magnificent job, Jake. Your heroic work will bring journalism back from the brink of propaganda.
Posted by: Manny Mendelson | February 6, 2009, 6:15 pm 6:15 pm
“The prevailing liberal wisdom for FEMA’s purported failures at Katrina was because “George Bush hates Black People”.”
Most people (including myself) feel the failures at FEMA stem from Bush hiring a crony with zero experience for the job, notwithstanding Kayne West’s accurate observation.
“Heckuva a job Brownie!”
Posted by: Ryan C | February 6, 2009, 6:21 pm 6:21 pm
More than 150,000 Kentucky residents remained without power or potable water on Thursday after last week’s deadly ice storms, prompting President Obama to declare more than 90 counties a major disaster area and order federal aid to supplement local recovery efforts.
The storm has been blamed for 27 deaths in Kentucky, mostly from carbon monoxide poisoning from generators. More than 175,000 homes and businesses served by 55 water systems remained under orders to boil water, emergency officials said.
Mr. Obama signed federal emergency declarations last week for Kentucky, Arkansas and Missouri after ice and snow were blamed for knocking power out for 1.3 million homes and businesses from the Southern Plains to the East Coast.
But Mr. Beshear asked the president to upgrade the federal response by declaring the counties a major disaster area, which would open the door for immediate financial assistance.
Mr. Obama’s declaration allows the federal government to reimburse states and localities for up to 75 percent of storm-related costs. Mr. Beshear’s office estimated that the storm did more than $50 million worth of damage to the state.
Posted by: Ryan C | February 6, 2009, 6:25 pm 6:25 pm
“50 deaths that could have been avoided had 0bama not been too busy with cocktail hour to care.”
The storm has been blamed for 27 deaths in Kentucky, mostly from carbon monoxide poisoning from generators.
And from today
A Kentucky official says the number of power outages has dropped to about 125,000 across the state, down from a high of more than 769,000.
I know Katrina was embarrassing for you.
It was embarrassing for all Americans which is why Bush’s incompetence and failure of leadership was so vilified.
We can see the difference with Obama who was quick to declare disaster areas and has some in charge of FEMA who actually knows what they are doing.
Posted by: Ryan C | February 6, 2009, 6:46 pm 6:46 pm
RE: Mark @ 6:33
************************************
I’d like to expand on Mark’s concern. I look at other news sites, like CNN,NBC, etc, and I haven’t seen anything about the “bunch of people who were families of the terrorist victims,” who are expressing a collective concern about the overturn of Pohl’s ruling to go ahead with the Military Tribunal for Nashari. That’s been a major information gap in Political Punch articles. It’s reminiscent of the information gaps throughout the Bush years with much of the reporting. I’m not accusing anyone of misinformation at all –I’m just saying the reporting so far on Nashiri and the USS Cole has had some holes, which unfortunately, hasn’t been uncommon in the general media coverage of events over the years.
Posted by: kathy | February 6, 2009, 6:52 pm 6:52 pm
Concerned in OH forgets the terribly delayed response of Fema, not only in LA, but all accross the region. How convenient…
Posted by: gravy | February 6, 2009, 7:08 pm 7:08 pm
“Who ever heard of a president saying because I won that’s why.”
“I earned capital in the political campaign and I intend to spend it.”
- George W. Bush after the 2004 elections.
Keep in mind that Bush only won by 2.4%… not by 7.2% like Obama.
Obama had a higher percentage of the popular vote than Reagan when he beat Carter. He won. As such, his policies will be the basis for negotiation, not the failed Republican policies.
Posted by: Mark Kraft | February 6, 2009, 7:09 pm 7:09 pm
ALL Americans will be waiting to see this new process “he’ll put in place” to be better and sounder framework.
How it will be a quicker and “litigation free” in a civilian or modified civilian court is very questionable?
Same witnesses
Same interrogation
Same intelligence reports
Except it will be more difficult to provide the national security for our intelligence processes and extremely questionable that witnesses here or abroad will feel quite as secure standing in open court and then going in witness protection.
In military courts, well there’s the tribunal, there’s a specified appellate level, then right to Supreme Court for a constitution question,
IN the regular US court system, well, you know anything can and will happen.
In addition to the human rights questions and procedural minutiae, there is :
Venue shopping – what court is best
Conflict of interest of judge
Various motions of delay.
We all saw the OJ trial. KSM or even Nashiri will be that on steroids in a public trial, with the added extra pleasure that our national secrets and our national security are ebbing away in the courtroom.
Good work, President Obama.
Posted by: robert b | February 6, 2009, 7:14 pm 7:14 pm
“I feel sorry and pray for the victims and future victims of the Democrats.”
You said the same thing while pimping the Ashley Todd hoax.
What a shock.
Posted by: Ryan C | February 6, 2009, 7:24 pm 7:24 pm
“if we do everything right, if we do it with absolute certainty, we stand up there and we make really tough decisions, there’s still a 30-percent chance we’re going to get it wrong”
I prefer Joe Biden’s honesty to the Cheney method of never admitting mistakes even in the face of overwhelming evidence.
Posted by: Ryan C | February 6, 2009, 7:39 pm 7:39 pm
Surely you understand the concepts of before and after? Right? Your strange use of the word “delayed” indicates you might be confused.
_______
I’m not confused. You’re saying that Obama waited a few hours before declaring Kentucky a disaster area, which is debatable. I’m saying GW et al waited days, and days, and days, and days. Even while pictures of the suffereing was all over the news. Your post mentioned the disater declaration of “northern LA”prior to Katrina…What about the rest of the Gulf region. And is NO in Northern LA?
Posted by: gravy | February 6, 2009, 7:55 pm 7:55 pm
I remember Bush on the TV days after the disaster had begun saying that they were doing absolutely everything they could do to get relief to the people trapped at the Superdome while a helicopter sat on the ground in the background doing absolutely nothing. I think the first water they actually saw was sent by Donald Trump.
Posted by: Skip | February 6, 2009, 8:14 pm 8:14 pm
They need to keep those terrorist dudes locked up forever. Cause if they don’t you could be shopping at the mall and have to throw yourself down under a bench because the terrorists have invaded the mall. Big deal if they got water thrown into their face. My sorority initiation was a lot worse than that. BTW I’m a democrat but also a Sarahcrat. Just turn her and the First Dude loose at Gitmo. I bet they’re tired of shooting just mooses, wolfes and wildlife up in the country of Alaska.
Posted by: amber | February 7, 2009, 9:44 am 9:44 am
skip you bring up Katrina,where everybody knows the problem was with the democrat governor and mayor, who let buses flood instead of using them, and not pushing for evacuation as Pres. Buish requested, the state needs to ask for help first.
Now Obama sat on his but while people died in Kentucky and Arkansas for over a week and then sent food supplies that contained tainted Peanut butter!!
Wheres the out cry!!
Posted by: spock | February 7, 2009, 1:25 pm 1:25 pm
by the way Obama’s response to Kentucky was over a week!!
Posted by: spock | February 7, 2009, 1:27 pm 1:27 pm
and then sent food supplies that contained tainted Peanut butter!!
************************************************
Yecch! I hope they sent some Immodium to go with that tainted Peter Pan.
Posted by: amber | February 7, 2009, 1:51 pm 1:51 pm
I think it ought to be pointed out that the ‘extensive review’ cited here includes the Supreme Court striking down sections of the law because it violated the rights of the very people we’re talking about trying here. You make it sound like the law has been upheld in its entirety and the rights of the detainees have been respected. Of course if you have been following this issue you know that isn’t the case.
Posted by: Flash Override | February 7, 2009, 8:13 pm 8:13 pm
Mark Kraft -
Exactly! What would be the point of an election if the winner had to change everything to what the loser wanted? Darned Republicans are crazy and irrational.
/———
“Who ever heard of a president saying because I won that’s why.”
“I earned capital in the political campaign and I intend to spend it.”
- George W. Bush after the 2004 elections.
Keep in mind that Bush only won by 2.4%… not by 7.2% like Obama.
Obama had a higher percentage of the popular vote than Reagan when he beat Carter. He won. As such, his policies will be the basis for negotiation, not the failed Republican policies.
———/
Posted by: Common Sense | February 8, 2009, 6:53 am 6:53 am