Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Does everything require change? LOL..You guys are getting so pathetic. I guess we'll see a thread with people outraged over Obama not changing WH toiletpaper or salt shakers..Just sad.
Oh for christs sake---Obama is the fool who ran on "change" as the central focus of his campaign. Let me know when you get tired of bieng an Obama apologist...
Three judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit batted aside claims by the Obama administration that the suit would reveal "state secrets" at the heart of the agency's covert operations and so should be dismissed.
Since you're fairly nice and might possibly read through the links. I know you heard about "states secrets" that Obama invoked.... Otherwise known as secret CIA camps. Of course to the public it's a transfer of power to other nations for "justice" despite having video tapes of what happens to those transfers. http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id...onid=351020205
Most of the big L liberal stations forgot to cover this, they were too busy covering Obama's butt.
It requires change because Obama promised us change we can believe in.
See my above post about toiletpaper..LOL...You all want nonsense you can believe in. Lets keep torturing, gitmo open, a horrible health care system but oh no, we want some change in these social positions..Obama shouldn't be putting social people in social positions. LOL Keep em coming. This is funny.
Oh for christs sake---Obama is the fool who ran on "change" as the central focus of his campaign. Let me know when you get tired of bieng an Obama apologist...
Technically we do have change, change from those who bought positions with Bush, to those that bought positions with Obama. The only hypocracy is those that actually defend the selling of positions, lets scroll up to see who supports this.. ooh liberals.. The same individuals that oppose the rich..
Oh for christs sake---Obama is the fool who ran on "change" as the central focus of his campaign. Let me know when you get tired of bieng an Obama apologist...
LOL..apologist..these are social positions that he appointed social people to. LOL...Nobody thought that change meant he would change EVERYTHING..I get it..That's why you wingnuts were so scared. That's how YOU interpreted change. Now I understand..You guys are dumber than I thought. LOL.
The state secrets privelege is a long-established one. The issue with Bush was not his use of it, but his misuse of it. If one wishes to comment with any intelligence on this matter, understanding that difference is an imperative. In the three cases where the current DOJ has invoked state secrets, they have been defining an understanding of what has been the legitimate and traditional use of that privelege. They are defending against the baby's being thrown out with the bath water. In the instant case meanwhile, the 9th Circuit panel did not rule againt DOJ positions, but rather ruled that the case could proceed at this point in that there might arise no need within it to venture into areas that are protected by the state secrets privelege.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
