Jon Stewart lays the smack down on Obama and exposes all the promises he hasn't kept

[sgreger1]

John Stewart is the man:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tu...s%3Dshare_copy



Politifact "Promises Broken":



The Obameter Scorecard

• Promise Kept 122

• Compromise 39

• Promise Broken 22

• Stalled 82

• In the Works 238

• Not yet rated 3

Promise Broken: No. 515: No family making less than $250,000 will see "any form of tax increase."


Primise Broken: No. 518: Create a public option health plan for a new National Health Insurance Exchange.

Promise Broken: No. 240: Tougher rules against revolving door for lobbyists and former officials

Promise Broken: No. 431: Reduce earmarks to 1994 levels

Promise Broken: No. 379: Pay for the national service plan without increasing the deficit

Promise Broken: No. 339: Support human mission to moon by 2020

Promise Broken: No. 292: Urge states to treat same-sex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws


Promise Broken: No. 525: Introduce a comprehensive immigration bill in the first year

Promise Broken: No. 234: Allow five days of public comment before signing bills

Promise Broken: No. 30: End no-bid contracts above $25,000

Promise Broken: No. 24: End income tax for seniors making less than $50,000


Along with other classics such as "I will end the Iraq War within 16 months of taking office", "I will close Guantanamo Bay", "I will end torture"

[raptor]

He made a new promise as well:

"I will erode civil rights and due process."

[sgreger1]

He made a new promise as well:

"I will erode civil rights and due process."

Hey, now we can add another to the "promises kept" folder!

I am still very upset that he is pulling a Bush and allowing torture, yet not allowing anyone to have their day in court, using his executive privaledge of "states secrets" to block trials so that no one can ever recieve justice. Wasn't this like a focal point of his campaign, the whole end torture/close gitmo thing?

[tom502]

He's worse than Jimmy Carter.

[truthwolf1]

Hey, now we can add another to the "promises kept" folder!

I am still very upset that he is pulling a Bush and allowing torture, yet not allowing anyone to have their day in court, using his executive privaledge of "states secrets" to block trials so that no one can ever recieve justice. Wasn't this like a focal point of his campaign, the whole end torture/close gitmo thing?

Watched a B movie last night called "The Experiment". In one scene they are using the water torture deal.
I cannot imagine what some of those detainees have gone through who are still in that Gulag.
Either kill them or jail them but this torture deal close to a decade needs to stop.

[sgreger1]

Watched a B movie last night called "The Experiment". In one scene they are using the water torture deal.
I cannot imagine what some of those detainees have gone through who are still in that Gulag.
Either kill them or jail them but this torture deal close to a decade needs to stop.

I still don't consider waterboarding torture, but either way that's irrelivent. We are talking about hardcore, REAL torture. Like for example, the Obama admin just used the states secrets privaledge to deny a trial due to "national security" for a gentleman who was scooped up and renditioned around the world for years, with people brutally torturing him from several different countries, taking razor blades to his ball sack (literally), and then he eventually ended up in gitmo. He was eventually assumed innocent and released back home. Now he is trying to take the country to court that stole 5 years of hise life and put him on a worldwide torture tour, and Obama says "No, you can't have a trial. Not yours......"


I'm willign to vote for whoever will take Bush and Obama to court and make sure to it that they recieve the death sentence.




Edit: And as far as closing Gitmo and giving trials to the people who have been there for nearly 10 years, that is not going to happen. The Obama admin officially has stalled that process and does not plan to take it up in the forseable future according to democrat senators. Gitmo will remain open for his entire term and those men will not recieve a trial. (Oh, and torture is still legal, so sucks for them)

[raptor]

I still don't consider waterboarding torture

Have you ever experienced being waterboarded? How could you even say such a statement?

[tom502]

John Mccain has.

But the president is not the supreme ruler. he has to do what his puppet masters tell him, or he'll go the way of JFK.

[sgreger1]

Have you ever experienced being waterboarded? How could you even say such a statement?

Being Tazered by a cop is more lethal than waterboarding.



It all depends on how you define torture. In today's day and age, we include things such as sleep deprevation, strobe lights, or blowing cigar smoke in ones face as torture. I consider torture something that causes lasting harm, severe pain, and could kill you. Waterbaording simulates drowning, while no drowning actually occurs and no one dies from it. It is the hardcore version of a swirley, where you dunk some kids head in the water and swish em around.

Also, it depends on what kind of waterboarding you are referring to. US version has a written procedure and medical staff standing by, so it is made to annoy you and piss your body off more than actually cause some kind of lasting harm. In other countries it is much worse.


The US version has no chance of you dieing. Long lasting effects would be you thinking on it to much. Safe, but annoying

The 'other' versions may cause death, thanks to 'other' versions actually including drowning and/or dunking a person's head into water or pouring water into certain bodily opening to get water into the lungs.



And like I said, eitehr way, even if you call waterboarding torture, we are talking about way worse types of torture. Torture like we saw at Abu Gharib, where people tie car batteries to your nipples and dunk you in water. Slicing open your testicles etc. I would not put those onthe same level as pouring water over a cloth on someones face.

[tom502]

I'm just glad they don't use this heinous torture.

[raptor]

It's not just pouring water on a cloth over someone's face, it's cutting off airflow to the lungs to give a sensation of drowning and is both physically and psychologically painful.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_206906.html

[devilock76]

You actually can die from waterboarding, the simulation of drowning can cause the lungs to react in a spasm and water does get in from that, it causes what is called a dry drowning in that way. Also in struggling against the restraints the victims can break their own limbs.

Ken

[sgreger1]

You actually can die from waterboarding, the simulation of drowning can cause the lungs to react in a spasm and water does get in from that, it causes what is called a dry drowning in that way. Also in struggling against the restraints the victims can break their own limbs.

Ken

Okay, let's apply that to everywhere else then. Police restraining a violent criminal is torture because "struggling against the restraints" may break their limbs. Additionally, since tazers are MUCH more likely to lead to death, all countries who use tazers are guilty of condoning torture.


I'm not trying to get into the whole waterboarding debate. Let's just say it's torture if that makes you all feel better. I'm just saying that we train our own guys by waterboarding them. It's something that is really annoying and hurts because your body thinks it's drowning, but it is hardly the same as attaching batteries to you balls and flipping on the switch.


And the odds of dying are very low, the odds of dying in car crash or jet crash are more likely. The guys who allegedly committed 9-11 were waterboarded for breakfast lunch and dinner for half a decade and none of them died.

Either way, the point is that this administration has demonized waterbaording while allowing much more horrendous and painfull versions of torture to continue (oh, and waterboarding too). Seems kind of hypocritical to me.

[devilock76]

A non intoxicated violent criminal, well not intoxicated with something like PCP will not have the same adrenaline level as a person whose body is literally tricked into thinking it is dying will. Hence the struggle against the restraints could exceed the limits of their skeletal structure which typically will not happen in a basic restraint situation.

However both restraining and tazering have significant differences, they are techniques used to bring a person under control, not to inflict pain upon someone already under control. They are less lethal alternatives to the side arm and the billy club. In the case of someone you already have subdued, well that is torture. Now granted you could use a taser to torture someone, but since they are already restrained a car battery and some jumper cables is much more cost effective.

Ken

[truthwolf1]

A non intoxicated violent criminal, well not intoxicated with something like PCP will not have the same adrenaline level as a person whose body is literally tricked into thinking it is dying will. Hence the struggle against the restraints could exceed the limits of their skeletal structure which typically will not happen in a basic restraint situation.

However both restraining and tazering have significant differences, they are techniques used to bring a person under control, not to inflict pain upon someone already under control. They are less lethal alternatives to the side arm and the billy club. In the case of someone you already have subdued, well that is torture. Now granted you could use a taser to torture someone, but since they are already restrained a car battery and some jumper cables is much more cost effective.

Ken

I would take a few hits with a billy club over the chance of having my heart stop with a taser. With the number of deaths they have caused over the years they should be deemed illegal for police use.