General Discussion

Drunken Irishman

(34,857 posts)

147. The President used 'us'.

Sun Aug 3, 2014, 11:32 PM

Aug 2014

I believe the President meant the entire nation and not just a subset of individuals who want Bush and Cheney thrown to the dogs. Moreover, the overall arc of his comment wasn't solely about Bush and Cheney and others involved, probably low-level CIAers who were under immense pressure at the time. The sanctimonious part comes into play because, in the context of his words, we barely asked questions. Congress certainly didn't. You had the passing of the PATRIOT Act, which only Russ Feingold opposed (every other senator supported it - including the liberal hero Ted Kennedy), the ill-conceived invasion of Afghanistan that was hardly debated (and supported by nearly every politician) - the U.S. fucked up a lot more than just torturing people during those days.

The thing is, the backlash toward this comment is overplayed. Did Obama change anything Friday? No. We knew he wasn't going to go after Bush and Cheney - and he's not. We know that there is not many credible politicians today, including the woman in your avatar, who's advocating for Bush and Cheney be tried. But because it's Obama, he's being tossed to the dogs so to speak. YES, I get he's president ... but why nothing from the Senate or the House? Is Elizabeth Warren going to say what DU so wants to hear? What about Bernie Sanders? Probably not. But the President should - and then go full on even though, I'm sure, if you polled the country right now it would be about as popular as impeaching him.

Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

162 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

This message was self-deleted by its author [View all] bigtree Aug 2014 OP

Where did he say that? Drunken Irishman Aug 2014 #1

I honestly don't know where you're seeing that the president thinks these 'folks' should be charged bigtree Aug 2014 #9

That's not what I asked... Drunken Irishman Aug 2014 #10

Ha...you got him on semantics. zeemike Aug 2014 #14

It's not semantics. He never said what the OP is saying he said. Drunken Irishman Aug 2014 #96

Well it is the way I read the definition of it. zeemike Aug 2014 #100

Semantics works if there is some legitimate intent to what you're saying. Drunken Irishman Aug 2014 #102

With what group?...the ones who are calling for Bush accountability? zeemike Aug 2014 #114

I'm sorry bigtree Aug 2014 #16

His statement was a pre-emptive assault on what he knows is going to happen. We 'sanctimonious sabrina 1 Aug 2014 #23

This message was self-deleted by its author NanceGreggs Aug 2014 #45

Criminal penalties, among other things, serve as deterrents to JDPriestly Aug 2014 #47

Well, torture is against the Geneva Conventions. All of our Military are supposedly sabrina 1 Aug 2014 #59

I agree. If we stand for human rights, we have to make sure our actions are consistent with JDPriestly Aug 2014 #86

Torture is criminal under the War Crimes Act and under the Torture Act. Vattel Aug 2014 #134

Thanks. I did not know that. JDPriestly Aug 2014 #149

You're lecturing someone that has clouded vision. He like some others here appear to have decided rhett o rick Aug 2014 #85

Prosecutions wont happen though as those in power it seem in this world rarely cstanleytech Aug 2014 #88

I wouldn't count on that. We are in a very dark period in this country right now, it's not sabrina 1 Aug 2014 #142

You're completely off the rails. Drunken Irishman Aug 2014 #97

Your unabashed worship of the President is clouding your judgement and apparently causing rhett o rick Aug 2014 #66

I don't need to provide an argument. The President never said it. Drunken Irishman Aug 2014 #98

fuck, just answer the question I asked bigtree Aug 2014 #105

I'm not going to answer any question you ask until you provide a quote for your lie. Drunken Irishman Aug 2014 #106

you'd be responding to what the President said, not my words bigtree Aug 2014 #116

Why would I want to interpret his words? Drunken Irishman Aug 2014 #120

I dunno bigtree Aug 2014 #125

I am concerned with you putting words in the President's mouth... Drunken Irishman Aug 2014 #127

got that. responded to it. now answer the question bigtree Aug 2014 #128

Everyone - including himself. Hence the 'us'. Drunken Irishman Aug 2014 #129

thanks for the answer, Drunken Irishman bigtree Aug 2014 #133

He was probably referring to ... NanceGreggs Aug 2014 #162

So if you don't like the interpretation that most in this thread believe, give us your interpretatio rhett o rick Aug 2014 #143

The President used 'us'. Drunken Irishman Aug 2014 #147

"Did Obama change anything Friday? No." Ah hell yes he did. He soft played our war crimes. rhett o rick Aug 2014 #150

No he didn't. Drunken Irishman Aug 2014 #153

The torturers were patriots MannyGoldstein Aug 2014 #18

Yeah pretty weak. Rex Aug 2014 #35

And these "patriots"/torturers are walking the streets of America. I would like to see rhett o rick Aug 2014 #67

Depends on how you define "normal." malthaussen Aug 2014 #76

Ok, I agree with most of what you say. I would say that we need to weight the risks rhett o rick Aug 2014 #84

Like, say, an extension of blowing up frogs just for the fun and sheer enjoyment of it indepat Aug 2014 #87

^ nationalize the fed Aug 2014 #19

There you go again . . . markpkessinger Aug 2014 #104

My thoughts exactly - he's addressing something that people have been talking about.... George II Aug 2014 #111

That's exactly how I saw it. Drunken Irishman Aug 2014 #112

You are painting with too broad a brush Distant Quasar Aug 2014 #146

I don't think 'all' lost it... Drunken Irishman Aug 2014 #156

Doesn't say much for his being a constitutional scholar, does it? MrMickeysMom Aug 2014 #119

Sure it does. And it says more about him being an AMERICAN, and to the dismay of many.... George II Aug 2014 #123

Those things you just sited were disconnected... MrMickeysMom Aug 2014 #126

MUST. LOOK. FORWARD. blkmusclmachine Aug 2014 #2

Well, NOT holding Bush/Cheney accountable allows Pres Obama to justify postulater Aug 2014 #3

Why would a politician want to enforce a law that involved himself? rock Aug 2014 #6

Nor be held accountable himself Deny and Shred Aug 2014 #135

Judge not lest ye be judged, amandabeech Aug 2014 #161

The Cheneys are also angry about what Obama said. conservaphobe Aug 2014 #4

the Cheney's were upset that he called the practices 'torture' bigtree Aug 2014 #12

Really? That's what you got? "hmm". Pretty weak argument. Are you defending torture? rhett o rick Aug 2014 #68

Nice profile picture. conservaphobe Aug 2014 #69

LOL. Look over there at Sen Warren. How about those Yankees? Do you accept that torture rhett o rick Aug 2014 #72

Bush/Cheney did a lot of stuff I don't accept. A lot of it criminal. conservaphobe Aug 2014 #74

It's not a surprise that you aren't going to be angry at the president. I doubt there is anything rhett o rick Aug 2014 #91

well-said Vattel Aug 2014 #107

Another sanctimonious here (nt) malokvale77 Aug 2014 #5

OOH! ooh! Count me, too! Me, the sanctimonious one!..... lastlib Aug 2014 #22

And another. pangaia Aug 2014 #99

Because torture wasn't illegal, it was a "mistake" BrotherIvan Aug 2014 #7

An UNDERSTANDABLE mistake, BrotherIvan. sibelian Aug 2014 #56

Oh my, BrotherIvan Aug 2014 #78

Imagine their GUILTY FEELINGS. sibelian Aug 2014 #80

Easy to be torture free when not afraid. It is exactly when afraid to avoid it on point Aug 2014 #8

Well I guess I will just have to be sanctimonious then. zeemike Aug 2014 #11

That is yet another reason why we must become signatories to the International Criminal Court BainsBane Aug 2014 #13

I agree. Rex Aug 2014 #37

Look! Squirrel! kentuck Aug 2014 #15

apologies for CIA, apologies for NSA, apologies for Wall Street fraud, apologies for fracking whereisjustice Aug 2014 #17

+ a million nationalize the fed Aug 2014 #21

sincere welcome to DU grasswire Aug 2014 #36

+100000000 woo me with science Aug 2014 #50

"The whole damned country better get sanctimonious soon, or we will have permanently lost this natio Demeter Aug 2014 #94

It just goes on and on.. sendero Aug 2014 #53

Plus a quadrillion... MrMickeysMom Aug 2014 #121

The issue here is not whether we broke a few rules, or tortured a few folks tularetom Aug 2014 #20

For those that didn't get the reference... PoliticAverse Aug 2014 #29

Spot on! Great example... ReRe Aug 2014 #38

Oh, I got it! MrMickeysMom Aug 2014 #122

Well done. To further paraphrase Deny and Shred Aug 2014 #137

Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Aug 2014 #24

Free shots everytime Obama uses the word "folks" when downplaying torture, bank fraud, whereisjustice Aug 2014 #25

Sanctomonious? Jack Rabbit Aug 2014 #26

I shouldn't feel "too sanctimonious"... Alkene Aug 2014 #27

I believe in the First Amendment. Except, uh, when it's speech that personally offends me. RufusTFirefly Aug 2014 #28

Even during world wars when the fate of the entire nation is on the line?... PoliticAverse Aug 2014 #30

The link proves the point RufusTFirefly Aug 2014 #32

Now, now, is this being sensible? gratuitous Aug 2014 #31

Post removed Post removed Aug 2014 #33

Thank you, DeSwiss! n/t ReRe Aug 2014 #39

De nada. DeSwiss Aug 2014 #40

Sorry... ReRe Aug 2014 #43

Lover of truth! {Latin} n/t DeSwiss Aug 2014 #44

The truth is hard here, DeSwiss... MrMickeysMom Aug 2014 #124

sounds about right. m-lekktor Aug 2014 #55

K&R Solly Mack Aug 2014 #34

K&R ReRe Aug 2014 #41

While whistleblowers... Bohemianwriter Aug 2014 #42

I've got a sneaking suspicion that he is powerless to make the move if he wanted to... Hulk Aug 2014 #46

ah yes, Obama as impotent leader, not a king, powers bigger than him blah blah blah whereisjustice Aug 2014 #48

Perhaps. sendero Aug 2014 #54

Poor lad. sibelian Aug 2014 #57

I think it's just politics BuckeyeBrad Aug 2014 #63

I agree loyalsister Aug 2014 #89

well, consider the marketing campaign in favor of it and the dearth of actual information bigtree Aug 2014 #109

Dunno, the GOP equates a President with "unitary executive". nt NorthCarolina Aug 2014 #79

Some days I'm ashamed to have supported this man. Scuba Aug 2014 #49

Yeah...the Cheneys are pissed, too. Tells me ALL I need to know. nt msanthrope Aug 2014 #51

I would expect more from you to go to "If the Cheney's don't like it, it must be good." rhett o rick Aug 2014 #70

rhett, let me be clear here. msanthrope Aug 2014 #101

I was really hoping to get a decent argument out those of you that seem to be rhett o rick Aug 2014 #139

Neither the President, or I think torture is justified. Wow...the word "folks" really msanthrope Aug 2014 #140

Not even close. Why don't you argue your point and stop trying to tell me what my point is? rhett o rick Aug 2014 #144

I made my point. Torture is never justified. It's really that simple. Like the President, I can msanthrope Aug 2014 #145

This message was self-deleted by its author rhett o rick Aug 2014 #151

K&R. Superb post. woo me with science Aug 2014 #52

If he actually said that, I disagree. nt ladjf Aug 2014 #58

A man who used to stand on stages and explain that his sort of people were 'Sanctified by God' Bluenorthwest Aug 2014 #60

In the USA torturers of animals can get Felonies, these politician torturers should NOT be immune! Sunlei Aug 2014 #61

The article is great. K&R and all that but bottom line this shit is depressing riderinthestorm Aug 2014 #62

I know bigtree Aug 2014 #65

So, he is saying that he is a War Criminal now too, in regards to Iraq? PowerToThePeople Aug 2014 #64

We must remember that the torturers are "patriots" and under a lot of pressure. Tierra_y_Libertad Aug 2014 #71

I was definitely afraid after 9/11 malthaussen Aug 2014 #73

we knew who was in power and we could see Bush sucking it all in bigtree Aug 2014 #75

Oh, god, yes. malthaussen Aug 2014 #77

Cheney probably has five to ten years left on this earth. And Dubya might have twenty. The same totodeinhere Aug 2014 #81

Remember when a President was toppled for simple breaking and entering, and the subsequent cover-up? A Simple Game Aug 2014 #82

it is still not possible to clean the CIA/NSA/MIC up, and won't be as long certainot Aug 2014 #83

NEVER accuse the Left of allowing this shit! Demeter Aug 2014 #95

More rhetoric to keep liberal values out of the conversation. gtar100 Aug 2014 #90

Well said. nm rhett o rick Aug 2014 #92

I hope no one is surprised by this. Don Siegelman languishes in prison and rhett o rick Aug 2014 #93

There is a legal maxim so old that the original is in Latin Fortinbras Armstrong Aug 2014 #103

Oh what delicious irony it would be dickthegrouch Aug 2014 #108

I'm sanctimonious as shit about it and want to see ex-government officals at the Hague.... mike_c Aug 2014 #110

Count me in Fiendish Thingy Aug 2014 #113

I support the Fifth and Eighth Amendments - no torture for confession OR punishment derby378 Aug 2014 #115

And so, what if "we" faced our role in torture and "we" still got all sanctimonious? MrMickeysMom Aug 2014 #117

We had over 50 warning from our security apparatus PRIOR to the 9/11 event... MrMickeysMom Aug 2014 #118

If he had said "After 9/11 we tortured some kittycats", well then people would be outraged! Corruption Inc Aug 2014 #130

How to construct a strawman. NanceGreggs Aug 2014 #131

Well stated Zorro Aug 2014 #136

I am glad the President informed us about all of this. Vattel Aug 2014 #138

Thanks for your comments ... NanceGreggs Aug 2014 #141

I appreciate your deconstruction of his comments bigtree Aug 2014 #148

How to construct a strawman ... NanceGreggs Aug 2014 #154

oh bigtree Aug 2014 #158

Exactly. The outrage train. freshwest Aug 2014 #155

It's always on time. NanceGreggs Aug 2014 #157

I have a video about that by Chris Rock. But you've probably seen it. And a link... freshwest Aug 2014 #159

I suppose I get a little tired of people telling me what the president thinks bhikkhu Aug 2014 #132

... sheshe2 Aug 2014 #152

Go to sleep now! freshwest Aug 2014 #160