You're looking for a democrat with integrity. No luck yet, it seems.

Well Glenn,

In regards to your search..."for an Obama supporter who (a) defends his decision to suppress those photos but also (b) criticized him when, two weeks earlier, he announced that he would release those photos.

Maybe you should look to see what happens to coutiers who criticize the oligarch. What's going on in Iran might give you a little idea. Our elected officials aren't out to commit political suicide and that's exactly what it would be. The speaker has made that clear.

I'm glad you're having such a hard time swallowing Obama's continuation of so many of Bush's "abhorred" policies. Using all these as campaign vehicles and then quickly doing an about face shows him to be strictly the political animal he is. Watch the "no taxes on the middle class" get qucikly flushed next. Almost as if it were never said.

Unreal that isn't it? Why on earth would he use a signing statement to ignore the sensible provisions in the bill such as those?

Sensible? What is sensible about announcing your negotiating position before you start negotiations? Also, how is it constitutional for Congress to dictate a negotiating position to the president? Oh, that's right, I forgot, you don't know jack about our constitution, or our government (as evidenced by your insane birth certificate rants), but you love to run your mouth about it anyway.

I'll just start with your assertion that the provisions were "sensible". I'll use an analogy. If you walked into a car dealership, with a note from your bank, specifying that you must settle for a certain price, if it's offered, and that you must show the note to the car dealer before negotiations start, what price do you think you'd end up paying?

In case you didn't figure out the riddle: you'd pay exactly the price on the note, or more, but never ever ever less.

Laying out your bottom line negotiating position before negotiations even start is incredibly stupid. Also, it's not within Congress' power to even legislate that, nor should it be. Just as congress can't force the president to meet with Kim Jong Il or Fidel Castro, or offer them cookies, they can't tell the executive branch how to conduct negotiations with the World Bank.

... for doing my homework for me.

I appreciate the detailed reply of the kind that I would never get to read in any news coverage (supposing there were any) of this despicable microcosm in the continued descent into tyrannical imperialism (or imperialistic tyranny). Should we expect thunderous applause?

Not to be seen as fawning, I have a tiny quibble about "the fact that interrogation of POWs is forbidden under the Geneva Conventions", which, as ondelette has already pointed out, is not entirely correct.

"Name, rank, and serial number" is the only information a POW is required to give to his captor. He can give any additional information he chooses to. What is forbidden by the Geneva Conventions is any form of coercion to obtain information from POWs:

No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind.

http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/7c4d08d9b287a42141256739003e636b/6fef854a3517b75ac125641e004a9e68

I have posted about this before, but not for half a year or so:

http://letters.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/11/19/holder/permalink/ec8c3656918f86a7910f2ab1074f22bb.html

If even one of the "detainees" at GTMO is legitimately a prisoner of war, then his treatment there amounts to a war crime (also known, for the purposes of USC as a "grave breach of the Geneva Conventions").

Again, thanks for your detailed summary.

Obama wishes to avoid the fate of his father whose career was stalled when he fell out with the Kenyan authorities and descended into a life of poverty and alcoholism, but would rather emulate the career of his father's nemesis and become the Jomo Kenyatta of America.

Long-lost article by Obama's dad surfaces

By: Ben Smith and Jeffrey Ressner

April 15, 2008 04:43 AM EST

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=51418214-3048-5C12-00D20AC776ED4E67East Africa Journal

“Problems Facing Our Socialism” by Barak H. Obama

http://www.politico.com/static/PPM41_eastafrica.html

can do no wrong. You can point out his failings and deficiences ad infinitum, but it doesn't matter. The Great One is beyond reproach.

Bamage:GG, I'm pretty sure the only "response" you're going to get to this...

...

GG:"Ever since Obama reversed himself on the question of whether to suppress the torture photos, I've been searching for an Obama supporter who (a) defends his decision to suppress those photos but also (b) criticized him when, two weeks earlier, he announced that he would release those photos. I haven't found such a person yet, but I'm still looking."

Bamage: will be something along the lines of

"You're such a dick!"

Your point if such may be one is incomprehensible. Its quite clear what Glenn is looking for. He wants to find some one who approved of suppressing the photos BEFORE Obama decided to and then only showed consistency by praising Obama AFTER he had decided to do so.

And the point of this subtle exercise is to find whether there ever existed such a independently minded figure. And that the people now expressing approval are not just Obamabots not weighing the issue on its merits alone but are just now chanting "Five legs Good, Three legs Bad" simply because standing orders tell them its the chant of the day.

And the reason Glenn, (and myself actually)would like to know whether it was the merits of the case or simply supporting Obama that determined their position is because it is plain to see that if they have not decided on the merits but only say what is in line with their leader they might soon be chanting, "13.5 legs Bad, 51.999rec. Legs Good," if their leader so chooses them to do so and wishes to have a good laugh at the mindless supporta proles as he does so.