I am with Reality Kid. Obama is lying us into more war. He lied when he promised to bring the troops home from Iraq with the year; he's lying when he says we need to have a surge in Afghanistan because of terr-ist cells at the Af-Pak (sounds like Aflac - quack) border. He condemned the Bush-Cheney detainee policy and state secrets trump and then proceeded to perpetuate it. He lied about his vote on the new FISA bill. He lied about having no lobbyists in his cabinet. He lied about restoring the rule of law. He lied about promoting a single-pay universal health care policy.

And that's just the stuff I can come up with off the top of my head.

If Obama were a boyfriend, I'd have dumped him after FISA. And it was then (a year ago this month) that I started to have dark doubts about who he was. But, I continued to support his election, because I dreaded the alternative a lot more (and I don't regret that decision), but I am never going to see him again, as it were.

>>>Glenn still hasn't addressed the fact that the Supreme Court, twice, has ruled that in certain instances preventive detention is permissible.

To which decisions do you refer?

But let's hope Obama isn't implementing the Lieberman agenda or we will see warplanes with bombs heading towards Iran.

Well, given his track record to date...

"He lied when he promised to bring the troops home from Iraq with the year;"

Oh really. I think you little behind on the news. The troop in Iraq have been withdrawing for the last few months, and the last of the troops in Iraq pulling out this week?

It is hard to tell them apart. They are both so white.

The idea that Barack Obama, at the same time as he is sending those young men and women into new theaters of war, could also be seen as facilitating the release of photos that would be so obviously damaging to their reputation (and their capacity to perform effectively in those theaters), is absurd and naive. His troops would rightly question whether he truly had their back. Their salutes would, from that moment forward, be justifiably single fingered.

I'm with you. Whatever it takes to avoid a one way trip to Costa Rica.

Military trials, secret evidence, indefinite detention--It's day three of Obama's 'court-martial' for Crimes Against the Military. Who could have foreseen the twisting irony of this surprise ending?

Wait for it... just a little bit more... I see dead people.

the last of the troops in Iraq pulling out this week

I think you little behind, dear. Or ahead. Or something.

@reality kid: you don't know me, so don't make assumptions. I don't live in the US, have an Indian heritage, born in UK with an Iranian wife.

Are you really curious about the questions you ask? or are you playing gotcha?

I will assume the former and answer in good faith:

1. I think the danger posed by Iran if they get Nuclear weapons is self-evident; if only because of the arms race it will trigger. Having said that, I think Iran is perfectly entitled to Nuclear Power, something which Obama agrees. I also think that if Israel can have a bomb, why can't Iran - but in real world terms, I know that the more nuclear bombs there are, the more dangerous it is full stop. As to whether Iran is trying to get Nuclear weapons, I still regard this as an open question so any decisive statement that they are trying to build nuclear weapons I shy away from.

2. I don't like the drones and they have obvious detrimental effect. However, that's why I support extra troops in Afghanistan - which was always predicated on the basis that it would minimise the more random drone bombs.

3. You'll have to enlighten me on Somalia and the SOFA. Haven't read that SOFA was being breached - in fact hasn't Maliki made a big song and dance over withdrawal?

Though you didn't ask, I thought the war on terror was a bunch of crap. Bombs don't change a person's mind, food, clothing and education do. That's why I appreciated Obama saying that he would give non-military aid to Pakistan. But here's another point - might be too nuanced for you but here goes - the US was attacked 8 years ago, London was attacked 4 years ago, Spain has been attacked; India has been living with this sort of terrorism for years. It is not a figment of someone's imagination. Frankly, there are some people who will always be nutters, no matter how many carrots you give them (metaphorically - I'm not putting my chips on vegetables as the cure). Something has to be done about them - at least in my view - and it has to be a mixture of sticks and carrots. It's a difficult balance, but I think Obama is doing a good job finding it.

There is a big difference between Ukraine prisoners, and prisoners being held in GITMO . The prisoners in GITMO are not U.S. citizens or political prisoners. They are detainees who were picked up in terrorist training camps. While I think the torture of some prisoners was wrong, and illegal, I think you are all rather immature to think Obama can just release all these detainees. Not once have any of you presented an alternative that makes sense.

he's lying when he says we need to have a surge in Afghanistan because of terr-ist cells at the Af-Pak (sounds like Aflac - quack) border.

Just for a data point here -- no opinion intended -- is the lie that we need a surge, or that there are terrorist groups near the Afghanistan-Pakistan border? The latter is a fact, the former quite open to debate and scrutiny.

Jebbie's response to me an example.

is a legitimate question.

You have now posted 2 letters without either a spelling error or a typo. Why wouldn't anyone here question who is hitting the keys on your end? Your wife can't post a single sentence without having it come out like goulash and yet here we are, faced with two posts with neither a typo or spelling error.

Stop with the "Oh poor me." routine. No one is picking on you.