Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Doughnuts

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
sakabatou Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-13-11 02:39 AM
Original message
Doughnuts
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-13-11 02:42 AM
Response to Original message
1. perhaps if it was jobs instead of donuts?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sakabatou Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-13-11 02:45 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. I know.
:(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-13-11 02:48 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. it's just that
jobs / economic well-being concerns override EVERYTHING ELSE
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pipoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-13-11 05:26 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. Yep
instead of jobs we'll be getting more fabulous trade agreements with third world countries with no intentions of improving the financial well being of their residents...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-13-11 06:17 AM
Response to Reply #1
6. He did contribute to the economy though
He bought a locally produced commodity which at the very least keeps someone working today.

For economy to turn and jobs created, people have to spend. Of course if they don't have jobs, they can't spend. Then those who do have jobs don't spend with creates the spiral we have all ridden for the last 10 years.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OnyxCollie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-13-11 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #6
13. He supported the Carlyle Group.
See Post #12.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JTFrog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-13-11 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. FFS.
Let's see everyone fork over their fucking receipts for every purchase they've made in the last ten years and let's see who supported what. I bet some asses aren't near as clean as you expect Obama's to be.

Seriously.

Mother fuckers are just being intentionally ignorant up in the new DU.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OnyxCollie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-11 02:15 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. I don't feel a need to cut him any slack
when he supports shit like this:

Obama called on the former general chairman of the RNC to stop Spain's investigation of US torture crimes.

WikiLeaks: How U.S. tried to stop Spain's torture probe
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/12/25/105786/wikileaks-...

MIAMI It was three months into Barack Obama's presidency, and the administration -- under pressure to do something about alleged abuses in Bush-era interrogation policies -- turned to a Florida senator to deliver a sensitive message to Spain:

Don't indict former President George W. Bush's legal brain trust for alleged torture in the treatment of war on terror detainees, warned Mel Martinez on one of his frequent trips to Madrid. Doing so would chill U.S.-Spanish relations.



US embassy cables: Don't pursue Guantnamo criminal case, says Spanish attorney general
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-docum...

6. (C) As reported in SEPTEL, Senator Mel Martinez, accompanied by the Charge d'Affaires, met Acting FM Angel Lossada during a visit to the Spanish MFA on April 15. Martinez and the Charge underscored that the prosecutions would not be understood or accepted in the U.S. and would have an enormous impact on the bilateral relationship. The Senator also asked if the GOS had thoroughly considered the source of the material on which the allegations were based to ensure the charges were not based on misinformation or factually wrong statements. Lossada responded that the GOS recognized all of the complications presented by universal jurisdiction, but that the independence of the judiciary and the process must be respected. The GOS would use all appropriate legal tools in the matter. While it did not have much margin to operate, the GOS would advise Conde Pumpido that the official administration position was that the GOS was "not in accord with the National Court." Lossada reiterated to Martinez that the executive branch of government could not close any judicial investigation and urged that this case not affect the overall relationship, adding that our interests were much broader, and that the universal jurisdiction case should not be viewed as a reflection of the GOS position.



Judd Gregg, Obama's Republican nominee for Commerce secretary, didn't like the investigations either.

US embassy cables: Don't pursue Guantnamo criminal case, says Spanish attorney general
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-docum...

4. (C) As reported in REF A, Senator Judd Gregg, accompanied by the Charge d'Affaires, raised the issue with Luis Felipe Fernandez de la Pena, Director General Policy Director for North America and Europe during a visit to the Spanish MFA on April 13. Senator Gregg expressed his concern about the case. Fernandez de la Pena lamented this development, adding that judicial independence notwithstanding, the MFA disagreed with efforts to apply universal jurisdiction in such cases.



Why the aversion? To protect Bushco, of course!

US embassy cables: Spanish prosecutor weighs Guantnamo criminal case against US officials
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-docum...

The fact that this complaint targets former Administration legal officials may reflect a "stepping-stone" strategy designed to pave the way for complaints against even more senior officials.



Eric Holder got the message.

Holder Says He Will Not Permit the Criminalization of Policy Differences
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=7410267&page=1

As lawmakers call for hearings and debate brews over forming commissions to examine the Bush administration's policies on harsh interrogation techniques, Attorney General Eric Holder confirmed to a House panel that intelligence officials who relied on legal advice from the Bush-era Justice Department would not be prosecuted.

"Those intelligence community officials who acted reasonably and in good faith and in reliance on Department of Justice opinions are not going to be prosecuted,"
he told members of a House Appropriations Subcommittee, reaffirming the White House sentiment. "It would not be fair, in my view, to bring such prosecutions."



CIA Exhales: 99 Out of 101 Torture Cases Dropped
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/06/cia-exhales-99-... /

This is how one of the darkest chapters in U.S. counterterrorism ends: with practically every instance of suspected CIA torture dodging criminal scrutiny. Its one of the greatest gifts the Justice Department could have given the CIA as David Petraeus takes over the agency.

Over two years after Attorney General Eric Holder instructed a special prosecutor, John Durham, to preliminar(ily) review whether CIA interrogators unlawfully tortured detainees in their custody, Holder announced on Thursday afternoon that hell pursue criminal investigations in precisely two out of 101 cases of suspected detainee abuse. Some of them turned out not to have involved CIA officials after all. Both of the cases that move on to a criminal phase involved the death in custody of detainees, Holder said.

But just because theres a further criminal inquiry doesnt necessarily mean there will be any charges brought against CIA officials involved in those deaths. If Holders decision on Thursday doesnt actually end the Justice Departments review of torture in CIA facilities, it brings it awfully close, as outgoing CIA Director Leon Panetta noted.

On this, my last day as Director, I welcome the news that the broader inquiries are behind us, Panetta wrote to the CIA staff on Thursday. We are now finally about to close this chapter of our Agencys history.


Maybe President Constitutional Scholar needs a refresher course. He can start here:

U.S. Constitution: Eight Amendment
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendme... /

Eighth Amendment - Further Guarantees in Criminal Cases

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.


Once he's got that down, he can move onto this:


CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE
and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment
http://www.hrweb.org/legal/cat.html

Article 1

For the purposes of this Convention, torture means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.
This article is without prejudice to any international instrument or national legislation which does or may contain provisions of wider application.

Article 2

Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction.
No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat or war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.
An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture.

Article 3

No State Party shall expel, return ("refouler") or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.
For the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.

Article 4

1. Each State Party shall ensure that all acts of torture are offences under its criminal law. The same shall apply to an attempt to commit torture and to an act by any person which constitutes complicity or participation in torture.
2. Each State Party shall make these offences punishable by appropriate penalties which take into account their grave nature.

Article 5

1. Each State Party shall take such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the offences referred to in article 4 in the following cases:
1. When the offences are committed in any territory under its jurisdiction or on board a ship or aircraft registered in that State;
2. When the alleged offender is a national of that State;
3. When the victim was a national of that State if that State considers it appropriate.
2. Each State Party shall likewise take such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over such offences in cases where the alleged offender is present in any territory under its jurisdiction and it does not extradite him pursuant to article 8 to any of the States mentioned in Paragraph 1 of this article.
3. This Convention does not exclude any criminal jurisdiction exercised in accordance with internal law.

Article 6

1. Upon being satisfied, after an examination of information available to it, that the circumstances so warrant, any State Party in whose territory a person alleged to have committed any offence referred to in article 4 is present, shall take him into custody or take other legal measures to ensure his presence. The custody and other legal measures shall be as provided in the law of that State but may be continued only for such time as is necessary to enable any criminal or extradition proceedings to be instituted.
2. Such State shall immediately make a preliminary inquiry into the facts.
3. Any person in custody pursuant to paragraph 1 of this article shall be assisted in communicating immediately with the nearest appropriate representative of the State of which he is a national, or, if he is a stateless person, to the representative of the State where he usually resides.
4. When a State, pursuant to this article, has taken a person into custody, it shall immediately notify the States referred to in article 5, paragraph 1, of the fact that such person is in custody and of the circumstances which warrant his detention. The State which makes the preliminary inquiry contemplated in paragraph 2 of this article shall promptly report its findings to the said State and shall indicate whether it intends to exercise jurisdiction.

Article 7

1. The State Party in territory under whose jurisdiction a person alleged to have committed any offence referred to in article 4 is found, shall in the cases contemplated in article 5, if it does not extradite him, submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution.
2. These authorities shall take their decision in the same manner as in the case of any ordinary offence of a serious nature under the law of that State. In the cases referred to in article 5, paragraph 2, the standards of evidence required for prosecution and conviction shall in no way be less stringent than those which apply in the cases referred to in article 5, paragraph 1.
3. Any person regarding whom proceedings are brought in connection with any of the offences referred to in article 4 shall be guaranteed fair treatment at all stages of the proceedings.

Article 8

1. The offences referred to in article 4 shall be deemed to be included as extraditable offences in any extradition treaty existing between States Parties. States Parties undertake to include such offences as extraditable offences in every extradition treaty to be concluded between them.
2. If a State Party which makes extradition conditional on the existence of a treaty receives a request for extradition from another State Party with which it has no extradition treaty, it may consider this Convention as the legal basis for extradition in respect of such offenses. Extradition shall be subject to the other conditions provided by the law of the requested State.
3. States Parties which do not make extradition conditional on the existence of a treaty shall recognize such offences as extraditable offences between themselves subject to the conditions provided by the law of the requested state.
4. Such offences shall be treated, for the purpose of extradition between States Parties, as if they had been committed not only in the place in which they occurred but also in the territories of the States required to establish their jurisdiction in accordance with article 5, paragraph 1.

Article 9

1. States Parties shall afford one another the greatest measure of assistance in connection with civil proceedings brought in respect of any of the offences referred to in article 4, including the supply of all evidence at their disposal necessary for the proceedings.
2. States Parties shall carry out their obligations under paragraph 1 of this article in conformity with any treaties on mutual judicial assistance that may exist between them.

...


I don't feel a need to cut him any slack when he supports shit like this, either:

Diebold Sells U.S. Elections Systems Business to ES&S
http://news.diebold.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=...

NORTH CANTON, Ohio, Sept. 3 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Diebold, Incorporated (NYSE: DBD) announced today that it has sold its U.S. election systems business, primarily consisting of its Allen, Texas-based subsidiary, Premier Election Solutions, Inc., to Election Systems & Software, Inc. (ES&S), a leading company in the election systems industry. The sale was consummated on September 2.



HART INTERCIVIC, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
DIEBOLD, INCORPORATED and
ELECTION SYSTEMS & SOFTWARE, INC.
Defendants.
http://alt.coxnewsweb.com/statesman/pdf/09/0916hart.pdf

The transaction also poses a significant and imminent threat of irreparable harm to the other vendors like Hart serving less than 20% of voting precincts, harm to the political subdivisions that constitute the jurisdictions that must purchase voting machines and election systems, and, ultimately, harm to the voters of the United States, in the form of loss of confidence in the integrity and security of the means by which elections are performed.



Justice Department Requires Key Divestiture in Election Systems & Software/Premier Election Solutions Merger
http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2010/March/10-at-235.html

WASHINGTON The Department of Justice announced today that it will require Election Systems & Software (ES&S) to divest voting equipment systems assets it purchased in September 2009 from Premier Election Solutions Inc. in order to restore competition. The assets to be divested include the means to produce all versions of Premiers hardware, software and firmware used to record, tabulate, transmit or report votes, including the Assure 1.2 system, and a license to better serve disabled voters. The department said that todays settlement will restore competition in voting equipment systems in the United States and that, without the divestiture, the acquisition would result in higher prices, lower quality and a reduced incentive to innovate.



For those keeping score, the authors of HAVA have:

Been convicted of bribery and corruption for deals with Jack Abramoff and sentenced to 30 months in prison- Rep. Bob Ney

Been convicted of money laundering and conspiracy to commit money laundering to get repub candidates elected, and have received a sentence of three years in prison- Rep. Tom DeLay (See also DeLay's ties to Abramoff.)

Run for President (poorly)- Sen. Chris Dodd. Dodd was also a "Friend of Angelo" Mozillo of Countrywide.

Business and financial ties with ES&S, the company that has a monopoly on vote counting in the US- Sen. Chuck Hagel

Now, given all of the above, and the fact that every time an "anomaly" occurs with these electronic voting machines it benefits Republicans, why has the Obama administration not enforced its order for ES&S to divest? It seems highly irrational.

Whenever I post this, the cheering section goes silent. Why don't you address these issues, JTFrog?

Explain to me why President Obama isn't guilty of war crimes. Are you able to do that?

What's the depth of your political knowledge? Does it extend past the masturbatory fodder of the OP?

Can you explain these actions, or are you going to remain one of those intentionally ignorant mother fuckers on the new DU?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-13-11 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #6
14. as long as offshoring is not addressed
there is no real fix
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exilednight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-13-11 09:14 PM
Response to Reply #1
18. As the saying goes: It's the economy, stupid. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DontTreadOnMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-13-11 05:41 AM
Response to Original message
5. pretty funny
good graphic
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polmaven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-13-11 07:50 AM
Response to Original message
7. More importantly,
He has COFFEE!!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brooklynite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-13-11 11:25 AM
Response to Original message
8. Pretty inconsiderate if you ask me...
I don't see any coffee cups, do you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-13-11 11:43 AM
Response to Original message
9. why "motherfuckers"?
is it because he's black?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarheel_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-13-11 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
10. But what has he done for me since breakfast? Is that Decaf? This is the last straw!
Vote PerrRomBachney 2012! x(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Honeycombe8 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-13-11 12:44 PM
Response to Original message
11. Mmmmmm. Got any with lemon cream filling? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OnyxCollie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-13-11 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
12. Supporting the Carlyle Group.
The Carlyle Group: Dunkin' Brands, Inc.
http://www.carlyle.com/Portfolio/item7440.html

Dunkin' Brands, Inc.
Canton , MA U.S.

Carlyle Partners IV
Acquired: March 2006
Status: Current

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fuddnik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-13-11 08:31 PM
Response to Original message
15. Must be a police convention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
awoke_in_2003 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-13-11 08:54 PM
Response to Original message
16. okay, that made me chuckle a bit...
reminds me of the Whataburger commercial down here- said if you are running late to work, stop off to buy some taquitos for every one. Then you are not known as the guy who was late, but as the guy who brought breakfast.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Jul 16th 2019, 08:09 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC