I think I see a problem.
ca.news.yahoo.com...
President Barack Obama "declared an end" to his predecessor's "war on terror" and began to heal the US reputation abroad when he ordered the
Guantanamo Bay prison to close, US editorialists wrote Friday.
My understanding of what the President did was that he ordered the closure of a prison,
period. Did I miss something?
"President Obama yesterday eliminated the most controversial tools employed by his predecessor against terrorism suspects," the Post
said.
Has he eliminated renditions along with Gitmo? What about the Patriot Act? What about the Military Commissions Act? Doesn't he have some way to go
yet? Not as far as the press is concerned obviously.
"With the stroke of his pen, he effectively declared an end to the 'war on terror,' as President George W. Bush had defined it, signaling to
the world that the reach of the US government in battling its enemies will not be limitless," it said.
Ya know, I think that's reading a lot into the closure of the prison at Guantanamo Bay.
Is there a possibility that this is the new administrations's press paradigm.?
Walk a yard. The job of the press will be to say you walked a mile.
And that way it will take so much longer to travel any appreciable distance from the goals and aims of the Bush administration.
Am I being overly cynical about this?
The press article quoted had me jumping for joy for a moment, thinking that Obama had signed a series of executive orders rescinding the excesses of
the Bush administration. Are we already starting to be hoodwinked?
[edit on 23-1-2009 by ipsedixit]
