During the election campaign Barrack Obama denounced the Bush policies but he now is not only continuing with them, he is expanding on them.
If it wasn't so serious, and the fact that it lasts four years, it might have been quite a funny joke that's been played on the American electorate.
Reagan didn't nullify every executive order issued by Carter.
Bush, Sr, didn't revise every law signed by Reagan.
Clinton didn't undo every internal review conducted by Bush, Sr.
Bush, Jr., didn't seak to repeal every law signed by Clinton.
I don't see Pres. Obama needing to go out of his way to turnover every EO, internal review or law GWB signed just because he became our nation's 44th President.
Every new administration builds upon the next. I'm sure that there are things the Obama Administration is doing or trying to do slightly differently than his predecessor. Problem is we're still in 2 wars and much of what GWB did he did via the Justice Department and much of that is now law (i.e., extending the Patriot Act which in many respects is still a very powerful tool in capturing terrorist here and abroad).
I know presidential candidates come into an election thinking they're going to systematically "change the world," but I'm sure every new president will tell you (if he could) that "saying" and "doing" are two completely different things. For example, according to the book, "The Promise: President Obama, Year One," by Jonathan Alter President-elect Obama was briefed on the "Pakistan situation" long before he was inagurated. But could he deal with the Pakistani government exactly as he wished? No. Why? Because we still needed them to help root out terrorist. Yes, I know they haven't been of much help, but until you know the full details of the secret briefing the incoming President was given (and no, they weren't disclosed in the book), you really don't know why it is so difficult for our government to just cut them off completely. That said, now that OBL is dead we have far more negotiating power with Pakistan than we ever had before. Hence, the reason we're now sending Preditor Drones in the mountain region between Pakistan and Afghanistan where many of the insurgents tend to hide, and we're doing it relatively without a care what the Pakistan government thinks or threatens to do.
Gitmo is another example of how things aren't as straigh-forward as they seem. The way the GW Bush administration used the legal system to surpress classified evidence on detainees from ever being shown to the public let alone in any court of law makes it extremely difficult to give these terrorist suspects a "fair trail under the law" even when using military tribunals. But until you understand how things came about and just how difficult it is to unwind them you really don't know how difficult it will be to close Gitmo until both wars are over.
I understand what you guys are getting at, however..."say one thing, do another"...but I tend to put such things under the heading of "tried, but OBE...(Overcome By Events)," put it in its proper context and just let it go because the reality is there's nothing can be done about Pakistan or Gitmo until extermal circumstances change, i.e., both wars end.
Now, getting back to the President, Libya and Congress...it's day 91 and no official resolution calling for a total withdrawal of our military nor his impeachment. Hmmmmm....
