Page 27 of 51 FirstFirst ... 17252627282937 ... LastLast
Results 261 to 270 of 501

Thread: Obama under fire for admitting no 'strategy yet' for ISIS in Syria [W:446]

  1. #261
    User BringIt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Seen
    08-12-15 @ 10:10 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    114

    re: Obama under fire for admitting no 'strategy yet' for ISIS in Syria [W:446]

    Quote Originally Posted by Mustachio View Post
    The President is much, much less important than you seem to think he is. What Obama himself is doing to violate the constitution? I'm not sure what you're referring to. Are you a big fan of alternative media websites that make no attempt to relay actual facts, or are you the type who prefers to believe what extreme right wing media figures tell you without doing any research. Let me know and I'll have an easier time responding to your point.

    We'll need an entire thread to answer your question "What Obama himself is doing to violate the constitution"?


    This administration strategically shields the President and his tendency to abide only by the laws it likes. And this alone represents a disturbing and dangerous threat to the rule of law. That's just for starters.

    His blatant disregard for political due process and legal due process demonstrates his total disregard for opinions other than his party line.

    -------------------


    President Obama’s team recently suffered their twelfth defeat at the Supreme Court.

    But, you
    won't see anything about this stunning record in the main stream media. Why? Duh! Because the President's propaganda machine is manipulated and controlled by progressive liberals.

    “Not every case in which the president has exceeded his authority has made it all the way to the Supreme Court,” Lee, a former law clerk to Justice Samuel Alito, told National Review Online. “The fact that his track record is as bad as it is in the Supreme Court . . . is yet another indication of the fact that we’ve got a president who is playing fast and loose with the Constitution.”


    In this latest case, the high court's first-ever case involving the Constitution's recess appointments clause ended in a unanimous decision holding that Obama's appointments to the National Labor Relations Board in 2012 without Senate confirmation were illegal.

    Every sitting justice had concluded that Obama’s appointments violated the Constitution.

    “All the liberals on the Supreme Court agreed that the president was trying to overreach his power,” John Feehery said on MSNBC.

    ----------------------------


    This marks the twelfth time since January 2012 that the Supreme Court has unanimously rejected the Obama administration’s calls for greater federal executive power.

    If the Department of Justice had won these cases, the federal government would be able to electronically track all of our movements, fine us without a fair hearing, dictate who churches choose as ministers, displace state laws based on the president’s whims, bring debilitating lawsuits against individuals based on events that occurred years ago, and destroy a person’s private property without just compensation.



    Complaints about overreach by Obama have been simmering for months, if not longer, but recent controversies have pushed that criticism to the fore.

    A flood of child immigrants crossing into the U.S. from Mexico has drawn new attention to Obama’s decision to allow illegal immigrants who arrived as children years ago to stay in America in a quasi-legal status. The new arrivals aren’t eligible for that program, but some were sent based on rumors they might be.


    Before swapping five Taliban prisoners at Guantánamo for Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl last month, the president failed to make the 30-day advance congressional notification the law requires.


    Both liberals and conservatives remain aghast at the explosion of National Security Agency surveillance techniques and targeting that Obama has authorized — efforts that have outrageously expanded and broadened programs initially targeting only suspects with international ties under President George W. Bush.


    It’s clear the president and his aides view his use of executive actions as a way to get around the Checks and Balances that are supposed to take place in Congress. They’ve even branded his power grab as his “pen and phone” strategy — wielding a pen to issue executive orders and using his phone to urge outside groups to pressure Congress to act in his favor.

    When President Obama’s own Supreme Court nominees join their colleagues in unanimously rejecting the administration’s call for broader federal power 12 times in 18 months, the inescapable conclusion is that the Obama administration’s view of federal power knows virtually no bounds. And still we hear nothing from Obama's main stream media puppets.

    No president has gone as far as this president since Richard Nixon tried to suspend the laws he didn’t like.





    And still we hear nothing from the main stream media. Our Constitutional Republic is broken.

    Wake Up America!

  2. #262
    User BringIt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Seen
    08-12-15 @ 10:10 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    114

    re: Obama under fire for admitting no 'strategy yet' for ISIS in Syria [W:446]

    Quote Originally Posted by Mustachio View Post
    The President is much, much less important than you seem to think he is. What Obama himself is doing to violate the constitution?
    OBAMA PUSHES FOR UN 'CLIMATE' RULES WITHOUT CONGRESS

    ------------------------------------


    Obama Pursuing Climate Accord in Lieu of Treaty

    By CORAL DAVENPORT AUG. 26, 2014


    WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is working to forge a sweeping international climate change agreement to compel nations to cut their planet-warming fossil fuel emissions, but without ratification from Congress.

    In preparation for this agreement, to be signed at a United Nations summit meeting in 2015 in Paris, the negotiators are meeting with diplomats from other countries to broker a deal to commit some of the world’s largest economies to enact laws to reduce their carbon pollution. But under the Constitution, a president may enter into a legally binding treaty only if it is approved by a two-thirds majority of the Senate.

    To sidestep that requirement, President Obama’s climate negotiators are devising what they call a “politically binding” deal that would “name and shame” countries into cutting their emissions. The deal is likely to face strong objections from Republicans on Capitol Hill and from poor countries around the world, but negotiators say it may be the only realistic path.

    “If you want a deal that includes all the major emitters, including the U.S., you cannot realistically pursue a legally binding treaty at this time,” said Paul Bledsoe, a top climate change official in the Clinton administration who works closely with the Obama White House on international climate change policy.

    Lawmakers in both parties on Capitol Hill say there is no chance that the currently gridlocked Senate will ratify a climate change treaty in the near future, especially in a political environment where many Republican lawmakers remain skeptical of the established science of human-caused global warming.

    “There’s a strong understanding of the difficulties of the U.S. situation, and a willingness to work with the U.S. to get out of this impasse,” said Laurence Tubiana, the French ambassador for climate change to the United Nations. “There is an implicit understanding that this not require ratification by the Senate.”

    American negotiators are instead homing in on a hybrid agreement — a proposal to blend legally binding conditions from an existing 1992 treaty with new voluntary pledges. The mix would create a deal that would update the treaty, and thus, negotiators say, not require a new vote of ratification.

    Countries would be legally required to enact domestic climate change policies — but would voluntarily pledge to specific levels of emissions cuts and to channel money to poor countries to help them adapt to climate change. Countries might then be legally obligated to report their progress toward meeting those pledges at meetings held to identify those nations that did not meet their cuts.

    “There’s some legal and political magic to this,” said Jake Schmidt, an expert in global climate negotiations with the Natural Resources Defense Council, an advocacy group. “They’re trying to move this as far as possible without having to reach the 67-vote threshold” in the Senate.
    Wake Up America!

  3. #263
    User BringIt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Seen
    08-12-15 @ 10:10 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    114

    re: Obama under fire for admitting no 'strategy yet' for ISIS in Syria [W:446]

    Quote Originally Posted by Mustachio View Post
    The President is much, much less important than you seem to think he is. What Obama himself is doing to violate the constitution?
    587x434xObamas-Three-Branches-copy.jpg
    Wake Up America!

  4. #264
    User BringIt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Seen
    08-12-15 @ 10:10 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    114

    re: Obama under fire for admitting no 'strategy yet' for ISIS in Syria [W:446]

    Wake Up America!

  5. #265
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Los Angeles area
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 01:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,868

    re: Obama under fire for admitting no 'strategy yet' for ISIS in Syria [W:446]

    Quote Originally Posted by Mustachio View Post
    The President is much, much less important than you seem to think he is. What Obama himself is doing to violate the constitution? I'm not sure what you're referring to. Are you a big fan of alternative media websites that make no attempt to relay actual facts, or are you the type who prefers to believe what extreme right wing media figures tell you without doing any research. Let me know and I'll have an easier time responding to your point.

    Any U.S. President is very important in foreign affairs--that's just basic civics.

    I agree with the other poster that the catalog of Mr. Obama's offenses against the Constitution is too long to get into in much depth here. It's hard to imagine how anyone who understands the Constitution could even question that he has been largely ignoring it from the beginning, whenever he finds its restrictions on his authority inconvenient for his socialist agenda. I'm sure Mr. Obama's acolytes would like to deny all this, because most of them don't like the Constitution any better than he does.

  6. #266
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Los Angeles area
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 01:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,868

    re: Obama under fire for admitting no 'strategy yet' for ISIS in Syria [W:446]

    Quote Originally Posted by BringIt View Post
    L'etat, c'est moi.

  7. #267
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,923

    re: Obama under fire for admitting no 'strategy yet' for ISIS in Syria [W:446]

    From WaPo today:

    The world Obama now confronts is far different from the one he inherited when he came into office almost six years ago, and it is testing equally whether the style and substance of his leadership can win supporters and prevail against enemies.

    ...In the first years of his presidency, Obama’s principal foreign policy goals were far less reactive and were more dependent on his initiative and sense of timing.

    But as he tried to engage the world on his terms, Obama quickly found out that the world had thoughts and plans of its own. Far from the reset Obama sought with Russia, President Vladimir Putin sought a new balance of power through aggression in Ukraine. While Obama offered a fresh start for the United States in the Muslim world, the Arab Spring headed toward destabilization rather than democracy.

    Six years later, events seem to have spun out of his control, and Obama must react to the actions of others. Putin’s aggression in Ukraine has sparked the greatest East-West crisis since the Cold War. Islamic State advances have swallowed up a large swath of the Middle East and threaten a global upheaval far beyond the shock of al-Qaeda’s 2001 attacks. Obama sets his own pace in a world whirling with crises - The Washington Post

    Here's part of the problem. From the same article: "Officials across the government spent Friday trying to clean up after Obama’s Thursday news conference. They insisted that his “no strategy” remark had been misinterpreted and that what was being portrayed as hesitation and delay was instead a sign of due diligence and a sharp focus on developing an effective long-term plan."

  8. #268
    Guru

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    4,488

    Re: Obama has no strategy yet for dealing with ISIS.

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    In fact what happened was predicted by many, including the Mitt Romney during the last Presidential campaign when Obama was saying (though later claiming it wasn't his idea!) that he would pull all the troops from Iraq.. If Obama is thinking long and hard about anything it is probably related to his golf game or Michelle.
    This is Romney here:
    It is quite a leap to suggest that Romney predicted the facts on the ground today. What most believed was that the removal of Saddam would result in fragmentation of Iraq at best and civil war at worst. No one predicted that an external radical militia would invade and the Iraqis would refuse to defend their country. Romney was an empty suit who thought contributing to unemployment made him a good presidential candidate.

  9. #269
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Obama has no strategy yet for dealing with ISIS.

    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    Heya USC. Yeah some forgot that poll on BO lying and how much people trusted him nowadays.
    Ya'll act as though US policy in the Middle East changes from one administration to the next!

    The lightning-fast march of a violent al-Qaeda splinter group through the heart of Iraq is not just one new slice of bad news from the Middle East. It is a defining moment that exposes more than a decade of failed U.S. policy and leaves the Obama administration with deeply disquieting choices.

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinio...ates/10408671/


    This is Middle East policy for 70 years, NOT HUMANITARIANISM or any concern for democracy!!

    Because of the Cold War, the United States became deeply involved in the Middle East after 1945. Committed to containing communism around the globe, the Harry S. Truman and Dwight D. Eisenhower administrations strove to maintain access to petroleum resources, military bases, and lines of communication in the Middle East and to deny these assets to the Soviet Union.

    http://uncpress.unc.edu/browse/page/393
    Last edited by Montecresto; 08-31-14 at 12:40 PM.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  10. #270
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Obama has no strategy yet for dealing with ISIS.

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    That 'power vacuum' occurred when Obama removed the troops and yes, what do we do now? BHO will probably start on a strategy when he returns from the fundraisers and wedding but how will any Allies react? I doubt that the military trusts him either.

    It's a serious problem when the world's leading democracy, like it or not, will remain leaderless for over two years.
    Bull ****. The power vacuums started when Carter and Reagan armed the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, and hasn't ended. And most recently the removal of Hussein, Mubarak, Gaddafi and the attempted removal of Assad. Your partisan opinion fails. This IS American policy in the ME.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

Page 27 of 51 FirstFirst ... 17252627282937 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •