What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Obama XXI: Kenyan Muslins are ruining this country!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Priceless
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Obama XXI: Kenyan Muslins are ruining this country!

Kepler said:
Every president since JFK has been angling for more and more executive power. Congress and the Court are supposed to be checking and balancing like mad. At least they might this time just for pure blind partisan reasons (when Dubya put Alito and Roberts on the Court, he wasn't talking about a Democratic unitary executive!!!!).

I would think the administration was in a perfect position to request Congress for an extension of funding. If the GOP approves it then they shoot their "rabble rabble Libya rabble" rhetoric down. If they deny it, then Obama can say "sorry, guys, I tried," and then blame anything bad that happens from then on on "that tragic missed opportunity blah blah blah."

If Dubya did this I'd say it was awful so, Obama having done it, I'd say... it's awful.
Click to expand...

Presidents have been trying to get more power since way before JFK. One of my favorite Teddy Roosevelt stories was when he wanted to send half the Navy on a tour of the new American islands in the Pacific after 1898. Congress refused to authorize the money for the expedition. Teddy sent them anyway, then wrote to the Congress that he sent those ships half way around the world and that if they wanted the ships and crews to return they would have to authorize the money.
 
Re: Obama XXI: Kenyan Muslins are ruining this country!

Kepler said:
Every president since JFK has been angling for more and more executive power. Congress and the Court are supposed to be checking and balancing like mad. At least they might this time just for pure blind partisan reasons (when Dubya put Alito and Roberts on the Court, he wasn't talking about a Democratic unitary executive!!!!).

I would think the administration was in a perfect position to request Congress for an extension of funding. If the GOP approves it then they shoot their "rabble rabble Libya rabble" rhetoric down. If they deny it, then Obama can say "sorry, guys, I tried," and then blame anything bad that happens from then on on "that tragic missed opportunity blah blah blah."

If Dubya did this I'd say it was awful so, Obama having done it, I'd say... it's awful.

Kos rips them on it.
Click to expand...

One distinction is that Bush didn't campaign on the "I'd never do that" platform...Bush/Cheney, they'd have invaded Canada if it dawned on them as a bright idea, and most of us would have screamed but not been surprised. In this case, given the pre-election rhetoric, I'm surprised a few more steps weren't taken to gain acceptance.
 
Re: Obama XXI: Kenyan Muslins are ruining this country!

geezer said:
Your comedy central break revealing the dangers of Canada. It's hilarious to me because I know the guy, and can believe the dialog is accurate.
Click to expand...

Remember the creepy old man with the snow shovel from Home Alone who turned out to be a good guy? I sorta picture "Dave" as being that guy.

And yes, the center of America is f-ing insane. :D

Now back to your regularly scheduled amateur version of the McLaughlin Group. ;)
 
Re: Obama XXI: Kenyan Muslins are ruining this country!

FadeToBlack&Gold said:
Remember the creepy old man with the snow shovel from Home Alone who turned out to be a good guy? I sorta picture "Dave" as being that guy.

And yes, the center of America is f-ing insane. :D

Now back to your regularly scheduled amateur version of the McLaughlin Group. ;)
Click to expand...
yeah, that's about right. He's a good guy, but also a yooper.
 
Re: Obama XXI: Kenyan Muslins are ruining this country!

pirate said:
One distinction is that Bush didn't campaign on the "I'd never do that" platform...Bush/Cheney, they'd have invaded Canada if it dawned on them as a bright idea, and most of us would have screamed but not been surprised. In this case, given the pre-election rhetoric, I'm surprised a few more steps weren't taken to gain acceptance.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with this. Obama explicitly campaigned against the John Yooification of the WH. It's very disappointing to see him doing the same dance. :(

Bad Barack. Very bad. :mad:
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama XXI: Kenyan Muslins are ruining this country!

I'm going to be way out on an island here, but so what? :)

I suspect that I'm much less a small-d democrat than most folks around here. Maybe that explains it. The way I see it, Congress possesses all the subtlety of a sledgehammer - and about as much foreign policy competence. I don't pine for a return to Congressional prominence in foreign affairs. Moreover, it makes little sense to scream and yell "constitutionalism" when the constitutionality of the War Powers Act itself is unsettled (assuming you're not of the opinion that INS v Chadha already settled it - in the negative).

If a president really, really screws up, Congress controls appropriations. It's used that power in the past. It can do so again.
 
Re: Obama XXI: Kenyan Muslins are ruining this country!

Kepler said:
I completely agree with this. Obama explicitly campaigned against the John Yooification of the WH. It's very disappointing to see him doing the same dance. :(

Bad Barack. Very bad. :mad:
Click to expand...

Quite a conundrum - the wingnuts probably approve of kicking some Muslin hinney, and they probably approve of a stronger executive, but they can't come out and say either of those things. Conversely, the nutjobs can't start criticizing The One just as the election is getting going (or, frankly, any other time) so they sit quietly, too, while Obama sails merrily along to the shores of Tripoli...
 
Re: Obama XXI: Kenyan Muslins are ruining this country!

amherstblackbear said:
If a president really, really screws up, Congress controls appropriations. It's used that power in the past. It can do so again.
Click to expand...

Ugh. I don't like that at all. Give me explicit declarations of war and specific, limited appropriations of war funding. Otherwise you wind up with the President coming to Congress saying, "I already deployed the troops. If you bring them home you're 'running.' And I already spent the money, so it's just another debt that has to be paid." That gives the Prez too much power and lets Congress completely off the hook.

The only reason for not getting approval ahead of time is it's hard, and that's exactly the reason they should have to get it -- it should be hard. This is one of those times when the Libertarians are actually right.
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama XXI: Kenyan Muslins are ruining this country!

Kepler said:
Ugh. I don't like that at all. Give me explicit declarations of war and specific, limited appropriations of war funding. Otherwise you wind up with the President coming to Congress saying, "I already deployed the troops. If you bring them home you're 'running.' And I already spent the money, so it's just another debt that has to be paid." That gives the Prez too much power and lets Congress completely off the hook.

The only reason for not getting approval ahead of time is it's hard, and that's exactly the reason they should have to get it -- it should be hard. This is one of those times when the Libertarians are actually right.
Click to expand...

War is so last century. Nobody ever declares war any more. I'm assuming you're referring to sending troops into combat situations.

That Congressional approval is hard is not the only reason - at all - for Presidential ability to deploy forces. Or are you suggesting we should we have subjected the OBL raid to Congressional debate? :)

Given the unavoidable asymmetries of information, Congressional authorization is, and will continue to be, political theater.

eta: Which isn't to say that there's no value whatsoever to political theater. Maybe there is. I'm the wrong one to make that case, though. :)
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama XXI: Kenyan Muslins are ruining this country!

amherstblackbear said:
War is so last century. Nobody ever declares war any more. I'm assuming you're referring to sending troops into combat situations.

That Congressional approval is hard is not the only reason - at all - for Presidential ability to deploy forces. Or are you suggesting we should we have subjected the OBL raid to Congressional debate? :)

Given the unavoidable asymmetries of information, Congressional authorization is, and will continue to be, political theater.

eta: Which isn't to say that there's no value whatsoever to political theater. Maybe there is. I'm the wrong one to make that case, though. :)
Click to expand...

All legislative debate is political theater, but it's the only way to have a "voice of the people." Otherwise we get the Neocons' "the people get to speak every two years, otherwise, they can shut up" jackboot in the face.

I assume you're joking about OBL, but that's a special operation (really: a hit). Ideally, the big four (or whatever they're called -- House and Senate Intel chair and ranking member) should have some sort of running dialog with the administration about the general topic of whether we can assassinate, etc. But certainly that's more of a grey area. And there should already be a presumption that if there is an imminent attack on the US the CIC can order whatever the hell he wants.

But Libya is like Iraq -- a war of choice. It wasn't forced upon us and it wasn't a response to an immediate national security concern, its benefit is based on calculations of indirect national interest. We shouldn't do that without open debate. If open debate means we don't commit troops because it's politically disadvantageous, all the better.
 
Re: Obama XXI: Kenyan Muslins are ruining this country!

We'll agree to disagree there, too. Arguments about Congress being the embodiment of the will of the people strike me as, at best, quaint.

Leaving that aside for a moment, there are a few non-political theory disagreements. When I write that Congressional authorization is political theater, I'm understating the case. I could have been clearer if I had written that it is no more than political theater. Authorizing the use of force is fundamentally different than debating, I dunno, a balanced budget amendment. The latter is out there for all to see. Everybody has equal access to the resolution in question. That is unequivocally not the case re: use of force.

As your own example makes clear. Iraq 2003 was presented as a "preventive" measure, in a deliberate elision of the distinction between prevention and preemption. Of course, it was neither. It was, as you put it, an exercise in the indirect pursuit of national interests. Why did open debate fail to turn that up? Because it wasn't open. And it would be naive to claim that was just a Bush administration pathology.

The claim that Congressional authorization equals democratic accountability requires an extraordinary amount of faith in the ability of formal rules to constrain political behavior. I tend to believe that, in this case, the main effect of formal rules will be to influence the strategic use of information by presidents (or, in some cases, the lies that they will tell).

My basic problems with your side of the argument are that (1) preauthorization will never be more than ceremonial, and (2) a president acting with preauthorization will be even more difficult to constrain subsequently than one who acted without explicit authorization. As hard as it is for Congress to use its leverage against presidential adventurism, it's even harder for them to do so once they've signed off.
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama XXI: Kenyan Muslins are ruining this country!

I'm probably in the minority, but I see Iraq and Libya as different animals. In Libya, the rebels have taken a large part of the country (big difference in trying by preventing a future huge massacre)...and I may have missed something, but I don't think there's an American casualty. That's kind of a big deal.

Having said that, Obama is all over the board. I'm not sure what drummer he's marching to.

Also, I can't believe the kind of ad dollars that are coming down against him. Pretty amazing the kind of money somebodies pumping into net advertising.
 
Re: Obama XXI: Kenyan Muslins are ruining this country!

ringing endorsement of the "Bush Doctrine" in today's speech
 
Re: Obama XXI: Kenyan Muslins are ruining this country!

huskyfan said:
ringing endorsement of the "Bush Doctrine" in today's speech
Click to expand...

Which Bush doctrine?

The one that Krauthammer identified 10 years ago, or the one that he just reimagined this evening?

Don't get me started on Krauthammer's flaming ignorance. ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top