Finally.
Barack Obama finally got around to taking a position. Now that the dust is settling in Libya, Barack Obama is taking a position. This is exactly the same as he’s done for his entire career.
And the position he’s finally gotten around to taking is Sarah Palin’s. She got there on February 23.
Now, as Gaddafi is mopping up, Barack the Bold appears on the horizon.
In the Illinois State Senate, Barack Obama voted present 128 times. He would often use it to duck the tough issues.
Sometimes the “present’ votes were in line with instructions from Democratic leaders or because he objected to provisions in bills that he might otherwise support. At other times, Mr. Obama voted present on questions that had overwhelming bipartisan support. In at least a few cases, the issue was politically sensitive.
Not every state allows the “present” vote, but then hardly any other state can compete with Illinois for pure corruption.
If there was any doubt about voting present being Obama’s mother’s skirt, it was dispelled by on the debt his vote against raising the debt ceiling in 2006. Back then Obama said this:
The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.
He voted against it, knowing that he could vote against it. When pressed to explain the vote, Robert Gibbs mumbled
Gibbs said Obama’s vote was not necessary at the time to secure passage of the bill, which squeaked by 52-48, and that he was using the occasion to call for fiscal discipline.
Thus Obama could stake out the noble position without any political risk and without having to be point man.
Just like now.
The assertions that Obama was being “deliberate” and/or “thoughtful” with regard to Libya are ridiculous. They are the pathetic efforts of liberals to cover for this complete absence of leadership.
The need for a no-fly zone is past. It’s too late. Way too late.
But only then does Air Obama take to the skies.
The world called the US at 3 AM and there was no one to answer. The world was looking for a leader and none was to be found.
France took the lead in the concern over Libya. France’s Sarkozy and England’s Cameron have left Obama biting at their heels.
France is to host talks on Saturday with senior politicians to discuss what course of action to follow in Libya. The UK’s Prime Minister David Cameron says Britain will send fighter jets “in the coming hours” to enforce the no-fly zone.
Only then in the shade of political safety did “Brackets” Obama make an appearance.
On March 12 the Arab League voted to support a no-fly zone and asked the UN to impose it.
March 12.
On March 16 Hillary Clinton called vote that a “sea change.” And still nothing happened.
So there it is.
The Arab League opened the door for Obama on March 12. They all but begged him to go to the UN and stir action.
Sarkozy and Cameron probably threw their arms into the air waiting for President Godot and decided to go without him.
Only when Gaddafi was closing in on the Benghazi finale does Barack Obama get off the recliner.
Game over, man.
If you appreciate that unique and ideal combination of ineffectiveness, meaninglessness and tardy symbolism in a President, Barack Obama is your guy.
DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education.
DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed.
Except for liberals being foolish.
@blast:
We hoist Obama by his own petard. We hold Obama to the words he so freely used in criticism of Bush.
HE is the ONE. HE is supposed to be the Savior. He is supposed to be better than all of us.
HE is full of crap.
@rich wheeler:
On the social side there wasn’t much difference between Mac and Obama.
This stuff is the big boy game and Obie is over his head. He wants to look Presidential but take no political risks. That’s not how the world works.
Welcome to the stalemate in Libya. It’s never going to end.
@rich wheeler:
The “gotcha” was in the interest of knowing where you stand now. Hardly childish. As well, my post simply shows that you, amongst other Obama apologists and enablers, don’t care one whit to elect an honest, true to their word politician. You would rather elect someone like Obama, and be on the “winning” side, even if it costs the country. There is no way of denying that Obama is a hypocrite and a liar. This issue with Libya is the proof of that, front and center for all to see.
Nice switch on the topic as well. I see you didn’t address any of the points I made.
@johngalt, #124:
I was completely serious, but the comment was actually in reference to S0D Robert Gates’s statement before the House Appropriations Committee on March 2. (See posts #60 and #95.) All of the talk discounting the effectiveness of a no fly zone was calculated deception. That’s what was already being planned. It was the logical first step to any military intervention.
A monomaniacal fixation on Barack Obama’s supposed global incompetence sometimes seems to impair objective analysis. He may be wrong, but he isn’t random.
@blast:
It’s not just now, as in the recent past.
-The First Barbary War, fought against Tripoli muslim pirates, was never formally declared as war.
-For the War of 1812, some battles were fought in 1811, prior to the declaration of war in 1812.
-For the Mexican-American War of 1846, troops marched and battles were fought prior to Congress declaring war on Mexico.
-In WWII, many of our military pilots were seconded to Great Britain prior to our entry into the war following declarations against Japan and Germany.
-The Korean Conflict was never declared as war by congress
-The Vietnam War was never officially declared as war by congress
There are many other occasions, many in the distant past, where no formal declaration of war was enacted by congress, even when they authorized use of military force. To somehow insinuate that this is something recent shows little factual history of U.S. military actions.
@Greg:
Are you somehow “in the loop” as far as Obama’s admin is concerned? I don’t believe Obama himself, or his admin, had any intention of deception against Ghaddafi and Libya. Any assertion on your part supporting that hypothesis is pure speculation, and unfounded speculation to boot.
@johngalt:
For context, the entire paragraph:
It will be readily allowed that the Constitution of a particular country may limit the Organ charged with the direction of the public force, in the use or application of that force, even in time of actual war: but nothing short of the strongest negative words, of the most express prohibitions, can be admitted to restrain that Organ from so employing it, as to derive the fruits of actual victory, by making prisoners of the persons and detaining the property of a vanquished enemy.
Our Constitution happily is not chargeable with so great an absurdity.
The framers of it would have blushed at a provision, so repugnant to good sense, so inconsistent with national safety and inconvenience.
That instrument has only provided affirmatively, that, “The Congress shall have power to declare War;” the plain meaning of which is that, it is the peculiar and exclusive province of Congress, when the nation is at peace, to change that state into a state of war; whether from calculations of policy or from provocations or injuries received: in other words, it belongs to Congress only, to go to War.
But when a foreign nation declares, or openly and avowedly makes war upon the United States, they are then by the very fact, already at war, and any declaration on the part of Congress is nugatory: it is at least unnecessary.
This inference is clear in principle, and has the sanction of established practice.
It is clear in principle, because it is self-evident, that a declaration by one nation against another, produce[s] at once a complete state of war between both; and that no declaration on the other side can at all vary their relative situation: and in practice it is well known, that nothing is more common, than when war is declared by one party, to prosecute mutual hostilities, without a declaration by the other.
Alexander Hamilton
17 Dec. 1801Papers 25:454–57
You might want to read the whole thing, it isn’t that long.
Point is, Viet Nam and North Korea were conflicts, not wars.
In the other cases we were attacked or provoked by the other side, whether Mexico, Germany or those Muslim pirates taking our merchant ships and holding our crews for ransom.
uh ahem… yuh. You mean like prohibiting US E&P in the Gulf of Mexico post Deepwater Horizon, but giving Brazils’ Petrobras the permit to drill 8200 ft down (Horizon was about 5000), plus have a production storage offloading facility.
Protective? Yup. Of the environment? LOL Doesn’t appear so. More like protective of favored corporations. And it’s right about now that someone will follow up with the Soros majority shareholder status in Petrobras.
Only the severely math challenged can label a “coalition of the willing” of 39 nations as “unilateral”. Sorry, Tom … revisionist history doesn’t make it so.
What can be appreciated by Bush I was stopping Saddam’s invasion of a neighbor/state. What can be appreciated by Bush II is that Saddam’s involvement with terrorist groups, Zawahiri and Somalia more than warranted removal of a despot who had been playing the back room game against UN resolutions and OFF.
None of this logic and strategy can be attributed to a hesitant and unsure CiC, dragged into the Security Counsel’s net of involvement by liberal peer pressure, and that of his own appointees. Because it sure wasn’t the advice of his Secy of Defense. Therefore, considering the length of time of the Iraq no fly zone, how can you say this isn’t “open ended” with no evidence? And I thought that stated goals was to prohibit Libyan AF jets… did they move the hangars to Gaddafi’s palace/compound in the past few days?
@johngalt, #160:
When the Secretary of Defense is discussing a specific military option in public it’s a safe bet it’s being done purposefully. What Gates said about a no fly zone with regard to Libya didn’t seem logical, nor did it seem logical each time someone repeated it in the media. The White House was oddly silent. Next thing you know, there’s a UN resolution and a coordinated international military action is already underway to impose a no fly zone with US forces at the center of things. Naval vessels have been previously positioned, there’s a prioritized target list, and missiles are launching.
You can’t set something like that up overnight. I don’t believe I’m engaging in unfounded speculation. It’s just a matter of working backward a couple of weeks and filling in the blanks.
It’s also possible to look forward, although that does involve a lot more speculation. I would speculate that there actually is a specific goal that extends beyond what was stated in the UN resolution.
And of this matter:
http://www.answers.com/topic/war-powers-1
As it is, our Allies in the EU is seeking our Air support. How this evolves into what role the United States is going to be sticky and messy for the President. As I’ve said before, the French Government were breathing down our necks to act (not domestic Conservatives) and the British have been spat in the eye over the Lockerbie Bomber release ontop of evidience that Gaddafi himself issued the bombing attack and funded it so British interests in attacking Gaddafi himself isn’t exactly surprising. Lockerbie boming had over 190 Americans on board, and if the evidence is true that Gaddafi orderd the attack and funded it then this alone is a good example of what type of threat he can pose ontop of what he’s doing to his citizens.
However, in terms of conventional warfare, it is becoming clear his forces won’t pose a mustered threat to the likes of Egypt or even EU forces without the backing of United States. However, due to the situation of Naval forces already in the area to give Air support in Iraq and Israel it was logical for the French and the British to pursue American support in Libyan No-Fly Zone enforcement. But frankly in my humble opinion, kill Gaddafi’s fighting ablity and him and his heirs and then withdraw leaving the French to nation build this. Congress isn’t a stones throw alway from declaring war against Libya if stablity to EU oil supplies do not come soon and pressure from the EU comes down on the American forces to act.
Dr John,
I am not interested in narrow political views on individual politicians. ALL should abide by the Constitution. If you believe that Presidents should have a declaration of war before committing to action then I am with you, if not, your position is as hypocritical as Obama’s and just as empty.
@Nan G:
I agree with your points. My post to blast was simply to point out the absurdity of the notion that congress not declaring war when our military is engaged is something of recent vintage.
Congress may authorize military action without a formal declaration of war, and the President may authorize it as well, however, it is up to Congress to fund such actions.
Mata #162 To your credit YOU didn’t follow up with the factcheck debunked Glenn Beck conspiracy story re Petrobras loan. I know you think Hannity a clown. What are your current thoughts on Beck’s credibility.
rich, Petrabras did get a loan, from the Inport/Export bank. But I don’t consider that a detriment since it can lead to American jobs, payrolls, revenue, etc. In fact, I’m tickled pink that Brazil can drill. What I’m annoyed about is that privilege seems to be denied to American producers.
As far as Beck, don’t watch him often. He’s like most pundits. Gets some things right, and some things wrong. What I will say for Beck is that he goes the extra mile to gather up more data before he makes his opinions. I, however, don’t allow pundits to form my opinions. I do my own research and homework.
@blast:
You mean like this?
@MataHarley: I love Jeff Beck.
Jeff Beck… LOL Yup, good taste. Love ya back. My favorite adversary, ya are.
@MataHarley: Et tu, Mate
@MataHarley: Freeway!
Jeff Beck and a Becks beer the perfect antidote to Glenn Beck?
I do not support this action as I share the same grave doubts as Mata and more. This is a civil war and no one wins a civil war from the outside. Gaddafi is a bad guy but this humanitarian nonsense is just that. I also think this is about assassination but there is even more beyond that. Who would step in after Gaddafi? I doubt Obama has anything in mind.
Dr J. Most on here were calling for BHO’S head when he wasn’t in the first 48 hrs with Americans still in Tripoli.Many say over 100,000 people would have died in Benghazi alone if mission hadn’t started last weekend.No question mission is both humanitarian and regime change.
Gaddafi successor? Suprised you havn’t suggested Farrakhan or maybe Saul Alinsky.
MS Bees #123 Are you suggesting the people who will emerge to lead countries like Iraq(Saddam),Egypt(Mubarek),Libya(Gadhafi),Tunisia ,Yemen and hopefully Syria and Iran will not improve the lives of the large majority of their citizenry?Do you feel this will hurt the U.S.A.?
Putting everything aside but politics. Look at Obama’s track record in Illinois. Also he does not have enough time as a representative in a state to go on and be a representative of the entire U.S.A. Do you think that the non Muslim countries are going to want to deal with a Muslim from the U.S. NO! It’s not going to bring a good relationship with Muslims because he’s from the U.S.[well almost]. He also stated he wants to bring home troops just to send them to Africa. If anything look at his track record it stinks. Now that he wants to run for president hes been absent on all Illinois votes.Lets hope if he gets president he doesn’t find another job to fun for and leave the nation standing.Look at the track record vote anything but obama.
I bet LIBYA IS DISAPPOINTED, TODAY, we where right to be afraid of the exchange from
one to worse radical rule, no freedom won there after all those deaths.
if you get in SYRIA YOU will get the same results, a change for worse. and the beast will get bigger,
but no freedom will come either.
Hi Mizz Beez: I just wanted you to know that my peach trees are blooming and the honey bees showed up right on time to pollinate them. How do they know?
@HR: Speaking of golfing, we haven’t heard any reports of Obama hitting the links for months now. Has he given it up, or is this just a media blackout?
John Cooper
yes how do they know?
an extraordinary event to my mind too, thank you for bringing the news,
it’s a breath of spring for me still in the snow storm,
the sight of peach trees in flowers must be so beautiful to admire, while it show,
the pleasure of being there make you so fortunate.
bye