I had a feeling this was going to happen, sooner or later when BO didn't get his way, it would be because he was BLACK. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) on Friday strongly suggested that members of Congress are making it difficult for President Obama to raise the debt ceiling because of his race. If he wasn't black he would still be an idiot. Jackson Lee, a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, said, "I do not understand what I think is the maligning and maliciousness [toward] this president. Why is he different? And in my community, that is the question that we raise. In the minority community that is question that is being raised. Why is this president being treated so disrespectfully? Why has the debt limit been raised 60 times? Why did the leader of the Senate continually talk about his job is to bring the president down to make sure he is unelected?”
"I am particularly sensitive to the fact that only this president — only this one, only this one — has received the kind of attacks and disagreement and inability to work, only this one," said Jackson Lee from the House floor, "Read between the lines, what is different about this president that should put him in a position that he should not receive the same kind of respectful treatment of when it is necessary to raise the debt limit in order to pay our bills, something required by both statute and the 14th amendment?" Jackson Lee concluded by saying that she hoped someone would step up and say that what appears obvious to her is not in fact true. "I hope someone will say that what it appears to be is not in fact accurate," said Lee. "But historically it seems to be nothing more."
It has NOTHING to do with RACE. It is simply what he deserves after the constant lies and after threatening Social Security checks to the elderly. He is showing his true Chicago-style of politics; threaten the people and they will cave. Well, he has no authority to halt the payments to the elderly or to stop paychecks to our servicemen. How can he even dream that he would be re-elected after all the lies he has been caught in? "We are not involved in Lybia, except in a support role" yet, we have flown over 1500 sorties and now supporting the rebels, who just last week were raping, killing, and looting their way through the country.
In 2006, the Democrats, including BO, voted against raising the debt-ceiling. Why the change of heart? Oh yeah, there was a Republican in as President, I remember now.
Let's look at BO's campaign promises:
1. "Will create a federal Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) that will require 25 percent of American electricity be derived from renewable sources by 2025, which has the potential to create hundreds of thousands of new jobs on its own." No renewable energy progress in sight.
2. Will "create 5 million 'green' jobs; will invest $150 billion over ten years to deploy clean technologies, protect our existing manufacturing base and create millions of new jobs." Seeds planted for greens jobs, but will they bear fruit?
3. "Will restore the strength of the Superfund program by requiring polluters to pay for the cleanup of contaminated sites they created." Not happened.
4. "Eliminating special tax breaks for oil and gas companies: including repealing special expensing rules, foreign tax credit benefits, and manufacturing deductions for oil and gas firms." Not happened.
5. "Obama is a cosponsor and strong advocate of the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), a bipartisan effort to make the unionization process more transparent and increase penalties on companies that violate employee rights. He will sign EFCA into law as president." Will not happen.
Now let's look at our involvement in Libya:
U.S. involvement in Libya began on March 19, 2011, as part of a NATO mission to support rebels attempting to overthrow the long-serving authoritarian leader Muammar Gadhafi. Obama said Gadhafi was launching military actions that were causing civilian deaths and forcing ordinary Libyans to escape to neighboring countries, threatening a humanitarian crisis within Libya and instability for its neighbors, Egypt and Tunisia. The NATO coalition initiated a bombing campaign and set up a no-fly zone designed to restrain Gadhafi.
"Left unaddressed, the growing instability in Libya could ignite wider instability in the Middle East, with dangerous consequences to the national security interests of the United States," Obama said.
Under the War Powers Resolution, a president can initiate military action but must receive approval from Congress to continue the operation within 60 days. If approval is not granted and the president deems it an emergency, then an additional 30 days are granted for ending operations.
But since NATO action in Libya began, Obama has not sought or received approval from Congress. In fact, individual members of Congress have warned Obama that he can't continue military action unilaterally. That's what has caused the current face-off between the White House and Congress.
So, earlier this month, butting up against the 90-day mark since action in Libya began, the Obama administration released a report summarizing its actions in Libya. The administration did not claim that the War Powers Resolution was unconstitutional but argued instead that its actions in Libya didn't meet the definition of "hostilities," so the War Powers Resolution did not apply. "U.S. military operations are distinct from the kind of 'hostilities' contemplated by the Resolution's 60-day termination provision. U.S. operations do not involve sustained fighting or active exchanges of fire with hostile forces, nor do they involve the presence of U.S. ground troops, U.S. casualties or a serious threat thereof, or any significant chance of escalation into a conflict characterized by those factors." The report also argued that NATO was leading the efforts in Libya and that U.S. strikes rely on remotely piloted drone planes for its attacks.
Members of Congress from both parties expressed skepticism. "You know, the White House says there are no hostilities taking place," said U.S. House Speaker John Boehner, a Republican. "Yet we've got drone attacks underway. They're spending $10 million a day, part of an effort to drop bombs on Gadhafi's compounds. It just doesn't pass the straight-face test in my view, that we're not in the midst of hostilities."
Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Calif., also rejected the administration's argument. "The War Powers Act is the law of the land. It says if the president deploys forces, he's got to seek Congressional authorization or begin pulling out after 60 days. Too many presidents have simply ignored the law....when you're flying Air Force bombers over enemy territory, you are engaged in combat."
The law itself: The War Powers Resolution, passed in 1973, doesn't define "hostilities," but it does say that the president must go to Congress under three possible conditions if there is no formal declaration of war:
"In any case in which United States Armed Forces are introduced—
1. into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances;
2. into the territory, airspace or waters of a foreign nation, while equipped for combat, except for deployments which relate solely to supply, replacement, repair, or training of such forces;
3. in numbers which substantially enlarge United States Armed Forces equipped for combat already located in a foreign nation."
By my reading, dropping bombs on a country would fall under the second point.
So, I guess if you wanted to play the RACE card, you need to take a good look at what is really going on.
No comments:
Post a Comment