or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Obama the Invisible
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Obama the Invisible

post #1 of 24
Thread Starter 
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion...tf15MAr9DYAORK

The opinion piece caught my eye. In recent days I've been wondering "where is Obama?" Excerpts:

Quote:
Where is the president? The world is beset. Moammar Khadafy [sic] is moving relentlessly to crush the Libyan revolt that once promised the overthrow of one of the world's most despicable regimes.

So where is the president?

Japan may be on the verge of a disaster that dwarfs any we have yet seen. A self-governing nation like the United States needs its leader to take full measure of his position at times of crises when the path forward is no longer clear.

This is not a time for leadership; this is the time for leadership.

So where is Barack Obama?


Quote:
nd yet, since Friday and a press conference in which he managed to leave the American position on Libya more muddled than it was before, we have not heard his voice. Except in a radio address -- he talked about education legislation.

And he appeared at a fund-raiser in DC. And sat down with ESPN to reveal his NCAA picks.


Now, it goes without saying I am no fan of the President. It's no secret I think he's anti-business, pro-big government and, well, wrong on nearly every issue I consider to be important. But the topic of this thread goes way beyond me disagreeing with his policies, his tactics, etc. This comes down to two things for me: Demonstrated incompetence and failure to lead. Leave the rest of the disagreements on the table, because these are the true problems. The following is listed in chronological order:

Exhibit A: The Healthcare Debate

Obama promised competent, smart leadership. Instead of taking the reins, he allowed Congress to fight it out (almost literally in some cases). He shutdown Republican ideas even while saying he was open to them. His sole act of "leadership" was to help facilitate the ramming-through of the bloated, unconstitutional (my opinion) bill. The result was a law that is likely worse than single payer or a public option.

Exhibit B: The BP Spill

Obama responded by killing thousands of jobs in the Gulf Coast region during the worst recession since WWII through the moratorium on offshore drilling. He appeared feckless, frustrated and outright angry at times. His administration uttered the famous "boots on throats" line and focused on getting the public to blame BP instead of focusing on the government's pathetic response. Where was "the speech?" Where was the national address where he confidently stated "We will do whatever it takes. We will overcome this disaster and make drilling safer going forward. We will protect jobs. Most importantly, we will offer the full resources of the federal government to assist BP in the cleanup operation. We will have time for blame later. It is now time to act." Answer: Despite doing many of the things I reference above, leadership can be as much about words as it is about action.

Exhibit C: Egypt

One term best describes Obama's response: "Ho-hum." He waffled and equivocated and clarified. We don't want to meddle, but the outcome is important. It's none of our business, but in a way it's our business. We support freedom around the globe, but we shouldn't be...you know, supporting freedom around the globe. Some advice, Mr. President: If you're not getting involved, say that. If you believe the Mubarak government is oppressive and needs to change or surrender power, say that. But you can't have it both ways.

Exhibit D: Libya

Ghadaffi (who, after a quick Google search, apparently spells his name several ways) is a brutal dictator that is now turning his military against his people. This man is slaughtering his own people. Making matters worse, he's doing so in a critical and unstable part of the world. Because of Libya's oil-producing status, he's even affecting the global economy. Where is Obama? He's nowhere. Hillary Clinton has show more leadership on the issue than he has (yes, I really just wrote that). Every day, we hear and see that Ghadaffi is attacking "the rebels." Hmmm. Has anyone noticed that Obama and the Obamaite Media are calling them "rebels" instead of "Freedom Fighters?" Funny enough...MS-OBAMA and ONN (The Obama News Network) had no trouble using the latter term when it came to terrorists attacking American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Where is the term now? These people are LITERALLY "Freedom Fighters." Once again, where is Obama? Here again, get involved or don't. In fact, let's just get involved. Why wouldn't we? The United States is supposed to promote freedom throughout the world, correct? Isn't that one of the ideals Mr. Obama talked about promoting in order to make America "more respected in the world?" Secondly, doesn't Libya affect our national security? Doesn't it affect oil...the lifeblood of our economy? Forget the No-Fly. Get on TV and state that he has 48 hours to surrender power. Then show news footage of the 1986 Reagan-ordered raid on his country. Then ask a simple question: "Mr. Ghadaffi, do you think we've gotten better or worse at bombing since then?....Your call." And Mr. Obama, guess what? The world doesn't respect America when she stands on the sidelines and lets brutal dictators attack their own people. Would attacking Libya earn us enemies? Absolutely. But not dealing with this madman will earn us a lot more.

Exhibit E: The Final Atrocity: Japan

Unfortunately for the President, "E" doesn't stand for "excellent." The way the President has handled (read: not handled) the nearly unthinkable devastation in Japan quite literally sickens me. Nothing short of a prime-time national address and the presentation of a plan to rebuild the quake and tsunami-stricken areas is acceptable. The US should announce a major and nationwide effort. We should send any military resources we can spare without affecting our own security. The President should visit Japan immediately. He should coordinate with other world leaders as they develop the international response effort. Is he doing some of this now? I'm sure. But he, as the article states, is invisible. During one of the most grave crises in the history of human civilization, the leader of the world's most powerful nation is nowhere to be seen.

President Obama is not fiddling as Rome burns. He is fiddling as the world burns.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #2 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Ghadaffi (who, after a quick Google search, apparently spells his name several ways).

No he doesn't - he's Arabic. His name is Arabic. People transliterate it different ways from the Arabic script.

Another 'Obama invisibility point for you: Saudi Arabia has essentially invaded Bahrain and are oppressing and murdering the Democracy protestors there.

Quote:
Security forces with tanks have overrun a square in the centre of Bahrain's capital Manama where anti-government protesters have been camped for weeks.

At least three died after police fired on mainly Shia protesters, reports say. Officials said three police died.

The government has imposed a curfew from 1600 (1300 GMT) to 0400 and banned all demonstrations. There are reports of shooting at the main hospital.

The country's Sunni rulers on Tuesday called in Saudi troops to keep order.

At least two people died in clashes on Tuesday and more than 200 were injured.

Link

The truth is - unfortunately - that events have overtaken Obama and he is floundering and out of his depth.....exposed in fact for the shadow of a leader he is. More worrying is that his Staff seem to be also.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #3 of 24
Check the golf course.
post #4 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

Check the golf course.

Or the ranch... oops... wrong president.
post #5 of 24
I voted for him and I can say that while I don't expect perfection on the one hand he has really failed to lead on more than one occasion. I watched the other day just after the events in Japan unfolded and his press conference was like bullet point after bullet point. He covered Japan but then went right to oil prices and why there is no reason for these high prices etc.

I was sitting there thinking..... He should focus on Japan and then schedule another press conference later for other matters. His press conference seemed indifferent towards Japan in my view due to Japan just seemingly being one of the bullet points he wanted to touch on.

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #6 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship View Post

I voted for him and I can say that while I don't expect perfection on the one hand he has really failed to lead on more than one occasion. I watched the other day just after the events in Japan unfolded and his press conference was like bullet point after bullet point. He covered Japan but then went right to oil prices and why there is no reason for these high prices etc.

I was sitting there thinking..... He should focus on Japan and then schedule another press conference later for other matters. His press conference seemed indifferent towards Japan in my view due to Japan just seemingly being one of the bullet points he wanted to touch on.

Fellows

Well worse then that the tone within many of these conferences is the same. There's the "I get it" which I guess is supposed acknowledge the problem, but unlike Clinton, who was a political master, there's no empathy. Sometimes even when you can't do anything about it, just sharing and caring can help. With him, you don't even get that.

Then there is usually a strawman or two to be labeled as the problem or admission that the problem is being addressed but the worse was mess than anyone anticipated or that we need patience while the solution takes longer than was thought, etc.

Then there is just the checking out. I can't imagine how bad this would be if it were the press as it had been on Bush who took a couple days to address Katrina and flew over it in a plane which lead to him basically being crucified in the press.

As SDW notes, there has been issue after issue on this with Obama from oil spills to Middle East wars, to nuclear neighbors needing help. The man just seems to be asleep at the switch.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #7 of 24
I suspect his job is very draining considering how many problems our nation faces and the world at large faces. That said. He was voted into office and if he is not up to the challenges he needs to surround himself with more and better advisors. I would suspect that if Obama continues to pander to unions like he did with regard to WI and continue to seemingly be absent from addressing let along providing leadership to congress regarding our financial woes add to that the political changes in North Africa / middle east and crisis in Japan he is not going to sail into a second term as president.

If he is not cut out for the job at hand we need to find someone who is.

I don't honestly know who this person would be. But Obama needs to step up his "efforts".

I give him some slack for being a human being but his job IS demanding and it demands strong leadership. Frankly we are not seeing it.

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #8 of 24
Obama? He's in a secure undisclosed location. Hmm.. where have we heard that before?

One of Obama's primary confidants/advisers is the famous liberal, Henry Kissinger. Maybe he knows?
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #9 of 24
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

No he doesn't - he's Arabic. His name is Arabic. People transliterate it different ways from the Arabic script.

My comment was tongue-in-cheek.

Quote:

Another 'Obama invisibility point for you: Saudi Arabia has essentially invaded Bahrain and are oppressing and murdering the Democracy protestors there.

Yeah, that's another one. Obviously there are different views of the situation, but there is no leadership from him on that issue, either.

Quote:



Link

The truth is - unfortunately - that events have overtaken Obama and he is floundering and out of his depth.....exposed in fact for the shadow of a leader he is. More worrying is that his Staff seem to be also.

Totally agree there. I would add that his worldview and overall governing philosophy make things much worse.


Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Or the ranch... oops... wrong president.

At least that president was working at the time. Obama is on ESPN picking his bracket. WTF?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship View Post

I suspect his job is very draining considering how many problems our nation faces and the world at large faces.

Agreed. I can't imagine the pressure that any President must face.

Quote:
That said. He was voted into office and if he is not up to the challenges he needs to surround himself with more and better advisors.

Well, I think the problem is the head of the snake...pardon the expression. The man's arrogance and ego I think prevent him from really relying on knowledgable people.

Quote:

I would suspect that if Obama continues to pander to unions like he did with regard to WI and continue to seemingly be absent from addressing let along providing leadership to congress regarding our financial woes add to that the political changes in North Africa / middle east and crisis in Japan he is not going to sail into a second term as president.

Unless the economy turns around quickly, he's doomed. His approval rating is nearing 40 percent. His negatives are exceptionally high. There are literally millions of Americans that think he's a Muslim who was born in Kenya. There is no evidence of those whatsoever, but politically speaking, that doesn't matter (then again, I am getting to the point where I'm asking the question: Why not show the birth certificate?).

Quote:

If he is not cut out for the job at hand we need to find someone who is.

I don't honestly know who this person would be. But Obama needs to step up his "efforts".

I give him some slack for being a human being but his job IS demanding and it demands strong leadership. Frankly we are not seeing it.

Fellows

Appreciate the honesty from someone that voted for Obama. It's not a question of effort, though. He's just a terrible President. His policies are all wrong for the country. America is less respected in the world. He's clearly the most liberal/progressive president we've ever had. On top of this, he's arrogant, egotistical, thin-skinned, indecisive and inexperienced as an executive. It's a recipe for disaster...and dinner is nearly done.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

Obama? He's in a secure undisclosed location. Hmm.. where have we heard that before?

For the life of me I don't see the obsession you have with this issue. Could you explain it? Putting the POTUS or VPOTUS apart from each other in secure, undisclosed locations seems to make sense when the nation is under attack. Hmmm?

Quote:

One of Obama's primary confidants/advisers is the famous liberal, Henry Kissinger. Maybe he knows?

That's overstated. There's really no evidence that he's a "primary confidant." He's an advisor. Now, there is the odd quote from James L. Jones that he "takes his daily orders" from Kissinger. I don't think anyone really knows what that means, nor how it would even be possible without being widely known. Here is the quote:

Jones:
Quote:
"Thank you for that wonderful tribute to Henry Kissinger yesterday. Congratulations. As the most recent National Security Advisor of the United States, I take my daily orders from Dr. Kissinger, filtered down through Generaal Brent Scowcroft and Sandy Berger, who is also here. We have a chain of command in the National Security Council that exists today.

(emphasis added)

That could mean any number of things. Kissinger may be in that chain of command. It doesn't mean he's at or near the top. In any case, even if Kissinger were a primary advisor, that doesn't mean Obama's view of the world is any different than he has demonstrated. That doesn't make him any more right on government spending, healthcare, or the failures of leadership I mentioned.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #10 of 24
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Well worse then that the tone within many of these conferences is the same. There's the "I get it" which I guess is supposed acknowledge the problem, but unlike Clinton, who was a political master, there's no empathy. Sometimes even when you can't do anything about it, just sharing and caring can help. With him, you don't even get that.

Then there is usually a strawman or two to be labeled as the problem or admission that the problem is being addressed but the worse was mess than anyone anticipated or that we need patience while the solution takes longer than was thought, etc.

Then there is just the checking out. I can't imagine how bad this would be if it were the press as it had been on Bush who took a couple days to address Katrina and flew over it in a plane which lead to him basically being crucified in the press.

As SDW notes, there has been issue after issue on this with Obama from oil spills to Middle East wars, to nuclear neighbors needing help. The man just seems to be asleep at the switch.

Good points. It's funny...as much as I disliked Obama prior to his election, I am honestly surprised at what I've seen from him in most if not all areas. It's like he is the polar opposite of everything he was portrayed to be in the campaign. I mentioned it earlier: During the campaign he was mostly VERY positive (some exceptions, but not many I can recall). His speeches were soaring and inspirational. He projected confidence, reason, level-headedness, transparency, competence, bipartisanship and empathy in almost all cases. But from nearly the moment he took office, he's governed in exactly the opposite of those terms and with seemingly the exact opposite personalty. His speeches are flat and uninspired. Confidence has become indecisiveness. Reason has been supplanted by ideology. Level-headedness has been replaced by feckless anger. Transparency is worse than ever. Competence has become utter incompetence. Empathy has become complete disconnection. What the hell? It's just..odd. It's hard to believe any campaign team could have been that good at creating a false image. Or, did he just change? Perhaps it all came from him to begin with (e.g. he fooled everyone). I just don't know. I do know this is about much more than policy at this point. Early on, it wasn't for me. I just disagreed with him...strongly. I now add the items in this thread to the pile.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #11 of 24
I find Obama's speeches to be a tad tone deaf or something. I'm not sure what the right word is. WRT Japan it's easy. Express sympathy, US has mobilized, ready to help in any way requested, american people are generous so please donate. Pretty simple. Instead we get some bizarre message about Japan was strong and will be strong again. Huh? Like they are weak now? So damaged they are weak? Pity party for Japan? Mind you this isn't today or yesterday but soon after the disaster.


Oh yea and toss in the straw man and blame bush for the current situation.
post #12 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

For the life of me I don't see the obsession you have with this issue. Could you explain it? Putting the POTUS or VPOTUS apart from each other in secure, undisclosed locations seems to make sense when the nation is under attack. Hmmm?

Well, if you remember from that day, Cheney was the one in an "undisclosed secure location" while the President was being literally "hung out to dry", in the middle of when, as you put it "the nation was under attack". Bush and his entire entourage were apparently in severe danger, in a location which had been publicly known for at least a week prior to the attacks... and nobody did anything to protect the president between 9-03 that morning and 9-38 when the motorcade left the school. Somebody was either not doing their job, or the security of the VPOTUS was considered of greater importance than that of the POTUS... which strikes me as peculiar, to say the very least, given the circumstances.

Quote:
That's overstated. There's really no evidence that he's a "primary confidant." He's an advisor. Now, there is the odd quote from James L. Jones that he "takes his daily orders" from Kissinger. I don't think anyone really knows what that means, nor how it would even be possible without being widely known. Here is the quote:

Jones: (emphasis added)

That could mean any number of things. Kissinger may be in that chain of command. It doesn't mean he's at or near the top. In any case, even if Kissinger were a primary advisor, that doesn't mean Obama's view of the world is any different than he has demonstrated. That doesn't make him any more right on government spending, healthcare, or the failures of leadership I mentioned.

One could take it at face value... after all, why would Jones drop that little tidbit, unless he wanted to discredit Obama for associating with the likes of Kissinger. Jones surely wasn't intending on looking like an idiot for fabricating something like that. DC insiders are part of the same club... it matters not whether they are democrat or republican... their allegiances are more about serving themselves and their privileged cronies, than serving the American people.

Back to Kissinger. He is regarded in a number of nations as a war criminal (and with much solid evidence and information to back up that claim). He is unable to travel to a number of countries, for fear of arrest. No matter what, history will not look kindly upon this person, no matter how much weaseling and revisionism is done to shore up his legacy.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #13 of 24
I thought this was some Alex Jones Gold which kinda ties in with this thread..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiteF...layer_embedded

This next video is reason enough why President Obama has failed.

I don't care that he mentions Japan and USAID it is such a token gesture. It is 100% complete arrogance how this President participates with this nonsense when the world is in the condition that it is. He is free to his own personal time but to have this media interview filmed and all makes it beyond "his personal time off to harbor his own opinions and thoughts" He is fiddling while the world is burning so to speak and I think this is immoral and repulsive in the highest degree.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1L2U2...eature=related
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #14 of 24
The middle east needs stability so that the world can gets it's oil. All the dictators have been funded, supported and put in place by powers outside of the middle east. While democracy is nice for the people, it will also break the influence of the external forces in the policy of the oil producing nation. Also, providing support for democracy in one middle eastern country will more than likely piss off OPEC and we don't want that, do we? Again, Saudi Arabia is above judgement even from the 9/11 days. They can get away with anything. Unless you want full out military invasion of the middle east which will trigger a world war, there isn't much that can be done.

Update: The US and France talk tough after the Arab league extends it support to civilians in Libya. Thank you for the permission.
Most of us employ the Internet not to seek the best information, but rather to select information that confirms our prejudices. - Nicholas D. Kristof
Reply
Most of us employ the Internet not to seek the best information, but rather to select information that confirms our prejudices. - Nicholas D. Kristof
Reply
post #15 of 24
Disgusting hypocrisy by POTUS in this speech I am unfortunately hearing as we speak...sounds just like Bush...even same words and phrases.

Sickening really....Saudis massacring in Bahrain and he's talking about 'freedom'. Just like in Iraq...well...I guess the people in the region know now what to expect and what that 'freedom' looks like.

Wouldn't have thought the US populace would sign up for more crap and chaos but I guess you never know...
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #16 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Disgusting hypocrisy by POTUS in this speech I am unfortunately hearing as we speak...sounds just like Bush...even same words and phrases.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tu...augural-speech

\

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #17 of 24
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

Well, if you remember from that day, Cheney was the one in an "undisclosed secure location" while the President was being literally "hung out to dry", in the middle of when, as you put it "the nation was under attack". Bush and his entire entourage were apparently in severe danger, in a location which had been publicly known for at least a week prior to the attacks... and nobody did anything to protect the president between 9-03 that morning and 9-38 when the motorcade left the school. Somebody was either not doing their job, or the security of the VPOTUS was considered of greater importance than that of the POTUS... which strikes me as peculiar, to say the very least, given the circumstances.

LET THE CONSPIRACIES......BEGIN!

Quote:

One could take it at face value... after all, why would Jones drop that little tidbit, unless he wanted to discredit Obama for associating with the likes of Kissinger. Jones surely wasn't intending on looking like an idiot for fabricating something like that. DC insiders are part of the same club... it matters not whether they are democrat or republican... their allegiances are more about serving themselves and their privileged cronies, than serving the American people.

So...Obama is a "Washington insider" now...or at least he embraces them? Really?


Quote:
Back to Kissinger. He is regarded in a number of nations as a war criminal (and with much solid evidence and information to back up that claim). He is unable to travel to a number of countries, for fear of arrest. No matter what, history will not look kindly upon this person, no matter how much weaseling and revisionism is done to shore up his legacy.

I'm not here to defend Kissinger. But, I do think that him being a "war criminal" is in the eye of the beholder, so to speak. We've heard that nearly every President since Nixon was a "war criminal" according someone for some reason. It seems that every time someone does something controversial with the military, he's a "war criminal." Again, I don't have any great love for the man, but I think your perspective is somewhat skewed.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #18 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

LET THE CONSPIRACIES......BEGIN!

Surely. If 9/11 wasn't a conspiracy, then who was responsible? A lone nut?

Quote:
So...Obama is a "Washington insider" now...or at least he embraces them? Really?

When Obama made a speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, he was a junior senator. 4 years later, he's president. Outsiders don't get fast-tracked like that.

Quote:
I'm not here to defend Kissinger.

Wow! Great!. I should hope not!

Quote:
But, I do think that him being a "war criminal" is in the eye of the beholder, so to speak. We've heard that nearly every President since Nixon was a "war criminal" according someone for some reason. It seems that every time someone does something controversial with the military, he's a "war criminal." Again, I don't have any great love for the man, but I think your perspective is somewhat skewed.

If a US president, or senior official (from either 'side') was suspected to have committed a war crime, what would happen? Nothing. Too many others in positions of authority might be implicated. Accessory before/after the fact carries equal penalties as the perps of the actual crime are subject to. Who would dare investigate, let alone prosecute? What happens when, for example, the Gambino family investigates the Mafia?
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #19 of 24
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

Surely. If 9/11 wasn't a conspiracy, then who was responsible? A lone nut?

It wasn't a conspiracy. The lone nuts are the ones that think otherwise.

Quote:



When Obama made a speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, he was a junior senator. 4 years later, he's president. Outsiders don't get fast-tracked like that.

Got it. He's a Washington insider. Right. \

Quote:



Wow! Great!. I should hope not!



If a US president, or senior official (from either 'side') was suspected to have committed a war crime, what would happen? Nothing. Too many others in positions of authority might be implicated. Accessory before/after the fact carries equal penalties as the perps of the actual crime are subject to. Who would dare investigate, let alone prosecute? What happens when, for example, the Gambino family investigates the Mafia?

First, suspected by whom? This is what I'm saying. One country's butcher is another's hero, and so forth. Secondly, the issue is that there's very little evidence pertaining to actual war crimes by any recent President (save perhaps Johnson and Nixon re: Vietnam). In conjunction with point one, that is why not many have taken up the mantle of prosecuting "war criminals."

Now, let's assume a US President committed an actual war crime. Say he ordered the wholesale slaughter of civilians. Say he dropped a nuclear bomb on Tripoli for no reason other than Gadaffi "getting the message". What then? He would first be impeached here, then tried in the US or elsewhere for said war crimes. He sure wouldn't just continue on because he happens to be powerful.

War crimes are genocide, deliberate slaughter of civilians, etc. War crimes are not collateral damage, accidents, or launching missiles into dictator's houses. The problem you have here, sammi, is that you and others have cried wolf too many times. Everything you don't like is a "war crime." Yet you ignore true war crimes, such as Gadaffi is committing now and such as the brutal dictators we know and despise have. I don't see you posting rants tantamount to your Kissinger-inspired one concerning the crimes that Saddam, Jong-Il, Mugabe, even Chavez and Castro committed. Where are those threads, sammi?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #20 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post


If a US president, or senior official (from either 'side') was suspected to have committed a war crime, what would happen? Nothing. Too many others in positions of authority might be implicated. Accessory before/after the fact carries equal penalties as the perps of the actual crime are subject to. Who would dare investigate, let alone prosecute? What happens when, for example, the Gambino family investigates the Mafia?

Suspicions are used as a political weapon. They are meaningless and worthless.
post #21 of 24
At this rate, we can expect for there to be Democratic presidential candidates opposing Obama in the next election. Maybe this is part of the big plan?
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #22 of 24
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post

At this rate, we can expect for there to be Democratic presidential candidates opposing Obama in the next election. Maybe this is part of the big plan?

I think Hillary is going to run, no matter what she says. And I think she would win. Liberals and moderates loved Hillary. Conservatives didn't, but they also see her (I think) as a lot better than Obama. I confess to changing my view of her after the last two years. At least she doesn't share Obama's view of the world and the US's place within it. At least she's competent.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #23 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post

At this rate, we can expect for there to be Democratic presidential candidates opposing Obama in the next election. Maybe this is part of the big plan?

I doubt it. Obama paid off all the proper Democratic constituencies. His ability to raise funds doesn't appear too damaged. Who else would they run?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I think Hillary is going to run, no matter what she says. And I think she would win. Liberals and moderates loved Hillary. Conservatives didn't, but they also see her (I think) as a lot better than Obama. I confess to changing my view of her after the last two years. At least she doesn't share Obama's view of the world and the US's place within it. At least she's competent.

I don't think she will run. I could be wrong but she really seems toned down in part because she has moved on from this. She would be 65 years old when taking office if she won but we all know age is only a concern when Republicans are involved.

Speaking of age, isn't McCain supposed to have been dead 14 times over by now per all the Democratic supporters and the guy who didn't have the energy for the job? Hillary could pull out all those quotes for the naysayers I guess. So far it seems like there's one guy who doesn't have the energy and desire for the job, and it wasn't him.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #24 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

It wasn't a conspiracy. The lone nuts are the ones that think otherwise.

A conspiracy is a "plan by more than one person to commit a criminal act", except in the case of the mythical Al Qaeda conspirators.

Quote:
Got it. He's a Washington insider. Right. \

OK. You'r right.

Quote:
First, suspected by whom? This is what I'm saying. One country's butcher is another's hero, and so forth.

Agreed. Decisions by politicians render unto them the status of "butcher". In SE Asia, both Kissinger and Pol Pot qualify "admirably". In Iraq, same for both Pres. Clinton and Saddam Hussein. And when it comes to terrorism, Bin Laden and Peter King also live up to the term.

Quote:
Secondly, the issue is that there's very little evidence pertaining to actual war crimes by any recent President (save perhaps Johnson and Nixon re: Vietnam). In conjunction with point one, that is why not many have taken up the mantle of prosecuting "war criminals."

Evidence that we are aware of, you mean. Evidence which remains classified is evidence that we don't know. How much trust can one place in those who have the capacity to classify information, when that information could lead to their political downfall, or ending military careers, or even being prosecuted for high crimes such as treason, mass murder or war crimes? How often is that loaded phrase "national security" (ab)used in order to protect privileged people who break the law? The answer is "unknown", because we the people (their employers) have been placed very firmly outside of the loop.... as if we don't have the right to know.

Quote:
Now, let's assume a US President committed an actual war crime. Say he ordered the wholesale slaughter of civilians. Say he dropped a nuclear bomb on Tripoli for no reason other than Gadaffi "getting the message". What then? He would first be impeached here, then tried in the US or elsewhere for said war crimes. He sure wouldn't just continue on because he happens to be powerful.

The case of dropping a nuke is gong to extremes, in that it is very hard these days to conceal such. In the past, such was done under cover of a long running and *declared* war (one of those rare ones authorized by Congress)... and the effects of nukes had never been seen before by the public. Does that make the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki any more justifiable, in that both cities were of little to zero military significance, the overwhelming number of people killed in and by cancer in thew decades afterwards) were civilians, and that Japan's inevitable surrender was more a result of the imminent invasion (of Japan) by 1.5 million Soviet troops?

Quote:
War crimes are genocide, deliberate slaughter of civilians, etc. War crimes are not collateral damage, accidents, or launching missiles into dictator's houses. The problem you have here, sammi, is that you and others have cried wolf too many times. Everything you don't like is a "war crime."

And your evidence and links to my supposed claims comes from... (links to prior posting, if possible)?

Quote:
Yet you ignore true war crimes, such as Gadaffi is committing now and such as the brutal dictators we know and despise have. I don't see you posting rants tantamount to your Kissinger-inspired one concerning the crimes that Saddam, Jong-Il, Mugabe, even Chavez and Castro committed. Where are those threads, sammi?

It seems as if you are cherry-picking war crimes to only include those by persons who are in opposition to your ideological set.

"My country, right or wrong"?
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Obama the Invisible