Obama is more like his Republican predecessor than the left seem to realise

cyberhog · 09-06-2012 01:05AM #1

Just like Bush, Obama is a power mad, narcissistic, egomaniac that thinks he has the right to arrest and indefinitely detain anyone he likes.

Some people may remember the Courts rebuked Bush for trying to trample the Constitution.

the Ninth Circuit judges reasoned, "We simply cannot accept the government’s position that the executive branch possesses the unchecked authority to imprison indefinitely any persons, foreign citizens included . . . without permitting such prisoners recourse of any kind to any judicial forum,"

http://www.counterpunch.org/2003/12/19/courts-rebuke-bush-for-trampling-the-constitution/

So now Obama has tried to aquire the same power and once again the courts have ruled that indefinite detention of terrorism suspects is unconstitutional.

Judge Forrest said in her injunction that the legislation contained elements that had a "chilling impact on First Amendment rights” and ruled that no, the government cannot imprison Americans over suspected ties with terrorists.

"In the face of what could be indeterminate military detention, due process requires more,” said the judge.

http://www.care2.com/news/member/101960828/3386651

How any left-wing Democrat can associate themselves with a thug like Obama is beyond me.

al28283 · 09-06-2012 01:19AM

cyberhog wrote: »

Just like Bush, Obama is a power mad, narcissistic, egomaniac that thinks he has the right to arrest and indefinitely detain anyone he likes.

Some people may remember the Courts rebuked Bush for trying to trample the Constitution.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2003/12/19/courts-rebuke-bush-for-trampling-the-constitution/

So now Obama has tried to aquire the same power and once again the courts have ruled that indefinite detention of terrorism suspects is unconstitutional.

http://www.care2.com/news/member/101960828/3386651

How any left-wing Democrat can associate themselves with a thug like Obama is beyond me.

As you said, Bush tried it too, can you understand how any right-wing republican could associate with a thug like him?
Funny how Bush tried the same stuff but nobody ever referred to him as a thug.:rolleyes:

The left tries it, the right tries it. and pretty much every leader throughout history has tried it.
The entire reason for having more than one branch of government is to stop the consolidation of power, and your post proved it worked. YAY!

The Romans got some things right

So is your issue with the individual or the system?

cyberhog · 09-06-2012 04:36AM

al28283 wrote: »

Funny how Bush tried the same stuff but nobody ever referred to him as a thug.:rolleyes:

Bush Is "Biggest Thug" Ever To Occupy White House, Historian Parenti Says

http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_sherwood_080327_bush_is__22biggest_thu.htm

c_man · 09-06-2012 12:33PM

cyberhog wrote: »

Just like Bush, Obama is a power mad, narcissistic, egomaniac that thinks he has the right to arrest and indefinitely detain anyone he likes.

Not sure Bush went as far as Obama though e.g. extrajudicial assassination of US citizens.

al28283 · 09-06-2012 04:11PM

cyberhog wrote: »

Bush Is "Biggest Thug" Ever To Occupy White House, Historian Parenti Says

http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_sherwood_080327_bush_is__22biggest_thu.htm

that's good to see, how about an answer to the question though?

Fromthetrees · 09-06-2012 10:31PM

cyberhog wrote: »

Just like Bush, Obama is a power mad, narcissistic, egomaniac that thinks he has the right to arrest and indefinitely detain anyone he likes.

Some people may remember the Courts rebuked Bush for trying to trample the Constitution.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2003/12/19/courts-rebuke-bush-for-trampling-the-constitution/

So now Obama has tried to aquire the same power and once again the courts have ruled that indefinite detention of terrorism suspects is unconstitutional.

http://www.care2.com/news/member/101960828/3386651

How any left-wing Democrat can associate themselves with a thug like Obama is beyond me.

By definition wouldn't anyone that becomes President of the most powerful country on earth pretty much have to be 'a power mad, narcissistic, egomaniac', other personality types will just never be the President.

American politics is just a bit mad whoever is in power.

He's won a Nobel Peace Prize but has now unilaterally attacked more countries than Bush, notably bombing inside Pakistan, Yemen and now Libya without Congressional approval.

Noam Chomsky said that,

'If the Nuremberg laws were applied, then every post-war American president would have been hanged. By violation of the Nuremberg laws I mean the same kind of crimes for which people were hanged in Nuremberg. And Nuremberg means Nuremberg and Tokyo.'

FISMA · 09-06-2012 10:35PM

Ya gotta love Obama. He said he would close Gitmo, now he is giving them cable TV.

Maybe they can make a reality show called Gitmo-licious! Or the Cuban Shore!

troposphere · 10-06-2012 03:24AM

Fromthetrees wrote: »

He's won a Nobel Peace Prize but has now unilaterally attacked more countries than Bush, notably bombing inside Pakistan, Yemen and now Libya without Congressional approval.

Bush also conducted airstrikes in Pakistan and Yemen and also Somalia.

FISMA wrote: »

Ya gotta love Obama. He said he would close Gitmo, now he is giving them cable TV.

If I remember correctly when Obama first came to office and wanted to transfer prisoners to mainland USA there was a group of prisoners that wanted to remain in Gitmo because they thought it was better conditions than regular US prison.

Fromthetrees · 10-06-2012 11:06AM

troposphere wrote: »

Bush also conducted airstrikes in Pakistan and Yemen and also Somalia.

Yeah but the OP is comparing Bush with Obama. I was comparing their war record, so here,

Obama- Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, Libya.

Bush- Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen.

When it comes to things like aggressive foreign policy the only difference that appears between Obama and Bush/McCain is rhetoric.

At least in the last election campaign McCain said something along the lines of we'll stay in Iraq for 100 years if needs be,

whereas,

Obama said,
'I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank.'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kr9ywEFRQkQ

20Cent · 10-06-2012 10:53PM

Its more like the right who have gotten Obama wrong, he's not the "radical" "socialist" they make him out to be he's to the right of Reagan. If war is the main issue I'd still vote for Obama since Romney is much more likely to start one with Iran. Despite being a big disappointment a republican president would be much worse for the world and the deficit.

Amerika · 11-06-2012 01:28PM

Luckily the media and the Left (with impunity and without conscience) are able to hold B Obama under an entirely different set of values and standards than they did GW bush, eh? (Gitmo, drones, leaks, unemployment, gas prices, executive orders, fundraising, lobbyists, travel, gaffes, etc, etc).

And funny how under Bush, disagreeing with his direction and policies was considered just to be people disagreeing with the direction of the country... but under Obama the same disagreements cause you to be considered a racist.

The media has only themselves to blame that only 43 percent of Americans (mostly democrats I presume) put any stock in the mainstream media's ability to report news honestly and fairly.

Overheal · 12-06-2012 03:29PM

43 percent?

Is it really that high? More people believe in Creationism.

Matt Holck · 15-06-2012 08:47PM

He's won a Nobel Peace Prize but has now unilaterally attacked more countries than Bush, notably bombing inside Pakistan, Yemen and now Libya without Congressional approval.

congress can choose to disapprove

poeticseraphim · 19-06-2012 07:51AM

The left are unhappy with Obama.

What is funny is why the right are unhappy with him...he is not socialist enough...it's like they are dissapointed that he does not go far enough to correct the mess they made.

PLEASE give us free healthcare ....we cant commit to it as a policy ...but please...

PLEASE pull out of Iraq..we can't ...but you can

PLEASE save the economy..we dont believe in intervention ..but you can

Every criticism from the right is a type of self hatred.

Yes Obama is not socialist enough......

And to be honest it was the assumption that he was that radical and not just another politician that was perhaps a racist assumption of the right.

poeticseraphim · 19-06-2012 07:54AM

Amerika wrote: »

Luckily the media and the Left (with impunity and without conscience) are able to hold B Obama under an entirely different set of values and standards than they did GW bush, eh? (Gitmo, drones, leaks, unemployment, gas prices, executive orders, fundraising, lobbyists, travel, gaffes, etc, etc).

And funny how under Bush, disagreeing with his direction and policies was considered just to be people disagreeing with the direction of the country... but under Obama the same disagreements cause you to be considered a racist.

The media has only themselves to blame that only 43 percent of Americans (mostly democrats I presume) put any stock in the mainstream media's ability to report news honestly and fairly.

Was it the mainstream media that reported that number??? :-D

Seriously the mainstream media enjoys whipping up a frenzy of radical opposition on BOTH sides and makes it seems Americans are at each others throats .....its ridiculous...

Amerika · 19-06-2012 12:46PM

poeticseraphim wrote: »

Was it the mainstream media that reported that number??? :-D

Last I heard, Gallup polling is not part of the mainstream media. :-D

http://www.gallup.com/poll/143267/Distrust-Media-Edges-Record-High.aspx

Jonny7 · 19-06-2012 06:09PM

Fromthetrees wrote: »

Yeah but the OP is comparing Bush with Obama. I was comparing their war record, so here,

Obama- Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, Libya.

Bush- Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen.

jesus..

Obama inherited Afghanistan and Iraq from the previous administration. It would have been highly irresponsible and dangerous just to immediately pull out of either situation, of course, in an act of perfect selfishness he could have done so.

Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen are not wars.

Libya was international action, backed by just about everyone.

FISMA · 19-06-2012 10:23PM

Jonny7 wrote: »

Obama inherited Afghanistan and Iraq from the previous administration. It would have been highly irresponsible and dangerous just to immediately pull out of either situation, of course, in an act of perfect selfishness he could have done so.

Then maybe he shouldn't promise people that ending the war is the first thing he'll do as President.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VlXfs1K04g

Also, I wouldn't rule out action against Iran just yet.

Jonny7 wrote: »

Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen are not wars.

Libya was international action, backed by just about everyone.

If you want to be technical, North Korea wasn't a war either, but a police action. Same goes for the Gulf War. But if you ask someone that was there, they'll damn well tell you that it didn't matter much what it was called when that first bullet flew by.

Jonny7 · 20-06-2012 10:39AM

FISMA wrote: »

Then maybe he shouldn't promise people that ending the war is the first thing he'll do as President.

He also promised to end Gitmo, but the realities of office have proved different - same as every living politician throughout history. I am firmly against Gitmo both physically and fundamentally, however I do understand what can and can't be done under timeframes, political atmophere, contraints, etc.

If you want to be technical, North Korea wasn't a war either, but a police action. Same goes for the Gulf War. But if you ask someone that was there, they'll damn well tell you that it didn't matter much what it was called when that first bullet flew by.

North Korea, Gulf War - different administrations, nothing to do with Obama.

Overheal · 20-06-2012 05:11PM

Every president to date has made a host of campaign promises they have little hope of accomplishing because these are things which are out of their scope to control with any absolution. Closing gitmo would have been a relatively simple affair except that congress ran a NIMBY with the idea of bringing our political prisoners to the US and 'wtf are they thinking' trying to give them trials in NYC and all that good stuff.

Amerika · 20-06-2012 06:09PM

Hmmm... And now with president Obama’s claim of executive privilege regarding Fast and Furious… perhaps he’s more like another former US president.

"Until now, everyone believed that the decisions regarding ‘Fast and Furious’ were confined to the Department of Justice," Boehner spokesman Brendan Buck said in a statement.

"The White House decision to invoke executive privilege implies that White House officials were either involved in the ‘Fast and Furious’ operation or the cover-up that followed. The Administration has always insisted that wasn't the case. Were they lying, or are they now bending the law to hide the truth?” Buck said.”

http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/06/boehner-accuses-white-house-of-fast-and-furious-coverup-126759.html

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQEQs6nkynfiv_8coxM6Kvuv-wECzMME4y_ZMLSRTGnAmSvz4Xj

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQEQs6nkynfiv_8coxM6Kvuv-wECzMME4y_ZMLSRTGnAmSvz4Xj

troposphere · 21-06-2012 02:49AM

Amerika wrote: »

Hmmm... And now with president Obama’s claim of executive privilege regarding Fast and Furious… perhaps he’s more like another former US president.

http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/06/boehner-accuses-white-house-of-fast-and-furious-coverup-126759.html

Perhaps he is just like most modern Presidents?

Presidential Claims of Executive Privilege

President Bill Clinton: 14
President George W. Bush: 6
President Richard Nixon: 6
President Ronald Reagan: 3
President John F. Kennedy: 2
President Gerald R. Ford: 1
President James E. Carter: 1
President George H.W. Bush: 1
President Barack Obama: 1

Amerika · 21-06-2012 02:14PM

troposphere wrote: »

Perhaps he is just like most modern Presidents?

Nice spin

But here is the problem. Two US agents were killed because of "Fast and Furious." Congress rightfully should investigate the matter. Additionally, government whistleblowers reported that the ATF was using “Fast and furious" to argue for new rules about gun sales to circumvent the 2nd Amendment. If true, congress also needs to get to the bottom of this also. President Obama rightfully can claim Executive Privilege in the matter only for information involved in the White House offices. The President can redact any advice given to the Justice Department, but he cannot claim the privilege for any communications inside the Justice Department and also with field offices. If true and a cover-up is in play, we need to know!
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-57338546-10391695/documents-atf-used-fast-and-furious-to-make-the-case-for-gun-regulations/

Then there is this matter. So was it just rhetoric to get elected? Did we just get a Chicago politician as POTUS, instead of the transformative president we were promised and we elected?

http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/play;_ylt=A2KLqIM_K.NPyHUAuDD7w8QF;_ylu=X3oDMTBrc3VyamVwBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDdmlkBHZ0aWQD?p=obama+executive+privilege+2007&vid=3EB4772AC03835BF5A4F3EB4772AC03835BF5A4F&l=00%3A30&turl=http%3A%2F%2Fts3.mm.bing.net%2Fvideos%2Fthumbnail.aspx%3Fq%3D2299185791050%26id%3D4d873a2d041f98348ac50a176efec1b3%26bid%3DT1q%252fNTjAKne0Pg%26bn%3DThumb%26url%3Dhttp%253a%252f%252fwww.youtube.com%252fwatch%253fv%253dmEU3S0V0oDI&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DmEU3S0V0oDI&tit=Obama+In+2007%3A+He+Would+Respect+The+Law+And+Branches+Of+Gov%26%2339%3Bt%2C+Not+...&c=1&sigr=11aq5cvlq&&

(not so "Conspiracy Theory" stuff now... is it Mods?)

Overheal · 21-06-2012 02:53PM

2 agents. And how many US Soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Don't get me wrong I want it investigated much as the next guy but the sympathy card for 2 dead agents really doesn't fly with me. We get people killed all the time because of our political and operational cock-ups.

Amerika · 21-06-2012 06:10PM

Overheal... what were your feelings back when the Valerie Plame issue was in the news?

cristoir · 21-06-2012 06:31PM

troposphere wrote: »

Perhaps he is just like most modern Presidents?

Presidential Claims of Executive Privilege

President Bill Clinton: 14
President George W. Bush: 6
President Richard Nixon: 6
President Ronald Reagan: 3
President John F. Kennedy: 2
President Gerald R. Ford: 1
President James E. Carter: 1
President George H.W. Bush: 1
President Barack Obama: 1

Get out of here you, with your facts! Some of us are trying be outraged.

I have heard a few comparisons online to how Obama's use of Executive Privilege is proof we are going to get Watergate mark 2. People need to cool the jets about this. Use of privilege is nothing new and should we end up with President Romney in January I'd bet he will use it too.

Overheal · 22-06-2012 02:52AM

Amerika wrote: »

Overheal... what were your feelings back when the Valerie Plame issue was in the news?

Only from googling the name just now, or I'd be completely lost. Therefore I have no feelings on the matter since I wasn't politically involved back when I was a pimply faced teenager who had other things going on. And I lived out of country, so, yeah.

FISMA · 24-06-2012 03:02AM

Overheal wrote: »

Every president to date has made a host of campaign promises they have little hope of accomplishing because...

Of course we are used to the rhetoric of politics. We all remember how "Read my lips" went for George Bush senior.

However, I am not sure I remember many Presidents actually "promising" to do something, that was within the realm of a pen stroke and then backing off.

Obama, given his political savvy and being a lawyer is rarely at a loss for words: he should choose them more carefully.

Fair enough, Gitmo is a political hot potato. However, what he did to the unions in Wisconsin is inexcusable. He couldn't make an appearance in that State?

Scott Walker removes most of the collective bargaining for unions. Obama says...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SA9KC8SMu3o

"And understand this: If American workers are being denied their right to organize and collectively bargain when I’m in the White House, I will put on a comfortable pair of shoes myself, I’ll will walk on that picket line with you as President of the United States of America. Because workers deserve to know that somebody is standing in their corner."
Barack Obama, during 2007 campaign.

I guess he couldn't find a comfortable pair of shoes!:D

FISMA · 24-06-2012 03:38AM

cristoir wrote: »

Use of privilege is nothing new and should we end up with President Romney in January I'd bet he will use it too.

How many people have died as a result of previous usages of the privilege?

Estimates put Mexican deaths at 200 and of course one American Federal Agent.

1765 guns sold to suspected smugglers? 195 guns linked to some form of crime. Half of the guns unaccounted for.

Unbelievable that people are willing to give him a pass on this.

troposphere · 24-06-2012 05:04AM

But remember it is the people that do the killing, not the gun. Maybe that only applies when it is some nutcase who goes on a rampage in the US? The whole letting guns walk across the border didn't even start under Obama

Emails obtained by The Associated Press show how in a 2007 investigation in Phoenix, agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives — depending on Mexican authorities to follow up — let guns "walk" across the border in an effort to identify higher-ups in gun networks. Justice Department policy has long required that illicit arms shipments be intercepted whenever possible.

The 2007 probe operated out of the same ATF office that more recently ran the flawed Operation Fast and Furious. Both probes resulted in weapons disappearing across the border into Mexico, according to the emails. The 2007 probe was relatively small — involving over 200 weapons, just a dozen of which ended up in Mexico as a result of gun-walking. Fast and Furious involved over 2,000 weapons, some 1,400 of which have not been recovered and an unknown number of which wound up in Mexico.

Earlier this month, it was disclosed that the gun-walking tactic didn't begin under Obama, but was also used in 2006 under his predecessor, George W. Bush. The probe, Operation Wide Receiver, was carried out by ATF's Tucson, Ariz., office and resulted in hundreds of guns being transferred to suspected arms traffickers.

Continued

Brian? · 24-06-2012 02:46PM

Amerika wrote: »

Nice spin

But here is the problem. Two US agents were killed because of "Fast and Furious." Congress rightfully should investigate the matter. Additionally, government whistleblowers reported that the ATF was using “Fast and furious" to argue for new rules about gun sales to circumvent the 2nd Amendment. If true, congress also needs to get to the bottom of this also. President Obama rightfully can claim Executive Privilege in the matter only for information involved in the White House offices. The President can redact any advice given to the Justice Department, but he cannot claim the privilege for any communications inside the Justice Department and also with field offices. If true and a cover-up is in play, we need to know!
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-57338546-10391695/documents-atf-used-fast-and-furious-to-make-the-case-for-gun-regulations/

Then there is this matter. So was it just rhetoric to get elected? Did we just get a Chicago politician as POTUS, instead of the transformative president we were promised and we elected?

http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/play;_ylt=A2KLqIM_K.NPyHUAuDD7w8QF;_ylu=X3oDMTBrc3VyamVwBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDdmlkBHZ0aWQD?p=obama+executive+privilege+2007&vid=3EB4772AC03835BF5A4F3EB4772AC03835BF5A4F&l=00%3A30&turl=http%3A%2F%2Fts3.mm.bing.net%2Fvideos%2Fthumbnail.aspx%3Fq%3D2299185791050%26id%3D4d873a2d041f98348ac50a176efec1b3%26bid%3DT1q%252fNTjAKne0Pg%26bn%3DThumb%26url%3Dhttp%253a%252f%252fwww.youtube.com%252fwatch%253fv%253dmEU3S0V0oDI&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DmEU3S0V0oDI&tit=Obama+In+2007%3A+He+Would+Respect+The+Law+And+Branches+Of+Gov%26%2339%3Bt%2C+Not+...&c=1&sigr=11aq5cvlq&&

(not so "Conspiracy Theory" stuff now... is it Mods?)

As a matter of interest, what do you think about all of the guns that are bought legally every day and sold across the border? Forget the ones involved here, what about the thousands of other fire arms that are sold in a largely unregulated manner? Guns that are used to kill Mexican citizens, who's lives are every bit as valuable.

Back on topic: Obama is not going to come and take your guns away.

Obama is more like his Republican predecessor than the left seem to realise

Comments