George W. Obama, Barack Cheney — Take Your Pick

[marshabar1]

Gleen Greenwald writes in Salon:

That Barack Obama has continued the essence of the Bush/Cheney Terrorism architecture was once a provocative proposition but is now so self-evident that few dispute it (watch here as arch-neoconservative David Frum — Richard Perle’s co-author for the supreme 2004 neocon treatise — waxes admiringly about Obama’s Terrorism and foreign policies in the Muslim world and specifically its “continuity” with Bush/Cheney). But one policy where Obama has gone further than Bush/Cheney in terms of unfettered executive authority and radical war powers is the attempt to target American citizens for assassination without a whiff of due process. As The New York Times put it last April:

It is extremely rare, if not unprecedented, for an American to be approved for targeted killing, officials said. A former senior legal official in the administration of George W. Bush said he did not know of any American who was approved for targeted killing under the former president. . . .

That Obama was compiling a hit list of American citizens was first revealed in January of last year when The Washington Post’s Dana Priest mentioned in passing at the end of a long article that at least four American citizens had been approved for assassinations; several months later, the Obama administration anonymously confirmed to both the NYT and the Post that American-born, U.S. citizen Anwar al-Awlaki was one of the Americans on the hit list.

Yesterday, riding a wave of adulation and military-reverence, the Obama administration tried to end the life of this American citizen — never charged with, let alone convicted of, any crime — with a drone strike in Yemen, but missed and killed two other people instead:

A missile strike from an American military drone in a remote region of Yemen on Thursday was aimed at killing Anwar al-Awlaki, the radical American-born cleric believed to be hiding in the country, American officials said Friday.

www.nationalreview.com/media-blog/266821/george-w-obama-barack-cheney-take-your-pick-greg-pollowitz

[magichat]

Those who have lost their citizenship due to treason do not deserve or need due process. Now if only the government would follow through and remove their citizenship.

[marshabar1]

"never charged with, let alone convicted of, any crime"

Doesn't matter if this administration does it?

The hypocrisy reeks to high heaven.

[thyme4change]

That Obama was compiling a hit list of American citizens was first revealed in January of last year

Oh pretty please let one of them be Rihanna - I just can't stand her!

[ugonow]

Doesn't matter if this administration does it?

The hypocrisy reeks to high heaven.

It goes both ways......

[magichat]

May 10, 2011 9:56:21 GMT -5 @marshabar1 said:

"never charged with, let alone convicted of, any crime"

Doesn't matter if this administration does it?

The hypocrisy reeks to high heaven.

Due process is for citizens, do you think people who committ treason deserves citizenship?

[fairlycrazy23]

My understanding is that when new people became privy to top secret terrorism briefings, they suddenly changed there tune to what was appropriate.

Due process is for citizens, do you think people who committ treason deserves citizenship?

Shouldn't the finding of treason follow due process itself? But in any regard I don't know if the individual has been charged with anything, let alone treason.

But it seems silly to think that the kind of water boarding that we do is off limits, but killing an uncharged/unconvicted American citizen is A'OK

[magichat]

May 10, 2011 10:35:28 GMT -5 fairlycrazy23 said:

My understanding is that when new people became privy to top secret terrorism briefings, they suddenly changed there tune to what was appropriate.

Due process is for citizens, do you think people who committ treason deserves citizenship?

Shouldn't the finding of treason follow due process itself? But in any regard I don't know if the individual has been charged with anything, let alone treason.

But it seems silly to think that the kind of water boarding that we do is off limits, but killing an uncharged/unconvicted American citizen is A'OK

I pointed out in #2 that it would be nice if the government would actually go through the process of charging these people with treason. People can be tried in absentia if they refuse to appear.

[deziloooooo]

May 10, 2011 9:56:21 GMT -5 @marshabar1 said:

"never charged with, let alone convicted of, any crime"

Doesn't matter if this administration does it?

The hypocrisy reeks to high heaven.

Marsha , I believe your letting your political leanings, which you have a right to, your particuler feeling of disdain to our current POTUS, which are your right to have too, to come through and influence your post of suggesting that the current , {if true, and possible is, even with the supposedly un identified government source to the Times , of it is true, who knows] , and has nothing to do with your real feelings , [if true, that if these individuals have gone across to our enemies, they are our enemies and if not some one really screwed up in authorizing all this wealth , manpower, actions against a myth], about the correctness of acting against these people.

Me thinks your being very partisan in your post , and it really boils down to you feelings about Obama, specifically, his party in general, not the event itself. IMHO.

[Deleted]

Marsha- spot on. I mentioned that Yemeni bombing in passing on a couple of threads, just in general, over the weekend, and no reaction at all from Obama people. I, personally, don't care if that terrorist gets killed. What disgusts me is as you said-- the hypocrisy from the left. Not only do they not care that he is American, but they could care less WHERE Obama drops his bombs. Not a peep. Take Libya. Bad stuff all over the region,but for some reason it is okay with the left if we invade Libya. Nowhere else, just Libya. And Egypt-- people were so caught up in being pro-demonstrators. Some of us said-- wait up, who ARE these protesters? Now they are burning churches in Egypt, and coming out with strong anti-Israel stances.
It seems to be if Obama says so, it is good. No questions asked. Wow.
Did you see this in AT?? I posted it somewhere on the board.
www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/05/55_of_americans_prove_failure.html

[Deleted]

www.americanthinker.com/2011/05/is_obama_a_serial_liar.html

May 09, 2011
Is Obama a Serial Liar?
By Nancy Morgan

Accusing someone of lying is a serious matter. Especially when that someone is the President of the United States. Charges of that nature should be leveled based only on absolute proof of a deliberate statement, intentionally made, whose sole purpose is to deceive. Based on this criterion, President Obama is a liar. Demonstrably so. And a disturbing pattern is emerging that allows for the possibility that our president is a serial liar. Consider:

In just the last month, Obama has made several statements that are just not so. Statements made to the American public that were in direct conflict with known facts.

In April, Obama flatly stated that implementing ObamaCare will reduce the deficit by $1 trillion. A day later, the Congressional Budget Office reported that statement was 'incorrect,' pegging the "deficit savings" at $210 billion over 10 years.

In the same April 15 speech, Obama stated that the tax burden on the wealthy is the lowest it has been in 50 years. A simple fact-check proves him wrong. Obama did not correct his false statement and the media didn't either.

In January of 2009, Obama stated that it was no longer necessary to kill Osama bin Laden to win the war against al-Qaeda. On May 1, 2011, after the successful raid by Navy Seals that killed bin Laden, Obama told the nation that he made the capture or killing of Osama bin Laden a "top priority," and had instructed CIA Chief Leon Panetta to make this job number one. Which statement is correct?

Last week, several of my friends asked me if I believed that bin Laden was really dead. The questions weren't surprising, considering the mass of misinformation and conflicting accounts of bin Laden's death now emanating from the White House. It appears the question of bin Laden's demise was only settled after al Qaeda issued a statement confirming it.

What does it say about Obama's credibility when the pro-Arab al Jazeera media reports are given more credibility than our own president? Maybe that's why Columbia School of Journalism just awarded al Jazeera a journalism prize.

Giving Obama the benefit of the doubt, I'll allow for the possibility that he underwent a drastic change of heart and altered his position on bin Laden. It happens. But when added to the increasing number of statements Obama continues to make that defy reality, the facts, and common sense, I'm more inclined to believe Obama's "mis-statements" are a deliberate effort to deceive the American people.

For example: Obama told the American people that not spending money is "mortgaging America's future." Who knows, it's possible Obama actually believes this, but anyone with an ounce of common sense knows we can't spend our way out of bankruptcy.

Another blooper: Obama stated that increased drilling will not solve our energy problems. Huh? Again, the media let this statement go unchallenged. (At least Sen. Vitter called him on it.)

Obama would have us believe that the big bad oil companies are to blame for our skyrocketing gas prices, despite the fact that every energy decision made by Obama, from with holding drilling permits to increased regulatory burdens being placed on big oil, has directly resulted in raising the cost of gasoline.

Obama would like us to ignore the fact that his Energy Secretary, Steven Chu, stated in 2008 that he wants to "figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe." Since then, gas prices have doubled. Mission accomplished.

Despite the pain at the pump, Obama's energy dis-information campaign has been quite successful, with a new poll showing that only 9% of Americans believe that Obama is responsible for rising gas prices.

Tailoring the facts to reflect the most favorable interpretation is an accepted prerogative of the bully pulpit. Every president will of course, spin the news to a certain extent. This is not new. But under Obama, there appears to be a deliberate campaign by the White House and many segments of the government to blatantly deceive the American people. Consider our Department of Homeland Security:

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told Congress last week that the Obama administration is trying to come up with a new yardstick to better reflect the improvements it says it has made. The Washington Times correctly noted that, unable to meet its border goals, the DHS merely moved the goals.

Arizona Sheriff Larry Deaver pretty much confirmed the Washington Time's report, testifying before Congress that the U.S. Border Patrol has told its agents to stop arresting illegal aliens crossing the border from Mexico to keep the illegal immigration numbers down. In other words, deceive the American people by peddling perception as reality.

Obama and his administration are masters in getting Americans to think with their hearts instead of their brains. After all, emotions are easier to manipulate than facts. And many truths are easier to ignore than acknowledge. But not acknowledging reality, doesn't change the reality. And we ignore reality at our own peril, as we are now finding out on a daily basis.

Though not specified in our Constitution, I believe Americans should have the right to enough information to make informed decisions. Instead, we are being fed a steady stream of outright lies and deliberate misstatements. And when we the people fail to challenge our elected representatives when they lie, we not only enable them, we become complicit. We also forfeit the right to complain when reality hits us in the pocketbook while America continues its slide to the level of a third world country.

[ed1066]

In related news, liberals now LOVE assassinations of American citizens with no due process. It's Obama-tastic!

[Deleted]

As long as Bush doesn't do it, it's okayyyyyy.

[magichat]

May 10, 2011 12:52:05 GMT -5 @ed1066 said:

In related news, liberals now LOVE assassinations of American citizens with no due process. It's Obama-tastic!

Anything useful to add Ed? Do you think the guy deserves his citizenship?

[ed1066]

May 10, 2011 13:31:15 GMT -5 @magichat said:

May 10, 2011 12:52:05 GMT -5 @ed1066 said:

In related news, liberals now LOVE assassinations of American citizens with no due process. It's Obama-tastic!

Anything useful to add Ed? Do you think the guy deserves his citizenship?

Quit trolling, dude...

[magichat]

So of all the intelligent and thoughtful posters we have here nobody will stand up and say this guy deserved to lose his citizenship a long time ago? Or hell, even defend his right to be a citizen. Fuck it, I give up.

[cme1201]

May 10, 2011 14:23:26 GMT -5 @magichat said:

So of all the intelligent and thoughtful posters we have here nobody will stand up and say this guy deserved to lose his citizenship a long time ago? Or hell, even defend his right to be a citizen. Fuck it, I give up.

Yes, magichat. I believe that anyone who would take up arms against or give aid and comfort to our enemy should have there citizenship removed.

[fairlycrazy23]

May 10, 2011 14:23:26 GMT -5 @magichat said:

So of all the intelligent and thoughtful posters we have here nobody will stand up and say this guy deserved to lose his citizenship a long time ago? Or hell, even defend his right to be a citizen. Fuck it, I give up.

Sure he probably deserves to lose his citizenship, but that doesn't change the fact that he apparently is still an American citizen and the President has issued a kill order on him.

[magichat]

May 10, 2011 14:33:39 GMT -5 fairlycrazy23 said:

May 10, 2011 14:23:26 GMT -5 @magichat said:

So of all the intelligent and thoughtful posters we have here nobody will stand up and say this guy deserved to lose his citizenship a long time ago? Or hell, even defend his right to be a citizen. Fuck it, I give up.

Sure he probably deserves to lose his citizenship, but that doesn't change the fact that he apparently is still an American citizen and the President has issued a kill order on him.

No it doesn't, so why doesn't the government try him in abentia, that's the question I wish I had an answer to. Instead we kick the can downt he road bitching about one of the Presidents we hate....great, that accomplished something.

[marshabar1]

Quoted from the American Thinker article above:
"Last week, several of my friends asked me if I believed that bin Laden was really dead. The questions weren't surprising, considering the mass of misinformation and conflicting accounts of bin Laden's death now emanating from the White House. It appears the question of bin Laden's demise was only settled after al Qaeda issued a statement confirming it."

Rush Limbaugh was saying today that he is getting lots of emails from military people, including people he knows personally, who believe Osama bin Laden is not dead. They give reasons why they think so. He didn't detail those reasons while I was listening. He believes bin Laden is dead. I do too. However it is interesting that many military personnel are raising the question.

[magichat]

May 10, 2011 21:13:11 GMT -5 @marshabar1 said:

Quoted from the American Thinker article above:
"Last week, several of my friends asked me if I believed that bin Laden was really dead. The questions weren't surprising, considering the mass of misinformation and conflicting accounts of bin Laden's death now emanating from the White House. It appears the question of bin Laden's demise was only settled after al Qaeda issued a statement confirming it."

Rush Limbaugh was saying today that he is getting lots of emails from military people, including people he knows personally, who believe Osama bin Laden is not dead. They give reasons why they think so. He didn't detail those reasons while I was listening. He believes bin Laden is dead. I do too. However it is interesting that many military personnel are raising the question.

So a known liar and a man who will say anything to keep his audience say military are emailing him and you believe like a lost puppy?

[marshabar1]

Are you calling me a lost puppy? Does that mean idiot or what?

[Deleted]

I started believing he was dead from reports of what his daughter said. How insane is that?? To so mistrust the POTUS that a terrorist's young daughter seems more credible?? But, as the article says, he lies. A LOT.

[magichat]

May 10, 2011 21:27:39 GMT -5 @marshabar1 said:

Are you calling me a lost puppy? Does that mean idiot or what?

Lighten up Marsha, I'm pointing out that you have always been a worshipper of Rush's and see no wrong in his moronic preachings.

[marshabar1]

Are you calling me a cultist?

[magichat]

May 10, 2011 21:33:13 GMT -5 @marshabar1 said:

Are you calling me a cultist?

Are you trolling instead of arguing the valid point that you would believe one known liar over another?

[Deleted]

Would that be Rush over Obama?

[marshabar1]

May 10, 2011 21:35:57 GMT -5 @magichat said:

May 10, 2011 21:33:13 GMT -5 @marshabar1 said:

Are you calling me a cultist?

Are you trolling instead of arguing the valid point that you would believe one known liar over another?

I'm sorry, I missed your point entirely due to the personal attack you leveled at me twice. Why didn't you just say what you meant?

I don't believe Rush Limbaugh is a liar. I believe he suffered from severe pain and was caught in the horror of addiction to one of the most addictive substances known to man.

[Opti]

May 10, 2011 12:06:28 GMT -5 @krickitt said:

www.americanthinker.com/2011/05/is_obama_a_serial_liar.html

May 09, 2011
Is Obama a Serial Liar?
By Nancy Morgan

Accusing someone of lying is a serious matter. Especially when that someone is the President of the United States. Charges of that nature should be leveled based only on absolute proof of a deliberate statement, intentionally made, whose sole purpose is to deceive. Based on this criterion, President Obama is a liar. Demonstrably so. And a disturbing pattern is emerging that allows for the possibility that our president is a serial liar. Consider:

In just the last month, Obama has made several statements that are just not so. Statements made to the American public that were in direct conflict with known facts.

In April, Obama flatly stated that implementing ObamaCare will reduce the deficit by $1 trillion. A day later, the Congressional Budget Office reported that statement was 'incorrect,' pegging the "deficit savings" at $210 billion over 10 years.

In the same April 15 speech, Obama stated that the tax burden on the wealthy is the lowest it has been in 50 years. A simple fact-check proves him wrong. Obama did not correct his false statement and the media didn't either.

In January of 2009, Obama stated that it was no longer necessary to kill Osama bin Laden to win the war against al-Qaeda. On May 1, 2011, after the successful raid by Navy Seals that killed bin Laden, Obama told the nation that he made the capture or killing of Osama bin Laden a "top priority," and had instructed CIA Chief Leon Panetta to make this job number one. Which statement is correct?

(Partially quoted for brevity)

What I find ironic is Bush was caught in similar types of lies as well.
I don't approve of either of them doing it, but I am beginning to wonder if sometimes it is laziness on the part of the president and his staff and not always intent to deceive that this happens. I do believe the american people would be happier if one of these days a POTUS would always issue corrections when they are wrong and work more on initial fact checking.

[marshabar1]

May 10, 2011 22:40:36 GMT -5 Opti said:

May 10, 2011 12:06:28 GMT -5 @krickitt said:

www.americanthinker.com/2011/05/is_obama_a_serial_liar.html

May 09, 2011
Is Obama a Serial Liar?
By Nancy Morgan

Accusing someone of lying is a serious matter. Especially when that someone is the President of the United States. Charges of that nature should be leveled based only on absolute proof of a deliberate statement, intentionally made, whose sole purpose is to deceive. Based on this criterion, President Obama is a liar. Demonstrably so. And a disturbing pattern is emerging that allows for the possibility that our president is a serial liar. Consider:

In just the last month, Obama has made several statements that are just not so. Statements made to the American public that were in direct conflict with known facts.

In April, Obama flatly stated that implementing ObamaCare will reduce the deficit by $1 trillion. A day later, the Congressional Budget Office reported that statement was 'incorrect,' pegging the "deficit savings" at $210 billion over 10 years.

In the same April 15 speech, Obama stated that the tax burden on the wealthy is the lowest it has been in 50 years. A simple fact-check proves him wrong. Obama did not correct his false statement and the media didn't either.

In January of 2009, Obama stated that it was no longer necessary to kill Osama bin Laden to win the war against al-Qaeda. On May 1, 2011, after the successful raid by Navy Seals that killed bin Laden, Obama told the nation that he made the capture or killing of Osama bin Laden a "top priority," and had instructed CIA Chief Leon Panetta to make this job number one. Which statement is correct?

(Partially quoted for brevity)

What I find ironic is Bush was caught in similar types of lies as well.
I don't approve of either of them doing it, but I am beginning to wonder if sometimes it is laziness on the part of the president and his staff and not always intent to deceive that this happens. I do believe the american people would be happier if one of these days a POTUS would always issue corrections when they are wrong and work more on initial fact checking.

Absolutely!