Barak Obama: The Strongest President In History

Obama being the strongest president is laughable at best! More like the best empty suit ever derived!

Here's his own words.
cnsnews.com...

Obama: ‘President Does Not Have Power Under Constitution to Unilaterally Authorize a Military Attack’ Monday, March 21, 2011 By Fred Lucas Barack Obama, presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama (D.-Ill.), campaigning for president on Sept. 21, 2008, in Charlotte, NC.. (AP photo/Chuck Burton) (CNSNews.com) - As a presidential candidate, Sen. Barack Obama (D.-Ill.) emphatically stated that the Constitution does not give the president the authority to unilaterally authorize a military attack unless it is needed to stop an actual or imminent attack on the United States. Obama made the assertion in a Dec. 20, 2007 interview with the Boston Globe when reporter Charlie Savage asked him under what circumstances the president would have the constitutional authority to bomb Iran without first seeking authorization from Congress. “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,” Obama responded. “As Commander-in-Chief, the President does have a duty to protect and defend the United States,” Obama continued. “In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent. History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the Legislative branch.” Obama did not seek congressional authorization before joining allies, including Great Britain and France, in taking military action against the regime of Libyan dictator Col. Moammar Gadhafi in order to establish a no-fly zone over that country. The action was approved by the United Nations Security Council but not by the U.S. Congress. In a followup question in its December 2007 interview, the Boston Globe asked Obama if the Constitution gave the president the power to disregard a congressional statute putting some type of limit on the way troops could be deployed. Here, too, Obama deferred to the constitutional authority of Congress. “No, the President does not have that power,” Obama told the paper. “To date, several Congresses have imposed limitations on the number of US troops deployed in a given situation. As President, I will not assert a constitutional authority to deploy troops in a manner contrary to an express limit imposed by Congress and adopted into law.”

reply to post by hawaii50th


hahaha great find. OBAMA is like bush 3, or is it 4 now? idk anymore

Obama "all growed up" ... got his own war now

ORIGINAL CAPTION: Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Barry (DDG 52) launches a Tomahawk missile in support of Operation Odyssey Dawn in the Mediterranean Sea in this handout photo taken March 19. This was one of approximately 110 cruise missiles fired from US and British ships and submarines that targeted about 20 radar and anti-aircraft sites along Libya's Mediterranean coast. Joint Task Force Odyssey Dawn is the US Africa Command task force established to provide operational and tactical command and control of US military forces supporting the international response to the unrest in Libya and enforcement of United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1973. (US Navy)

reply to post by hawaii50th


Something I just learned, actually the POTUS does have the power to unilaterally maneuver, and avoid Congressional approval. Under the USC 287 d allows for the special agreements act:

The President is authorized to negotiate a special agreement or agreements with the Security Council which shall be subject to the approval of the Congress by appropriate Act or joint resolution, providing for the numbers and types of armed forces, their degree of readiness and general location, and the nature of facilities and assistance, including rights of passage, to be made available to the Security Council on its call for the purpose of maintaining international peace and security in accordance with article 43 of said Charter. The President shall not be deemed to require the authorization of the Congress to make available to the Security Council on its call in order to take action under article 42 of said Charter and pursuant to such special agreement or agreements the armed forces, facilities, or assistance provided for therein: Provided, That, except as authorized in section 287d–1 of this title, nothing herein contained shall be construed as an authorization to the President by the Congress to make available to the Security Council for such purpose armed forces, facilities, or assistance in addition to the forces, facilities, and assistance provided for in such special agreement or agreements.

source: www.law.cornell.edu...

The UN Article 41-58 establish the rules of agreement through the council.

www.un.org...

I was in a debate of another topic, that this particular information was given to me. And was rather educational as well.

Originally posted by woghd
For god's sakes watch the OBAMA DECEPTION...
It is unbiased, made by the same folks who did the anti-Bush videos.

There is no such thing as 'unbiased'. TO claim so only shows your own blindness to such a simple rule. We all have biases, but those of us who can admit them are far more likely to being open to new, possibly contradicting info.

There is no such thing as 'unbiased'.

What I love is all the re'pelicans that said Obama would have a soft stance on war. I mean that was one of the biggest things people kept going to before the election, that we needed another red suit because we were at wartime. Now the guy is not only sending more people to war but is taking an extremely strong stance and all the RED SUITS ARE CRYING . HYPOCRITES I TELL YA!!!! HYPOCRITES!!!!!

Originally posted by NoJoker13
What I love is all the re'pelicans that said Obama would have a soft stance on war. I mean that was one of the biggest things people kept going to before the election, that we needed another red suit because we were at wartime. Now the guy is not only sending more people to war but is taking an extremely strong stance and all the RED SUITS ARE CRYING

. HYPOCRITES I TELL YA!!!! HYPOCRITES!!!!!

No matter which side it is, they'll con everyone.

Originally posted by NoJoker13
What I love is all the re'pelicans that said Obama would have a soft stance on war. I mean that was one of the biggest things people kept going to before the election, that we needed another red suit because we were at wartime. Now the guy is not only sending more people to war but is taking an extremely strong stance and all the RED SUITS ARE CRYING

. HYPOCRITES I TELL YA!!!! HYPOCRITES!!!!!

You do realize that it was Congress who was pushing for action right? Gotta keep that war profiteering going!

Originally posted by NoJoker13
What I love is all the re'pelicans that said Obama would have a soft stance on war.

That's kind of the point on why obama is the WEAKEST president.

He did have a soft stance on Libya - right up until he stuck his finger (could have been Valerie Jarrett, too) in the air to test the wind and found out that once again appearing to be indecisive was hurting his poll numbers.

Then obama quickly decided on the knee-jerk reaction to shoot missiles and drop bombs on Libya without a real operational or end-game plan.

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by hawaii50th

 

Something I just learned, actually the POTUS does have the power to unilaterally maneuver, and avoid Congressional approval. Under the USC 287 d allows for the special agreements act:

The President is authorized to negotiate a special agreement or agreements with the Security Council which shall be subject to the approval of the Congress by appropriate Act or joint resolution, providing for the numbers and types of armed forces, their degree of readiness and general location, and the nature of facilities and assistance, including rights of passage, to be made available to the Security Council on its call for the purpose of maintaining international peace and security in accordance with article 43 of said Charter. The President shall not be deemed to require the authorization of the Congress to make available to the Security Council on its call in order to take action under article 42 of said Charter and pursuant to such special agreement or agreements the armed forces, facilities, or assistance provided for therein: Provided, That, except as authorized in section 287d–1 of this title, nothing herein contained shall be construed as an authorization to the President by the Congress to make available to the Security Council for such purpose armed forces, facilities, or assistance in addition to the forces, facilities, and assistance provided for in such special agreement or agreements.

source: www.law.cornell.edu...

The UN Article 41-58 establish the rules of agreement through the council.

www.un.org...

I was in a debate of another topic, that this particular information was given to me. And was rather educational as well.

So basically, the president answers to the UN, and not the congress. This country has been dissolved. We are sovereign in name only.

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by hawaii50th

 

Something I just learned, actually the POTUS does have the power to unilaterally maneuver, and avoid Congressional approval. Under the USC 287 d allows for the special agreements act:

The President is authorized to negotiate a special agreement or agreements with the Security Council which shall be subject to the approval of the Congress by appropriate Act or joint resolution, providing for the numbers and types of armed forces, their degree of readiness and general location, and the nature of facilities and assistance, including rights of passage, to be made available to the Security Council on its call for the purpose of maintaining international peace and security in accordance with article 43 of said Charter. The President shall not be deemed to require the authorization of the Congress to make available to the Security Council on its call in order to take action under article 42 of said Charter and pursuant to such special agreement or agreements the armed forces, facilities, or assistance provided for therein: Provided, That, except as authorized in section 287d–1 of this title, nothing herein contained shall be construed as an authorization to the President by the Congress to make available to the Security Council for such purpose armed forces, facilities, or assistance in addition to the forces, facilities, and assistance provided for in such special agreement or agreements.

source: www.law.cornell.edu...

The UN Article 41-58 establish the rules of agreement through the council.

www.un.org...

I was in a debate of another topic, that this particular information was given to me. And was rather educational as well.

www.law.cornell.edu...

(a) Armed forces details; supplies and equipment; obligation of funds; procurement and replacement of requested items Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law, the President, upon the request by the United Nations for cooperative action, and to the extent that he finds that it is consistent with the national interest to comply with such request, may authorize, in support of such activities of the United Nations as are specifically directed to the peaceful settlement of disputes and not involving the employment of armed forces contemplatedby chapter VII of the United Nations Charter— (1) by chapter VII of the United Nations Charter— (1) the detail to the United Nations, under such terms and conditions as the President shall determine, of personnel of the armed forces of the United States to serve as observers, guards, or in any non-combatant capacity, but in no event shall more than a total of one thousand of such personnel be so detailed at any one time: Provided, That while so detailed, such personnel shall be considered for all purposes as acting in the line of duty, including the receipt of pay and allowances as personnel of the armed forces of the United States, credit for longevity and retirement, and all other perquisites appertaining to such duty: Provided further, That upon authorization or approval by the President, such personnel may accept directly from the United Nations (a) any or all of the allowances or perquisites to which they are entitled under the first proviso hereof, and (b) extraordinary expenses and perquisites incident to such detail; (2) the furnishing of facilities, services, or other assistance and the loan of the agreed fair share of the United States of any supplies and equipment to the United Nations by the Department of Defense, under such terms and conditions as the President shall determine; (3) the obligation, insofar as necessary to carry out the purposes of clauses (1) and (2) of this subsection, of any funds appropriated to the Department of Defense or any department therein, the procurement of such personnel, supplies, equipment, facilities, services, or other assistance as may be made available in accordance with the request of the United Nations, and the replacement of such items, when necessary, where they are furnished from stocks. (b) Reimbursement from United Nations; waiver of reimbursement Whenever personnel or assistance is made available pursuant to the authority contained in subsection (a)(1) and (2) of this section, the President shall require reimbursement from the United Nations for the expense thereby incurred by the United States: Provided, That in exceptional circumstances, or when the President finds it to be in the national interest, he may waive, in whole or in part, the requirement of such reimbursement: Provided further, That when any such reimbursement is made, it shall be credited, at the option of the appropriate department of the Department of Defense, either to the appropriation, fund, or account utilized in incurring the obligation, or to an appropriate appropriation, fund, or account currently available for the purposes for which expenditures were made. (c) Additional appropriation authorizations In addition to the authorization of appropriations to the Department of State contained in section 287e of this title, there is hereby authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Defense, or any department therein, such sums as may be necessary to reimburse such departments in the event that reimbursement from the United Nations is waived in whole or in part pursuant to authority contained in subsection (b) of this section. (d) Disclosure of information Nothing in this subchapter shall authorize the disclosure of any information or knowledge in any case in which such disclosure is prohibited by any other law of the United States.

of personnel of the armed forces of the United States to serve as observers, guards, or in any non-combatant capacity,
I don't know, doesn't it say something about not getting into any kind of combat?

reply to post by Whereweheaded


Um I didn't say a thing about congress in that post, but since when can congress deny what the united nations want? I mean I know they can but if the world wants it, why doesn't congress? Hmmmm... Also you seemed to side step the topic of the re'pelicans.... very sly.

reply to post by NoJoker13

It's almost like the U.S. is not a sovereign nation anymore.

reply to post by centurion1211


Sure he did, keep living behind the lies of Fox News it seems to be doing a great deal for your self education and your political know how. Obama was waiting for the backing of other countries before he stepped in, he has that now, screw congress he said American troops won't be on the ground there anyway and for once France and the UK are gonna send in their troops! Hooray for the UN!

reply to post by hawaii50th


Anymore? Where have you been living since Andrew Jackson died.

2nd line.

Originally posted by woghd

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by hawaii50th

 

Something I just learned, actually the POTUS does have the power to unilaterally maneuver, and avoid Congressional approval. Under the USC 287 d allows for the special agreements act:

The President is authorized to negotiate a special agreement or agreements with the Security Council which shall be subject to the approval of the Congress by appropriate Act or joint resolution, providing for the numbers and types of armed forces, their degree of readiness and general location, and the nature of facilities and assistance, including rights of passage, to be made available to the Security Council on its call for the purpose of maintaining international peace and security in accordance with article 43 of said Charter. The President shall not be deemed to require the authorization of the Congress to make available to the Security Council on its call in order to take action under article 42 of said Charter and pursuant to such special agreement or agreements the armed forces, facilities, or assistance provided for therein: Provided, That, except as authorized in section 287d–1 of this title, nothing herein contained shall be construed as an authorization to the President by the Congress to make available to the Security Council for such purpose armed forces, facilities, or assistance in addition to the forces, facilities, and assistance provided for in such special agreement or agreements.

source: www.law.cornell.edu...

The UN Article 41-58 establish the rules of agreement through the council.

www.un.org...

I was in a debate of another topic, that this particular information was given to me. And was rather educational as well.

So basically, the president answers to the UN, and not the congress. This country has been dissolved. We are sovereign in name only.

The POTUS does not answer to the UN, but USC and UN charters allow for the POTUS to act within the confines of the council without direct Congressional Approval.

Originally posted by NoJoker13
reply to post by hawaii50th

 

Anymore? Where have you been living since Andrew Jackson died.

2nd line.

I wasn't born yet, and did the united nations exist back then? I'm assuming your talking about Andrew Jackson the president right? I mean there can't be another Andrew Jackson somewhere.

Originally posted by Whereweheaded

Originally posted by woghd

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by hawaii50th

 

Something I just learned, actually the POTUS does have the power to unilaterally maneuver, and avoid Congressional approval. Under the USC 287 d allows for the special agreements act:

The President is authorized to negotiate a special agreement or agreements with the Security Council which shall be subject to the approval of the Congress by appropriate Act or joint resolution, providing for the numbers and types of armed forces, their degree of readiness and general location, and the nature of facilities and assistance, including rights of passage, to be made available to the Security Council on its call for the purpose of maintaining international peace and security in accordance with article 43 of said Charter. The President shall not be deemed to require the authorization of the Congress to make available to the Security Council on its call in order to take action under article 42 of said Charter and pursuant to such special agreement or agreements the armed forces, facilities, or assistance provided for therein: Provided, That, except as authorized in section 287d–1 of this title, nothing herein contained shall be construed as an authorization to the President by the Congress to make available to the Security Council for such purpose armed forces, facilities, or assistance in addition to the forces, facilities, and assistance provided for in such special agreement or agreements.

source: www.law.cornell.edu...

The UN Article 41-58 establish the rules of agreement through the council.

www.un.org...

I was in a debate of another topic, that this particular information was given to me. And was rather educational as well.

So basically, the president answers to the UN, and not the congress. This country has been dissolved. We are sovereign in name only.

The POTUS does not answer to the UN, but USC and UN charters allow for the POTUS to act within the confines of the council without direct Congressional Approval.

Okay but still, what about that part about not entering into combat?

reply to post by hawaii50th


Clearly and AJ was the last president to have the national debt reduced to zero and to force out the national bank system. Since he died this country went to crooks and in those terms lost its sovereignty.