Let's just blame Republicans... it's certainly not OUR fault!

The Real Obama Administration/Pentagon Military Agenda as revealed Thursday May 16,2013 in the Senate Armed Forces Committee hearing:

Quote The Democracy Now Website:SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: OK. Do you agree with me that when it comes to international terrorism, we’re talking about a worldwide struggle?

MICHAEL SHEEHAN: Absolutely, sir. [inaudible]

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: Would you agree with me the battlefield is wherever the enemy chooses to make it?

MICHAEL SHEEHAN: Yes, sir, from Boston to the FATA.

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: I couldn’t agree with you more. We’re in a—do you agree with that, General?

BRIG. GEN. RICHARD GROSS: Yes, sir. I agree that the enemy decides where the battlefield is.

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: And it could be anyplace on the planet, and we have to be aware and able to act. And do you have the ability to act, and are you aware of the threats?

MICHAEL SHEEHAN: Yes, sir. We do have the ability to react, and we are tracking threats globally.

Senator Angus King responds:

Quote The Democracy Now website:SEN. ANGUS KING: Gentlemen, I’ve only been here five months, but this is the most astounding and most astoundingly disturbing hearing that I’ve been to since I’ve been here. You guys have essentially rewritten the Constitution here today. The Constitution, Article I, Section 8, Clause 11, clearly says that the Congress has the power to declare war. This—this authorization, the AUMF, is very limited. And you keep using the term "associated forces." You use it 13 times in your statement. That is not in the AUMF. And you said at one point, "It suits us very well." I assume it does suit you very well, because you’re reading it to cover everything and anything. And then you said, at another point, "So, even if the AUMF doesn’t apply, the general law of war applies, and we can take these actions." So, my question is: How do you possibly square this with the requirement of the Constitution that the Congress has the power to declare war?

This is one of the most fundamental divisions in our constitutional scheme, that the Congress has the power to declare war; the president is the commander-in-chief and prosecutes the war. But you’re reading this AUMF in such a way as to apply clearly outside of what it says. Senator McCain was absolutely right: It refers to the people who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks on September 11. That’s a date. That’s a date. It doesn’t go into the future. And then it says, "or harbored such organizations"—past tense—"or persons in order to prevent any future acts by such nations, organizations or persons." It established a date.

Pentagon spokesman Michael Sheehan and Senator King then have this exchange:

Quote The Democracy Now website:MICHAEL SHEEHAN: Senator, let me take the first response. I’m not a constitutional lawyer or a lawyer of any kind. But let me talk to you a little—take a brief statement about al-Qaeda and the organization that attacked us on September 11, 2001. In the two years prior to that, Senator King, that organization attacked us in East Africa and killed 17 Americans in our embassy in Nairobi, with loosely affiliated groups of people in East Africa. A year prior to 9/11, that same organization, with its affiliates in Yemen, almost sunk a U.S. ship, the U.S.S. Cole, a billion-dollar warship, killed 17 sailors in the port of Aden. The organization that attacked us on 9/11 already had its tentacles in—around the world with associated groups. That was the nature of the organization then; it is the nature of the organization now. In order to attack that organization, we have to attack it with those affiliates that are its operational arm that have previously attacked and killed Americans, and at high-level interests, and continue to try to do that.

SEN. ANGUS KING: That’s fine, but that’s not what the AUMF says. You can—you can—what I’m saying is, we may need new authority, but don’t—if you expand this to the extent that you have, it’s meaningless, and the limitation in the war power is meaningless. I’m not disagreeing that we need to attack terrorism wherever it comes from and whoever is doing it. But what I’m saying is, let’s do it in a constitutional way, not by putting a gloss on a document that clearly won’t support it. It just—it just doesn’t—it just doesn’t work. I’m just reading the words. It’s all focused on September 11 and who was involved, and you guys have invented this term "associated forces" that’s nowhere in this document. As I mentioned, in your written statement, you use that—that’s the key term. You use it 13 times. It’s the justification for everything. And it renders the war powers of the Congress null and void. I don’t understand. I mean, I do understand you’re saying we don’t need any change, because the way you read it, you can—you could do anything. But why not say—come back to us and say, "Yes, you’re correct that this is an overbroad reading that renders the war powers of the Congress a nullity; therefore, we need new authorization to respond to the new situation"? I don’t understand why—I mean, I do understand it, because the way you read it, there’s no limit. But that’s not what the Constitution contemplates.

AMY GOODMAN: Independent Senator Angus King of Maine, speaking Thursday at a Senate hearing on the president’s war powers under the Authorization for Use of Military Force.

Palindromedary ~ Unless I'm mistaken you might be right that this Presidential speech is nothing more than blowing smoke up our collective A**'s!

http://www.democracynow.org/2013/5/17/astoundingly_disturbing_obama_administration_claims_power

[emphasis added]

Quote Kend:I will say it one more time. What has Obama done to make America a better place to live. Oh ya nothing. What is it that makes people like him I don't get it.

Kend ~ Well Kend, the answer is quite simple--Obama isn't Bush. Let's face it Obama is everything Bush isn't. He's not only a good student but a good teacher, he's literate, he comes from a poor family, he's a good public speaker, he can speak without a script, and most of all he's black. That's right, black. President Bush was such a bad leader--without a doubt the worst President by far in the short history of this country--that he made the election of a black man possible. Voters desperately wanted the most 100% opposite to the previous Administration they could find and Barack Obama fit the description perfectly. That's probably the greatest accomplishment of the Bush Administration--the greatest all time achievement for Civil Rights. President Bush with his preposterously incompetent Presidency paved the way for the greatest moment of Affirmative Action in American history.

In short, my friend, that is why people like President Obama--because he isn't President Bush! As long as he stays that way, he will be loved--no matter what he screws up!

Obama's calls for the War on Terror are synomous with calls to perpetuate the military industrial. And there is no better$$$ use for the military complex than to have them assist in the theft of other nation's resouces by conflating the fight against terrorism with acts that concentrate wealth from beyond our borders.

Sadly, military assisted theft of other countries resources and wealth result in terrorism.

I know! Something really scarey...a "terrorist" nuke goes off somewhere...that will scare the people so badly that they will all start waving their little flags again and totally forget about being totally screwed by our own ruling elite. Maybe that will be the excuse to invade Iran or Venezuela. Man, I sure hope they don't bomb us here in Podunk, Iowa!

DAnneMarc: Yes, I suspect you are right about the next false flag...what will it be...I wonder? It would behoove people to stay away from anyplace that is crowded...don't fly...don't take trains...stay out of tall buildings...crowded airports...sports or entertainment events. And if you want to "just go shopping" make sure you go to little places...not big malls. Yes, I suspect that when the manipulators can no longer control people's attitudes they'll resort to yet another scare tactic..another false flag..yet another Pearl Harbor or 911. That will bring them right into line again. It worked so well before! The people will never question authority and the authorities can get away with anything.

What news will we wake up to tomorrow...or the next day...or the next? How about: all the major banks have lost all their savings and checking accounts completely drained by international hackers...even though, in reality, that was just the cover for insider banksters doing the dirty deeds themselves and blaming it on the false flag patsies. When no one can get any money...then what will they do? Lash out against some innocent victims who just happen to be of the same ethnic origins that the criminals, who really absconded with the money, have blamed for the massive bank heists? FDIC could never cover such a loss.

Or, maybe something else on the order of more multiple hijackings and crashes into yet more tall buildings.

Or how about massive mailings of anthrax to thousands, or hundreds of thousands of Americans...right to their homes? All these things would be absolutely horrible but I don't doubt that the ruthless ruling elite would do such things...because they have done them before...911 and the anthrax mailings afterwards comes to mind. The assassinations of JFK, RFK, MLK and others come to mind.

There could be ways of turning things around with the military-industrial bunch. They have the engineers and R&D capabilities to advance energy technologies and any number of technologies, and really turn their profit-making for the greater good. The incentive needs to be there.

I was thinking of some of the reasons Eisenhower decided to build the national highway system. After seeing the efficiency of the German autobaun for moving troops, he decided the US needed such highway system for defense. Which begs the question, could Obama circumvent congress, by making some infrastructer work part of the military budget? Claiming crumbling infrastrucure poses a national defense risk. Especially since so much of the military funding goes to waste. Perhaps involve the Corps of Engineers type units, but contract out a large percentage. Just a thought.

I firmly believe complaining about the problems does little without some solution ideas.

Quote Palindromedary:Oh come on now! "Our President cannot do this alone."? All he does is say a few things he thinks we want to hear but he has no intention of really going to bat for the people who elected him.

Good point my friend. I too am a bit disheveled at this brief interlude of sanity. However, from habit--or conditioning--I seem to sense the setup for another false flag that would make all The President's recent words instantly meaningless. I hope I am wrong and this is a real turning point for our nation. God knows we deserve it and any genuine Constitutional Scholar/Statesman would time his restoration of the Constitution at about this time in his tenure. However, I have been too profoundly disappointed in the past to let my sheer optimism dictate my believes. I want to see action to back up these words. Deliberate and consistent action. Anything less is a charade. Any false flag event is a conspiracy.

Dear Thom. I've enjoyed your radio shows for a number of years, and also your email newsletters. I don't always agree with your views but I always respect your thinking.

I feel so angry right now about the way some "progressives" are responding to our President's speech yesterday at the National Defense University [whatever that is!].

I want to thank you for your more adult and reasoned and measured response. No president can make these changes alone. This should be obvious to all those who have been watching and listening to the crazy rightwing nonsense all these years now. Every elected official, from County Supervisor to President of the United States, must feel her/himself to have the citizenry on his side in order to get things done. This is why the ridiculous republicons work so hard and spend so many millions to pollute our airwaves and claim our minds.

Thom. You are a bit younger than I and you tend to be a much more positive thinker than I. But I suspect that you, too, get pretty much fed up with the fatuous self-righteousness of many "progressives-who-don't-wish-to-be-called-Liberals-because-they're-not!" Even some who otherwise appear to have some handle on history have disappointed me plenty. I've written an angry note just today to one who runs a "progressive" magazine which I have previously supported but from which I now withdraw my subscription.

Barack Obama is the best thing that could have happened to this country. He came in with all our "Liberal" hopes and dreams. The fact that we all, he and us together, ran right into the wall of status quo is not surprising, and is not his invention. I suspect, as I did in 2007, that Mr. Obama is politically and personally something of a moderate in his worldview. So I never expected miracles beyond the miracle of his election. Yet, he has rewarded my political passions a hundredfold with his Supreme Court appointments, his thoughtful unraveling of Iraq and Afghanistan commitments, his incredibly sensitive and effective support and encouragement to our poor and elderly and women and children and grief-stricken parents and families. I am so proud of him and his beautiful family and so grateful that he came along at the height of our American nightmare and lifted us out and away - however gradually - back to a political reality we can understand if we try.

It seems to me that Barack Obama is the adult among us, just when we need him. This is why I am angered, yes, by those Repubicans, such as Mr. McCain, who nitpick and badmouth and slander at every turn whether from bruised ego or outright racialism. But, more, much more deeply, I am smolderingly angry with those who call themselves Democrats or Liberals or Progressives who cannot seem to see past the most recent press "scandal" to pile on -- right along with the rightwing crazies and cynics and self-aggrandizers.

No human is perfect. No country can be perfect. No president can be perfect. But let us all make the effort to grow up and stand up now for a man who is better than I think we presently deserve.

Thanks for listening, Thom.

This guy has a tendency to say whatever he thinks the crowd wants to hear

Look forward, not backward.

That statement let a president and an entire cabinet of felons go free.

I have not been very impressed with Obama for a long while, but I think this time he may mean it, if he's looking toward his legacy. Why would he want to go down in the books as perpetuating and even worsening some of the worst of W;s failures? Maybe he also sees the futility of these endless wars, and not just the futility but the way the wars and the so-called war on terrorism has done nothing but worsen matters, perhaps he's stung, finally, by the criticism from his supporters the beginning of his failure to carry out his promises. There was an air of apology and backing down.

But let's not drop it! Let's do, hound him hound him hound him. Email him every day. Sign all the petitions, then email him again. Also, your elected representatives.

Don't give up. Never give up. Keep working at it.

One of the reasons the Republicans fabricate scandals is to take everyones eye off things like voter suppression.