Regarding Obama's ability to use executive orders:

[jenmito]

January 22, 2009-"Obama Signs Executive Order To Close Guantanamo Bay"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/22/obama-and-guantanamo-unde_n_159849.html

So don't act as if he has powers that he doesn't have. He tried. Congress failed him. Period.

[Tx4obama]

1. K & R n/t

[Andy823]

2. Yes you are right

However there seems to be a large group here who will NEVER accept the facts. All they seem to want to do is tear down the president, and encourage people to NOT VOTE in 2012, just like they did in 2010, and we can all see just how well that is working at the state levels where republicans too control! Funny how many of these "trolls" seem to be posting these days!

All I can say is people need to wake up and realize the right is playing us for fools, and unless we stay united we will end up with the whole country in the hands of the republicans who will make the last melt down look small compared to what will happen when they get even more control and privatize this whole country!

[young but wise]

3. +1

[jenmito]

5. Exactly...

I just responded to an Obama critic who asked if Obama has heard of "executive orders" and I replied that he couldn't DO the things the poster wanted via executive order. And here's proof that he TRIED. But he still needed congress to cooperate. They failed him.

[Armstead]

6. You write this insulting crap and then say "stay united?"

[Andy823]

9. Curious

Why would you be insulted? Did I hit a nerve or what?

What I find insulting is how many people here buy into the right wing talking points, and take the side of the "trolls" who come here to divide people! I read post after post that is so obviously right wing BS, yet I see people who have been here for years buying into the crap! Why is that?

[Armstead]

12. Because of the way you frame it

There are trolls here who like to play at being angry leftists to stir the pot by criticizing Obama.

Therefore everyone who is critical of Obama's performance is either a troll, or is being duped by the trolls.

While there are certainly trolls here, I would suspect there are just as many who like to pretend to be "outraged Obama supporters who are offended by criticisms of him" too.

And, the question of trolls aside, your characterization of Obama criticism as right-wing talking points....Well one reason I am critical of Obama is because he failed to really push hard for a public option....And furthermore I believe he should have been working to sel, the public on the possibility of universal payer coverage.

THat's a right wing talking point?

If you really want Democrats to "stay united" you might start by actually listening to and respecting the opinions of those who support Obama and the Democratic Party but also believe that course corrections are needed.

Even if you disagree, try focusing on debating the actual substance of the criticisms.

[Andy823]

14. Well...

First off the "trolls" I am talking about are very easy to spot. They have few post, and all of them are bashing the president.

Second, those who disagree, but still realize that he has done a hell of a lot since taking office, are not who I am calling trolls!

Third I do respect the opinions of others, but do "NOT" respect the trolls that come here day after day, nor do I respect those who never say anything good about the president, not matter what he has done.

Fourth "real" liberals, democrats, progressives etc. who want to prevent republicans for doing more damage than they already have, WILL be united to make sure we don't see any more republican takeover of any more states, or D.C.! I really respect all those who come here who have honest complaints, but have never once tried to encourage others to NOT VOTE! In my view those who say we should stay home and NOT VOTE got us in this mess last year!

Last but not least, I and many others here have tried to debate the actual substance of those who complain constantly, to no avail! I don't agree with everything the president has done, but one thing I can never agree with is NOT VOTING to send a message, to me that's just plain crazy, and what the right wants us to do.

[Armstead]

20. Okay, if you keep it focused on encouragement of not voting, I'm fine with that

Personally, although I do get a bit excitable at times, I believe the goal should be to get Democrats elected (or reelected) -- but I also believe it's important to keep their feet to the fire and push for the Democratic Party to actually represent the goals and values of liberalism and progressive populism.

[Igel]

25. "That's a right wing talking point?"

Given the sort of "logic" foisted on us by some, yeah.

For instance, LaRouche's group produced signs during the health-care protests that showed Obama as Hitler. They were protesting with tea partiers.

Therefore LaRouche is an arch-conservative. On the other hand, the reason that LaRouche decried the plan that Obama finally signed was that it was *not* single-payer universal coverage. LaRouche supported Conyer's plan. Nonetheless, because LaRouche was behind the Obama = Hitler signs and opposed "Obama's" plan he must automatically be a far-right conservative (rather than just a loony mix of left and right). Therefore what he wanted was also an arch-conservative plan--the best of deductive reasoning a la fou. This further entails that Conyers is a far-right conservative and, well, so are you.

(It was really important to not be on the same side of anything as LaRouche; and it was so satisfying to "nail" the tea partiers with the Obama = Hitler signs that the people actually behind them was an untouchable subject. Where the logic leads after that doesn't matter; people "felt" this to be true, therefore logic had to bend to their emotional needs.)

[William769]

4. When you are the Commander in Chief (or Chief executive).

Says alot about your Governing skills.

P.S. Before you jump me, you might want to research authority of an executive order.

[jenmito]

7. Yup-you still find a way to blame Obama.

:eyes:

[ProSense]

8. Congress has

the power of the purse. They prohibited funds from being used to close Guantanamo. Congress can defund the war if it chooses to do so.
The reason there is a budget debate is that all government funding is approved and appropriated by Congress.

[Hippo_Tron]

17. Not really, once in a while congressional consensus is so overwhelming

That the President's power is completely usurped by congress, even in matters of foreign policy and defense. Reagan wanted to keep money flowing to the Contras and to not enact sanctions against Apartheid South Africa. In both cases he was overridden by congress. In one case he remedied the situation by breaking the law.

The fact is that members of congress are all scared shitless that the inmates at Guantanamo might end up in their district/state and that they will pay a huge political price for that.

[jeff47]

10. Let me introduce you to this amazing device, known as a calendar

The order of events matters.

1) Obama signed EO to close Gitmo.
2) Republicans Demagogued.
3) Congress explicitly forbids any funding to implement Obama's EO.

So yes, Obama can yell and scream all he wants about closing Gitmo. He can issue EO after EO. But without Congress, he can't close it. Because he can't pay for it.

[jenmito]

11. That's right...

tell it to the constant Obama critics.

[frylock]

13. how much pressure did he apply to congressional dems..

to ensure they didn't fuck him over on one of his planks?

[jenmito]

16. Probably none at all...

right? :eyes:

[frylock]

18. that's what i have to assume since i haven't heard otherwise..

right? :eyes:

[jenmito]

19. No-because you CHOSE not to hear otherwise...

He spoke out often on how Gitmo is a stain on the U.S., a great recruiting tool for al Qaeda, and must be closed.

[frylock]

24. i heard obama say a lot of things

[krawhitham]

21. He signed the executive order, that should be good enough

He is the POTUS, if any other white POTUS had signed it congress would have rubber stamped it in a mater of days


The man should not have to campaign for every decision he makes, we elected him to make these decisions

[jenmito]

22. I agree. n/t

[hack89]

23. No it is not - we did not elect him to be king

I didn't vote for my Democratic congressman and senator to be a mindless rubber stamps. Obama is not omnipotent - he can make mistakes.

[Hippo_Tron]

30. When your own Senate Majority Leader undermines you...

No amount of pressure is going to do anything.

[truebrit71]

31. He was keeping his powder dry for the impending HCR "win"...

:sarcasm:

[rug]

15. It also ordered the relase or transfer of the detainees.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/closure-guantanamo-detention-facilities

[Igel]

26. The criticism of Obama is more nuanced than that.

I don't fault him for not closing Gitmo. He didn't have the authority to unilaterally do it. I don't act as though he has powers he doesn't actually have.

However, in saying that within 1 year of being inaugurated Gitmo he would have closed Gitmo *he* acted as though he had powers he doesn't actually have. *His* utterance entailed that he had the authority to unilaterally close it.

The problem those thinking he has powers that he doesn't have have is assuming his assumptions were correct. (Okay, that sentence needs some serious stylistic revising.) They believed him; therefore they're in error. "Yes, I can" meant "No, I may not." It's my preferred take on the matter--that he was uninformed on a point of Constitional law or exaggerated his powers in order to get voter support. Neither strikes me as a huge deal.

The other option is that he so assumed that Congress was in his pocket that he didn't have to worry about any objections. Congress would bow down and say, "Yes, sir, Mr. President, sir." Such an exaggerated sense of self-importance and authority, IMHO, is far more heinous an attribution.

[Exilednight]

27. Your last three sentences say it all. +1 for you. n/t

[Avant Guardian]

28. More excuse making

It must suck to constantly have to defend the indefensible

[jenmito]

29. Stating a fact is not "excuse making."

It must suck to constantly have to see a president in office that you never approved of.

[Imajika]

32. You are 100% correct...

And the people whining about Obama here are completely off the mark.

The US Senate under DEMOCRATIC control voted 90-6 to block all funding to close Gitmo and prevent any transfer of prisoners to the US. Obama was up against massive opposition in Congress to include significant opposition from his own party. The President is not a dictator. Congress controls the purse. There is nothing the President can do when Congress vehemently opposes him on an issue like this - particularly when much of that opposition comes from his own party.

One gets the feeling that there are people here who want Obama to commit political suicide by spending all his time banging away on unpopular issues like closing Gitmo, the comfort of Bradley Manning in jail, etc, etc.

The President has a lot on his agenda and much bigger fish to fry than spending all his time on Gitmo when it's so clearly a losing issue that he can't even get support from his own party.