Views: 10842|Replies: 32

Kenyan chap Obama rules as a dictator, says Ron Paul   [Copy link] 中文

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2012-1-7 18:28:38 |Display all floors
Obama rules as a dictator, says Ron Paul

Published: 6 January, 2012




Much of Congress is calling out President Obama for his excessive use of executive power in a string of recess appointments this week. To some lawmakers, this isn’t the first time the commander-in-chief has stepped on the toes of his constituents.
To Ron Paul, in fact, Obama has transcended America into a practical dictatorship.
The commander-in-chief overstepped the Congress and appointed Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection, much to the chagrin of the US Senate, who were on recess at the time. Although the president has the power to make such appointments during Senate recess sessions, lawmakers have since become outraged that Obama could not have waited for them to give Cordray the go-ahead.
Now the new CFP chief will sit pretty in a paid federal position and await a decision from Congress to either approve or disapprove Obama’s appointment — a decision which could be months in the making. In the meanwhile, Cordray lacks any official authority to rule the CFP, essentially allowing him to vacate a ghost opening and be compensated for simply sitting pretty.
But why would the president do such a thing?
“It is disappointing that a former constitutional law professor does not understand that the President is not a dictator or a king who can simply ignore the Constitution whenever he feels frustrated by the system of checks and balances wisely put in place by our Founders,” Texas congressman and GOP presidential hopeful Ron Paul says in an official statement.
His move, says the legendary libertarian politicians, shows a “clear disregard of the Constitution” and a “flagrant contempt for the rules.”
According to Paul, this isn’t first time that the current commander-in-chief has overstepped the Constitution either. Throughout the administration, says Paul, the president has bypassed the rules in order to make decisions favored by few but always to his liking. Most recently, the congressman attacked President Obama over his warning to Capitol Hill that he would get his jobs act through one way or another.
“The current administration has unabashedly stated that Congress's unwillingness to pass the president's jobs bill means that the president will act unilaterally to enact provisions of it piecemeal through Executive Order,” Paul said in an open letter last November. “Obama explicitly threatens to bypass Congress, thus aggregating the power to make and enforce laws in the executive. This clearly erodes the principles of separation of powers and checks and balances. It brings the modern presidency dangerously close to an elective dictatorship.”
Elsewhere in Congress, Senator John McCain called the appointment of Cordray an “absolute abuse of power,” and Congressman Dan Burton said the president was acting in “direct dereliction of his oath to the American people to protect and defend the American Constitution.”
Ron Paul adds that the president “must be called to account for his actions.” Paul is currently challenging Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum for the GOP party’s nomination in hopes of running against Obama later in 2012.

Single choice vote, There are a total of 6 people participating in the poll
50.00% (3)
0.00% (0)
33.33% (2)
16.67% (1)
Your current user group has no poll permission

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2012-1-7 18:41:36 |Display all floors
This post was edited by SMITHI at 2012-1-7 18:41

Russia Today

ACLU trashes Obama over indefinite detention and torture act

Edited: 6 January, 2012




“He will forever be known as the president who signed indefinite detention without charge or trial into law.”
These harsh words come courtesy of the executive director of the ACLU, formerly a supporter of the president but also just one of the many dissenters who have since have grown disillusioned with an administration tarnished by unfulfilled campaign promises and continuous constitutional violations.
When he signed the National Defense Authorization Act on New Year’s Eve, President Barack Obama said that he had his reservations over the controversial legislation that will allow for the indefinite detention of Americans.
Now some of the president’s pals are expressing their agreement with Obama’s own hesitation but say that the commander-in-chief should have thought harder before signing away the civil liberties of Americans.
Under the bill, which approves all defense spending for the 2012 fiscal year, certain provisions allow for the military detainment and torture of US citizens, indefinitely, essentially allowing for Guantanamo Bay-style prisons to be a real possibility for every American. As the act floated around Congress, an underground outrage erupted and activists attempted to keep the bill from leaving the House and the Senate, although a lack of media coverage largely left the matter hidden to the public. Despite this campaign, the legislation made it out of the Capitol Building and into the Oval Office last month, prompting advocates against the act to petition for the president to veto it.
Initially the Obama administration said the president’s advisers would recommend a veto, but later rescinded the threat. Senator Carl Levin eventually revealed that President Obama had insisted on adding the wording that has made NDAA such a target among activists who are frightened of the civil liberty-stripping capabilities.
One week after the president did ink the legislation, some of Obama’s old pals are saying they are in disbelief over how a former constitutional law professor could agree to such provisions that crush the law of the land.
"President Obama's action … is a blight on his legacy because he will forever be known as the president who signed indefinite detention without charge or trial into law," ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero says in a statement. Such a charge not only carries much clout because it comes courtesy of the head of such an integral and reputable advocacy group, but Romero himself was praising the president three years earlier after he won the 2008 election. Now that same administration is doing everything Romero thought it wouldn’t.
“I believe he knows what he needs to do to restore the America we believe in, to get us on back on track, to give us back our America, an America we never stopped believing in but have sorely missed for the past eight years,” Romero wrote in 2008 in an op-ed that encouraged the president to follow through on his campaign promise of closing Guantanamo Bay. “Call me naive, but I honestly believe he wants to do it. He promised us that on the campaign trail, and I believe it was more than an empty promise,” wrote Romero.
Three-quarters of the way through his presidency, Obama has now only left Gitmo remain open, but is going to be able to send his own citizens to its torture cells.
“We are incredibly disappointed that President Obama signed this new law even though his administration had already claimed overly broad detention authority in court,” adds Romero. “Any hope that the Obama administration would roll back the constitutional excesses of George Bush in the war on terror was extinguished today.”
Other groups who had previously offered their endorsement to the president are saying they are upset as well.
"It is deeply troubling that the NDAA became law with the detention provisions intact,” reads a statement from the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR. “We believe it is unconstitutional for our military to become a police force that would hold American citizens indefinitely without the right to trial or even to hear the charges brought against them."
CAIR had long supported Obama for his protection of Muslim-American rights. Nearly one year ago Executive Director Nihad Awad told the media that the group welcomes Obama for his “decision to emphasize the fact that Muslims are contributing members of our society.” Only 12 months later, the group says they are now skeptical over how the president can now use his power to strip the rights of anyone.
"This ill-conceived and un-American legislation will forever be seen as a stain on our nation's history – one that will ultimately be viewed with embarrassment and shame,” adds the advocacy group.
Although the powers of the act indeed offer the president the ability to indefinitely detain people, citizens or non, Obama said during signing that he would not interpret the legislation to mean as such.
“I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens,” added the president in a statement that accompanied the signing of NDAA. “My Administration will interpret section 1021 in a manner that ensures that any detention it authorizes complies with the Constitution, the laws of war, and all other applicable law.”
That memo does not, however, mean future heads of state will necessarily be excluded from following the orders authorized by Congress. In fact, the ACLU’s Romero tells The Atlantic, "The statute is particularly dangerous because it has no temporal or geographic limitations, and can be used by this and future presidents to militarily detain people captured far from any battlefield.”
“President Obama did pledge in a signing statement not to use this law to detain American citizens but this provides little comfort, as signing statements have no legal force and he has repeatedly failed to uphold similar promises in the face of political pressure — including his pledge to close Guantánamo within his first year in office,” adds the Center for Constitutional Rights in their own statement this week. “The law authorizes a future president, such as a President Romney, President Bachmann or President Perry, to use this authorization in the most aggressive manner available.
When he offered his John Hancock come signing time, the president acknowledged suspicious but went ahead with it anyway, noting, “The fact that I support this bill as a whole does not mean I agree with everything in it. In particular, I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists.”
“I guess promising that Americans wouldn't be indefinitely detained, period, was too much of a stretch,” blogger Mary Wheeler adds.
Those very suspicions that Obama wrote of did not stop the president from following the plea of Congress though, less than a year until November elections make or break the legacy of the president.
If you ask many, though, that legacy has been tarnished by the NDAA.
“Our Founders were fearful of the military — and they purposely created a system of checks and balances to ensure we did not become a country under military rule,” Minnesota Senator Al Franken wrote of the bill on Huffington Post. Franken, a Democrat along with Obama, said he had agreed with parts of the bill but the controversial provisions alone were reason for him not to sign it.
“This bill undermines that core principle, which is why I could not support it.”
For Obama, that didn’t quite seem to matter as much.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2012-1-7 18:47:17 |Display all floors
This post was edited by SMITHI at 2012-1-7 18:53

“He will forever be known as the president who signed indefinite detention without charge or trial into law.”
American sliding to dictatorship is hardly surprise for anybody , we the people see it as natural progression from plutocracy to full blown corporate fascist state.
One could only hope that brave American people stand up to dictatorship and organise armed rebellion with support of UN and international community.
Long suffering American people should not tolerate oppression and brutal force of Obama regime.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2012-1-7 20:06:04 |Display all floors
Yes we can?


hmmmmmmmmm

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2012-1-8 02:13:02 |Display all floors
OWS to protest foreclosed homes in Las Vegas
Sat Jan 7, 2012




The Occupy Wall Street movement is preparing to take over Las Vegas' foreclosure-ravaged neighborhoods.

Southern Nevada Occupy leaders say protesters will gather at foreclosed homes across the Las Vegas valley on Saturday to urge Wall Street banks to negotiate with mortgage borrowers.

The protesters say home ownership is a fundamental right.

Protesters in other states began gathering at foreclosed homes in November after law enforcement officials shut down Occupy camps across the nation.

The Las Vegas Occupy movement has largely avoided the violent police confrontations seen in other cities. The Republic

FACTS & FIGURES

The United States housing bubble is an economic bubble affecting many parts of the United States housing market in over half of American states. Housing prices peaked in early 2006, started to decline in 2006 and 2007, and may not yet have hit bottom as of 2011. Market Watch

The number of existing homes sold in the U.S. in recent years has been revised down by about 14 percent, further indication that the property market downturn was worse than originally thought. FT

Nearly a quarter of all U.S. homeowners with mortgages are now underwater, representing nearly 11 million homes. The Republic

Nevada has had the highest foreclosure rate in the nation for 59 months in a row. Economic Collapse



HJ/DB

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2012-1-8 10:34:53 |Display all floors
Why do Kenyans hate our freedom?

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

2015 Most Popular Member Medal

Post time 2012-1-8 12:11:55 |Display all floors
Guantanamo Bay and handing the keys to the banks to the super rich was done
by George Bush. Since then the Republicans have fought tooth and nail to keep
these inequities in place.
Ron Paul wants to do away with all regulations which will pretty much allow the
super rich to finish off middle class America.
I believe you're barking up the wrong tree.
If capitalism promotes innovation and creativity then why aren't scientists and artists the richest people in a capitalist nation?

Use magic tools Report

You can't reply post until you log in Log in | register

BACK TO THE TOP
Contact us:Tel: (86)010-84883548, Email: blog@chinadaily.com.cn
Blog announcement:| We reserve the right, and you authorize us, to use content, including words, photos and videos, which you provide to our blog
platform, for non-profit purposes on China Daily media, comprising newspaper, website, iPad and other social media accounts.