We have been discussing the growing concerns over President Barack Obama’s series of unilateral actions in ordering agencies not to enforce law, effectively rewriting laws, and moving hundreds of millions of dollars from appropriated purposes to areas of his choosing. One of the greatest concerns has been his unchecked authority asserted in the national security area. I previously represented members of Congress in challenging Obama’s intervention in the Libyan civil war without a declaration from Congress. In the case, President Obama insisted that he alone determines what is a war and therefore when he needs a declaration. Since the court would not recognize standing to challenge the war, it left Obama free to engage in war operations in any country of his choosing. As with his approach in Libya, Syria and other combat operations, President Obama declared this week that he does not need any approval or even consultation with Congress if he decides to commit us again to war again in Iraq.
As in the past, Democrats are not just silent but actually applauding the circumvention of Congress — a precedent that will likely come back to haunt them if the next president is a Republican. House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California said that the President does not need congressional approval to do go back into combat and then matter-of-factly that in their brief conversation, the President “did not give us an array of actions he was planning to take.”
While we do not expect combat troops on the ground, the White House appears to be exploring an intervention with air power and possible special forces. The White House simply told Congress and the public to trust their uber president: “Any action that he might contemplate when it comes to … the use of military force will be to deal with the immediate and medium-term threat posed by ISIL.”
I recently testified (here and here and here) and wrote a column on President Obama’s increasing circumvention of Congress in negating or suspending U.S. laws. Obama has repeatedly suspended provisions of the health care law and made unilateral changes that were previously rejected by Congress. He has also moved hundreds of millions from one part of the Act to other parts without congressional approval. Now, his administration is reportedly changing key provisions of the ACA to potentially make billions of dollars available to the insurance industry in a move that was never debated, let alone approved, by the legislative branch. I just ran another column this month listing such incidents of executive over-reach that ideally would have included this potentially huge commitment under Obama’s claimed discretionary authority.
This week I debated the head of the Brennan Center at New York University on Obama’s unilateral actions and the dangers that they pose on the PBS program Newshour. While my co-guest repeatedly insisted that he is “not troubled” by the concentration of authority in the presidency, I again believe that Democrats will long regret that they support the rise of this uber presidency:
Kraaken: “We already destroyed their country once over Bush and Cheney’s lies.”
That’s false.
The test was Iraq’s compliance, not US intel. The cause of action for Operation Iraqi Freedom – same as for Clinton’s military enforcement with Iraq – was whether Saddam was in full compliance or material breach of Iraq’s ceasefire obligations under the UNSC resolutions.
Setting aside Saddam’s noncompliance on Iraq’s non-weapons obligations, such as UNSC Res 688, Saddam’s noncompliance on Iraq’s weapons obligations was established fact reconfirmed by UNMOVIC.
The Duelfer Report also corroborated that Iraq was in broad violation of the UNSC resolutions.
rafflaw: “And wasn’t the status of forces agreement agreed to during the Bush Agreement that put a timetable on our exit?”
Yes and no. See my comment at June 20, 2014 at 7:36 pm and the in-depth reports about the SOFA linked at June 20, 2014 at 7:03 pm.
Nick, most of the people in my grammar school class were full-blooded Italians from an Italian town with real mafia. Most were second/third/whatever generation Americans, but there were new arrivals too. You may not care what people call you, but I can assure you that calling certain people a wop or dego would result in a fight.
Paul wrote “fighting Irish is a stereotype”
Do an Internet search on “fighting Irish” and you will discover that there are many theories on the origin of that phrase.
saucy – from Yahoo.
The most generally accepted explanation is that the press coined the nickname as a characterization of Notre Dame teams in the 1920’s as a result of preexisting Irish stereotypes, the widely reported events of 1924, and the grit, determination, and tenacity of Coach Knute Rockne’s football teams of the era. Although Notre Dame alumnus Francis Wallace popularized it in his New York Daily News columns in the 1920s with respect to the university, as early as the civil war Father Corby and the Irish Brigade of the Union Army had been dubbed “The Fighting Irish.”
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20061008150838AAYVGTH
david – some of the American public put him there. We are not all at fault. Personally, I am taking no blame.
Kraaken, the dysfunctional Congress is President Obama’s doing. If I was President, I would ask my party to stop with the partisan politics. Instead, Obama has joined right in. The Congress is used to the President and Vice President leading their policy so they aren’t stonewalled by the President’s veto power. This President simply does not lead. Did you hear yesterday how he said it was not his decision to withdraw troops from Iraq? This President has never owned anything he has done. Nobody can work under such failed leadership. The man is an empty suit sitting in the White House, and the American public put him there… twice!
The former student is opposed to mascots. He went to the U of Wi. The PC is ingrained there. We just respectfully disagree. The Brewer’s have an Indian pitcher, Kyle Lohse. He has that marvelous Indian temperament, very calm and centered. When things are falling apart on the field, Lohse is cooler than the other side of the pillow. If he played in Milwaukee back in the 60’s he could have been a Brave.
Saucy, I’ve been to many Reservations. I LOVE Indians. I have a former student w/ whom I’m very close who is half Chippewa, half German. His girlfriend is half Chinese, half German. Their kids will be a VERY unique mix. Rank and file Indians do not care about this mascot horseshit. As you mentioned they have much bigger problems. Let the market decide this, not the Patent Office!
Nick – a thing is either unique or it is not. It cannot be very unique. Sorry, but this is something that really bothers me. 🙂
Eric, Rafflaw’s misinformed comment about the SOF agreement is just one of many examples of cultists trying to protect the King. I remember discussing those “negotiations” Obama and Maliki had back in 2011. It was painfully obvious Obama was sabotaging the negotiations so he could bug out. All his military people told him that was insane. But, the King is benevolent.
Paul wrote “Fighting Irish of Notre Dame … It is a racial stereotype”
If their nickname was “Fighting Micks of Notre Dame” or “Typically drunken Irish of Notre Dame,” then you would have a point. But right now you are comparing apples and oranges.
You were only partially correct when you said that Pine Ridge has the worst Native American poverty. The Wikipedia page on “Reservation poverty” (which just reformats Census data) lists the worst reservations for poverty. For poverty for individuals, Pine Ridge Indian Reservation is the worst. For poverty for families with children, Uintah and Ouray Indian Reservation is the worst. For extreme poverty, San Carlos Indian Reservation is the worst.
Nick wrote “This ruling is a travesty”
I disagree. We have completely forgotten about the plight of Native Americans. Tea Party members selfishly bleat that their taxes are too high, yet they do not live in the poverty seen on the reservations. If the NFL is to be allowed to earn obscene profits each year, it must be a grown-up.
P.S. I’m someone who thinks the difference between “colored person,” an insult in PC-land, and “person of color” is only an issue of semantics.
saucy – fighting Irish is a stereotype. Irish were historically stereotypically known for drinking and fighting. So, it is racist. And the NAACP should lose any trademark protection it has, since ‘colored people’ is no longer PC.
While not an Obama apologist, I can certainly understand why he feels that way. Those were Bush’s sentiments, too, Republicants. Obama has been sidled with a do-nothing, obstreperous, Congress for the past six years. He’s probably at the point of saying “F.Y., something needs to be done and since you idiots are too busy drumming up fake scandals and acting like spoiled six-year olds to actually do anything, I’m going to have to be the adult in the room and do it myself.” You see, that’s what happens when things become too partisan as they now stand.
Having said all of that, I don’t think we have any business going back to Iraq. We already destroyed their country once over Bush and Cheney’s lies. We killed their leader (who was our man and who we supported until he decided to be his own man for a change) and now we’re going back for another round. We’ve caused enough damage around the world. It’s time we slink back to our cave and let them go to hell in their own way and without our interference.
Max-1: “And why aren’t the Cheney’s out dissing that man?”
The only ones blaming Bush for Obama’s ‘ending the war’ (ie, sacrificing the peace) are folks who either really don’t know or are purposely ignoring the historical context in order to sell a particular spin. Read the Michael Gordon and Max Boot pieces I linked at June 20, 2014 at 7:03 pm for the historical context.
I was brought up to not be a victim. I’m now on the Endangered Species list.
Shulte leading the PC Jihadists. “Death to Mascots!!” Cleveland Indians, Chicago Blackhawks, WV Mountaineers, where does it end? Saucy asked be about the Washington Wops, I’m fine w/ it. I’m half Mick so the Washington Micks is also great.
Nick – I am leading the War on the Trademark Office. If they can get rid of the Washington Redskins because of 5 people then certainly 5 Irish can get rid of the Fighting Irish and the Celtics.
What I hope will happen is that they will realize the error of their way and the opportunity they have given to people to complain using the same reasoning as the Redskins decision.
Max-1,
President Bush did what was needed to get us to the next inflection point of the peace operations with Iraq. It was commonly understood at the time that a new “peacetime” SOFA would be negotiated.
Think of it like emergency martial law that has a designed expiration. It doesn’t mean the security agents are removed as unnecessary at expiration, only that a different legal structure and relationship suit different circumstances. Roles change. After all, the US goal for Iraq after Saddam was a strong, stable, independent Iraqi partner at peace, not COIN “Surge” forever.
Iraq isn’t the first instance of the US renegotiating SOFA with a maturing host-nation partner. For example, the US military presence and SOFA with Korea now is a far cry from what it was at the start of our post-WW2 custody.
As circumstances change, relationships change, including parental relationships. SOFA with a growing independent host-nation strategic partner doesn’t normally remain unchanged from the start-up SOFA based on the necessary expedience of an immediate post-war occupier.
Eric,
Who arranged the withdrawal?
And why aren’t the Cheney’s out dissing that man?
From 1994
max-1: “Now, credit Obama here… he tried to extend the militarized occupation past 2011. Maliky wouldn’t have none of it and said GTFO!”
Kinda, sorta. Here are 2 in-depth reports of what happened:
Michael Gordon, NY Times, Sept 2012:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/23/world/middleeast/failed-efforts-of-americas-last-months-in-iraq.html?smid=pl-share&_r=0
Max Boot, Wall Street Journal, Oct 2011:
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052970203554104577003931424188806
Because it’s never an Imperial Presidency when a Democrat is in Office?