It is really sad that people still fall for all of this. What is even more sad to the point of pathetic is to see people driving around with those “Hope & Change” stickers still on their cars. Can they really be that gullible and unaware, clueless and asleep at the wheel?
This whole political theatre is just that. A Kabuki Theatre. All nonsense. A silly game perpetuated to make the people think that they actually have a choice. Candidates will say anything during a campaign to make the people feel good and think that their voices are being heard. But once elected, these politicians cater only to those who got them elected and we don’t mean you voters out there.
It’s all of them. It’s not just the new President who’s “Hope & Change” has amounted to nothing but a continuation of the policies of the last administration. How about all those “Tea Party Patriots” who were going to rein in all of the careless spending and ever-deepening debt addictive policies in Washington?
They’re all in it together.
Obama Sought Repeal of Bush War Statute now used to justify Islamic State strikes
White House employs 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force Resolution to evade Congress
President Obama’s first initiated war against an Islamic terrorist group is authorized, the White House says, by George W. Bush-signed legislation that Mr. Obama has criticized and wanted to repeal since last year.
Since beginning airstrikes last month against the Islamic State (ISIS), the White House has said it does not need congressional approval to carry out such missions.
Last week, on the 13th anniversary of 9/11, the administration announced why, saying President Bush’s Authorization for Use of Military Force resolution in 2001 is all the authority Mr. Obama needs.
In a May 2013 speech to a military audience at the National Defense University, Mr. Obama portrayed the law as dated and as a potential blank check to get the U.S. into wars.
“The AUMF is now nearly 12 years old,” he said. “Unless we discipline our thinking, our definitions, our actions, we may be drawn into more wars we don’t need to fight, or continue to grant presidents unbound powers more suited for traditional armed conflicts between nation states.”
Last week, The Washington Times asked a National Security Council spokeswoman whether the president still wants to repeal the authorization, given the rise of the Islamic State terrorist group.
“On the 2001 AUMF, we remain committed to engaging with Congress and the American people to refine, and ultimately repeal, the AUMF,” the spokeswoman said. “The president has made clear that he wishes to take America off a permanent war footing.”
Two days later, the White House cited the authorization as Mr. Obama’s go-ahead for airstrikes on the Islamic State.
Mr. Obama campaigned for re-election as a president who was put into office to “end wars, not start them.”
• source: WashingtonTimes.com
for more, please see:
- Republicrats 101-Episode 01
- Republicrats 101- ep.02 – Syria: So What’s Different
- Shutdown – More Kabuki Theatre
A startling new political science study concludes that corporate interests and mega wealthy individuals control U.S. policy to such a degree that “the preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.”
The startling study, titled “Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens,” is slated to appear in an upcoming issue of Perspectives on Politics and was authored by Princeton University Professor Martin Gilens and Northwestern University Professor Benjamin Page. An early draft can be found here.
Noted American University Historian Allan J. Lichtman, who highlighted the piece in a Tuesday article published in The Hill, calls Gilens and Page’s research “shattering” and says their scholarship “should be a loud wake-up call to the vast majority of Americans who are bypassed by their government.”
The statistical research looked at public attitudes on nearly 1,800 policy issues and determined that government almost always ignores the opinions of average citizens and adopts the policy preferences of monied business interests when shaping the contours of U.S. laws.
The study’s findings align with recent trends, where corporate elites have aggressively pursued pro-amnesty policies despite the fact that, according to the most recent Reuters poll, 70% of Americans believe illegal immigrants “threaten traditional U.S. beliefs and customs,” and 63% believe “immigrants place a burden on the economy.”
The solution, say the scholars, is a reinvigorated and engaged electorate.
“If policymaking is dominated by powerful business organizations and a small number of affluent Americans, then America’s claims to being a democratic society are seriously threatened,” conclude Gilens and Page.