Obama requests sidestepping controversy until after his re-election???

[Guest]

The article presents Obama proposing Russia wait until after his re-election to address nuclear disarming strategy.

I see two issues. One he has no limits to how, when, where and to what ends he will play the political "game". He is trying to avoid having a controversial subject in the lime light during his campaign. Does raise the question of what else is being suppressed to make him look good (or not any worse?) before the election.

Secondly he is advertising he will deal with unpopular policy after his re-election....because he will be able to do what ever he wants, as a lame duck POTUS, that accomplishes his agenda, whether the people like it or not. This tactic in and of itself should be of concern for Americans, to the point he is brazen enough about it to go on international record, telegraphing such intentions, should he be re-elected.

At least two red flags being waved in the face of we the people.

Read for yourself:

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/03/president-obama-asks-medvedev-for-space-on-missile-defense-after-my-election-i-have-more-flexibility/



btk

[Guest]

I edited it into the original post!

btk

[Guest]

The article presents Obama proposing Russia wait until after his re-election to address nuclear disarming strategy.

I see two issues. One he has no limits to how, when, where and to what ends he will play the political "game". He is trying to avoid having a controversial subject in the lime light during his campaign. Does raise the question of what else is being suppressed to make him look good (or not any worse?) before the election.

Secondly he is advertising he will deal with unpopular policy after his re-election....because he will be able to do what ever he wants, as a lame duck POTUS, that accomplishes his agenda, whether the people like it or not. This tactic in and of itself should be of concern for Americans, to the point he is brazen enough about it to go on international record, telegraphing such intentions, should he be re-elected.

At least two red flags being waved in the face of we the people.

Read for yourself:

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/03/president-obama-asks-medvedev-for-space-on-missile-defense-after-my-election-i-have-more-flexibility/



btk

" Does raise the question of what else is being suppressed to make him look good (or not any worse?) before the election."

I think you have raised a good question. This deal was picked up by microphones. What is going on behind closed doors?

[Guest]

My fear of seeing Barack Hussein Obama II being able to rule with no fear of facing the electorate is overwhelming. Imagine, and forget the worthiness of the healthcare bill, a man like this who lied to the country when he said there would be open discussion of the health care situation and then blatantly took it beyond closed doors, and then even paid blackmail to his own party members to have it passed. He blatantly lied and has made NO attempt to stop politics from the WH but instead geared it to a new level. Forget policy right or wrong...he is using our WH for his own political purpose to an extreme.

[Guest]

After viewing the video I must say it looks like two old comrades sealing a deal. The only thing missing was the vodka toast.

[Guest]

Big deal. Any politician in the same situation would have probably done the same thing and waited until after he/she was elected back into office.

Doubt if Mitt Romney, Ronald Reagan, Sarah Palin, John McCain, any Bush, or any other name you could throw out would do anything differently. What is he going to do? Make a foreign policy with Russia on missiles and then hope the Republican-- if he/she gets into office-- does not overturn it?

[Guest]

maybe most politicians would be smart enough to not announce to the world that is the game they are playing.

And maybe many of us would not be too concerned if he didn't qualify his intents by adding, after the election having more flexibility.....to do as he damn well pleases without concern for the reaction as there is no election to keep him in check.

So when someone lies, makes back room deals and openly states lets do this later because....makes one suspicious and we would be no matter what letter is behind the name openly flaunting what they are doing. If he does not care now what will he care when there is no risk of retribution from we the people when re-election is not on his agenda.

Makes me cringe every time I hear or think of his words....I need four more years to finish the job.....

btk

[Guest]

Big deal. Any politician in the same situation would have probably done the same thing and waited until after he/she was elected back into office.

Doubt if Mitt Romney, Ronald Reagan, Sarah Palin, John McCain, any Bush, or any other name you could throw out would do anything differently. What is he going to do? Make a foreign policy with Russia on missiles and then hope the Republican-- if he/she gets into office-- does not overturn it?

How can you say that ? A man wants to make a deal concerning foreign affairs, specifially missle defense and it would appear he wants it done without any questions.

YES I do doubt if any of those you name would be that arrogant. Of those who are serious (Reagan, McCain, or Bush) I would be shocked to see any of them act so arrogantly !

Actually, do not know how to research but would like to know if in our history a president has tried to make a deal and go around his responsibilities (which it APPEARS he means to do) to our constitution in making these kinds of deals.

I do think his faux paux requires an explanation to the american public but doubting it will ever happen

[Guest]

By commission and ommission the moves made or not made by Obama on foreign policy matters will come back to haunt America for the next decade. Obama has turned friends to foes and foes not to friends but pretender friends. He has missed one opportunity after another . Why? Idealogy.

so I am very surprised to learn that anyone is confounded or confused regarding Obama's decisions.

[Guest]

By commission and ommission the moves made or not made by Obama on foreign policy matters will come back to haunt America for the next decade. Obama has turned friends to foes and foes not to friends but pretender friends. He has missed one opportunity after another . Why? Idealogy.

so I am very surprised to learn that anyone is confounded or confused regarding Obama's decisions.

PLUS , in my opinion and can find no way to prove this with great validity...only circumstantial evidence, he ignored foreign affairs for probably well over ONE YEAR (along with unemployment) to concentrate and travel the country selling his healthcare bill.

[Guest]

The Maddow Blog - Romney doesn't know how to fake foreign policy acumen (http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/27/10884085-romney-doesnt-know-how-to-fake-foreign-policy-acumen)

[Guest]

Previous post stated that other presidents make deals behind closed doors and that is true. But none of them were trying to destroy American or to enter into a dictator government. I sure hope people are paying attention to what is happening. I dont care for Romney but if he is my alternative he has my vote

[Guest]

The Maddow Blog - Romney doesn't know how to fake foreign policy acumen (http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/27/10884085-romney-doesnt-know-how-to-fake-foreign-policy-acumen)

Dont mind reading MSNBC, as long as it is kept in perspective.

Look, Romney, Obama, Santorum, etc...NONE are perfect and whomever is chosen to run against Obama will have to listen to all their errors rebroadcast...that is the nature of the beast.

Having said that, this is obviously one of those situations where she is taking a negative against her guy and trying to turn it around against the other side...a spin piece in essence.

What we have is a President of the United States telling americans one thing and telling another power that they should just wait until after the election and then he can change his stance and nobody can stop him. This, to me is very bad, AND if he is talking treaties, there is something called the constitution that might get into his way.

In my voting and political life I have probably voted Democratic more than Republican for the WH, but in this case, I am afraid of this man, as Clinton declared in 2008. He is in one term and we have his handiword before the Supreme Court....now, having him not facing the electorate any longer and hearing that he will make deals under that circumstance different from what is in play now is pretty darn scary. I have never attacked the man personally and find no reason to but his policies that we know of are scary...now we know he has plans we do not know of

[Guest]

I just don't see the concern over this. You guys write like its the end of the world or worse. Calm down he's a politician just like all your boys and girls. Geez, you would think some of you really believe that Obama is trying to destroy America.

[Guest]

I just don't see the concern over this. You guys write like its the end of the world or worse. Calm down he's a politician just like all your boys and girls. Geez, you would think some of you really believe that Obama is trying to destroy America.

I do not have any concern for this. Sounds like the US needs Russia to help with various fires in the Middle East. Russia is an ally but President Obama does have the election to worry about. He does not see Russia posing a nuclear threat against the US. Cannot see how Mitt Romney ever arrived at that conclusion.

"[T]his is without question our number one geopolitical foe, they fight every cause for the world's worst actors, the idea that [President Obama] has more flexibility in mind for Russia is very, very troubling indeed."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/27/russia-usa-medvedev-idUSL3E8ER6TR20120327

[Guest]

I just don't see the concern over this. You guys write like its the end of the world or worse. Calm down he's a politician just like all your boys and girls. Geez, you would think some of you really believe that Obama is trying to destroy America.

The problem is that Obama is "trying to destroy America". He doesn't look at his efforts to transform America as destroying it, but if you believe in free capitalism and wish America to remain so, that is not Obama's America.

Articles: Barack Obama, Euro-Socialism, and the 2012 Election (http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/03/barack_obama_euro-socialism_and_the_2012_election.html)

[Guest]

John Boehner Defends Barack Obama Against Mitt Romney Attack (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/27/john-boehner-defends-barack-obama_n_1382820.html)

[Guest]

John Boehner Defends Barack Obama Against Mitt Romney Attack (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/27/john-boehner-defends-barack-obama_n_1382820.html)

He did the right thing. He should support the President especially while he is overseas. I agree. Too bad that didn't happen in the years preceding.

That being said, it was a serious gaffe and one that requires an explanation...I still feel, not because it was Obama but any president who "implies" what he did.

I can recall a number of open mike gaffes, but never one that dealt directly with our foreign policy.

To make good use of this post, I would refer you to the link supplied by RICHIE....it is on spot, and while I suspect NONE of you folks who blindly support the president ever read anything critical of him...try it and read this link. I read your MSNBC link earlier :)

I gotta tell you..I really mean I suspect you folks do NOT read some of these links because all you want is validation of this man. If any liberal leaves a link here I will jump on it to balance what I am reading and I read many left leaning sites on a regular basis Problem is, you guys dont do the same.

In any case...it was a SERIOUS gaffe.....requires explanation and the Speaker of the House as a representative of the "other" party did the right thing in sending that message overseas.

[Guest]

I just don't see the concern over this. You guys write like its the end of the world or worse. Calm down he's a politician just like all your boys and girls. Geez, you would think some of you really believe that Obama is trying to destroy America.

waynet: Obamais just not another politician. He is he President of the United States much to my chagrin. His faux pas while addressing the president of Russia speaks volumes about his ability to handle foreign policy. He is weak weak weak. And he is so blind sided with his obsession in remaking America to Europe that he is sinking the country. Tell me why we would want to imitate Europe? Europe doesn't want to be Europe. Foe after foe are sitting back like cheshire cats not believing their luck.

Obama supporters are so busy fawning over the Obamas that they metaphorically are missing the forest for the trees.

and I will be darned if I will wastemy time citing example after example that are so obvious if each were a tree well Obama followers would be running into everyone of them. Geeeezzz

[Guest]

I do not see the Pres turning us into Europe whatever that means and as for froeign policy I like what he is doing very much.So I guess we must agree to disagree.

[Guest]

I do not see the Pres turning us into Europe whatever that means and as for froeign policy I like what he is doing very much.So I guess we must agree to disagree.

I am honestly not trying to be argumentative but WAYNET...could you please expound on what he has done in regards to foreign policy that has impressed you ??

I am honestly wondering what you refer to

Thanks

[Guest]

I do not see the Pres turning us into Europe whatever that means and as for froeign policy I like what he is doing very much.So I guess we must agree to disagree.

waynet: Okey dokey

[Guest]

I do not have any concern for this. Sounds like the US needs Russia to help with various fires in the Middle East. Russia is an ally but President Obama does have the election to worry about. He does not see Russia posing a nuclear threat against the US. Cannot see how Mitt Romney ever arrived at that conclusion.

"[T]his is without question our number one geopolitical foe, they fight every cause for the world's worst actors, the idea that [President Obama] has more flexibility in mind for Russia is very, very troubling indeed."

UPDATE 1-Medvedev says Romney's anti-Russia comment smacks of Hollywood | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/27/russia-usa-medvedev-idUSL3E8ER6TR20120327)

Russia is our number one geopolitical foe? What year is Gov Romney running in 1972, or 1952? Someone should tell him the cold war is over.

[Guest]

Russia is our number one geopolitical foe? What year is Gov Romney running in 1972, or 1952? Someone should tell him the cold war is over.

Not defending anyone...just recalling recent news...

Dec 2011



"As tensions between the United States and Russia increase over issues such as missile defence and WTO accession, Moscow is attempting to create a rift between Central Europeans and their North American allies, argues Lauren Goodrich.

Lauren Goodrich is a Russia expert and senior Eurasia analyst at STRATFOR.

"Tensions between the United States and Russia have risen in the past month over several long-standing problems, including ballistic missile defence (BMD) and supply lines into Afghanistan. Moscow and Washington also appear to be nearing another crisis involving Russian accession to the World Trade Organisation (WTO)."

Russia's plan to disrupt US-European relations | EurActiv (http://www.euractiv.com/global-europe/russias-plan-disrupt-us-european-relations-analysis-509835)


March 3 2012

"Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton doffed her diplomatic gloves after Russia vetoed a United Nations Security Council resolution on Syria. Calling the February veto "despicable," she laid at Moscow's feet the "murders" of Syrian "women, children, [and] brave young men."
Not to be outdone, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin railed against the United States for indulging its "bellicose itch" to get involved in other countries' internal affairs. And he vowed that Russia will thwart American designs in the Middle East."

A cold-war chill? US-Russia relations falter over Libya and Syria. - CSMonitor.com (http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Foreign-Policy/2012/0303/A-cold-war-chill-US-Russia-relations-falter-over-Libya-and-Syria)

There are many more, and I certainly hope that Romney is wrong...but heard this tune from this administration before..one being the ME, and it is worse than ever,

More directly to Romneys point on geopolitics....

[B]"Despite the Soviet breakup twenty years ago, only Russia still possesses devices of mass destruction capable of destroying the United States and tempting international terrorists for years to come. Russia also remains the world’s largest territorial country, a crucial Eurasian frontline in the conflict between Western and Islamic civilizations, with a vastly disproportionate share of the planet’s essential resources including oil, natural gas, iron ore, nickel, gold, timber, fertile land and fresh water. In addition, Moscow’s military and diplomatic reach can still thwart, or abet, vital US interests around the globe, from Afghanistan, Iran, China and North Korea to Europe and Latin America. In short, without an expansive cooperative relationship with Russia, there can be no real US national security.


http://www.thenation.com/article/161063/obamas-russia-reset-another-lost-opportunity

[Guest]

The article presents Obama proposing Russia wait until after his re-election to address nuclear disarming strategy.

I see two issues. One he has no limits to how, when, where and to what ends he will play the political "game". He is trying to avoid having a controversial subject in the lime light during his campaign. Does raise the question of what else is being suppressed to make him look good (or not any worse?) before the election.

Secondly he is advertising he will deal with unpopular policy after his re-election....because he will be able to do what ever he wants, as a lame duck POTUS, that accomplishes his agenda, whether the people like it or not. This tactic in and of itself should be of concern for Americans, to the point he is brazen enough about it to go on international record, telegraphing such intentions, should he be re-elected.

At least two red flags being waved in the face of we the people.

Read for yourself:

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/03/president-obama-asks-medvedev-for-space-on-missile-defense-after-my-election-i-have-more-flexibility/



btkBillie, I don't disagree with you. But how much of the way the POTUS is conducting the affairs of the White House is the result of a Congress having been mired for years in totally unproductive and vitriolic partisan disagreement?

We have a government that doesn't work and a President who has simply given up on the idea of investing any more time trying to deal with the partisan idealogues in the Congress. He seems to be going his own way, utilizing the considerable power and authority of the executive branch. Not only isn't he talking with the Republicans, he dosen't talk to the leaders of his own party either! Neither side has shown any evidence of being willing to compromise on their disparate ideologies to govern in the interest of the country.

In my opinion, Congress's inability and unwillingness to participate in the governance of the country is partly, if not wholly, the cause of what we see happening.

[Guest]

Billie, I don't disagree with you. But how much of the way the POTUS is conducting the affairs of the White House is the result of a Congress having been mired for years in totally unproductive and vitriolic partisan disagreement?

We have a government that doesn't work and a President who has simply given up on the idea of investing any more time trying to deal with the partisan idealogues in the Congress. He seems to be going his own way, utilizing the considerable power and authority of the executive branch. Not only isn't he talking with the Republicans, he dosen't talk to the leaders of his own party either! Neither side has shown any evidence of being willing to compromise on their disparate ideologies to govern in the interest of the country.

In my opinion, Congress's inability and unwillingness to participate in the governance of the country is partly, if not wholly, the cause of what we see happening.


On congress I agree with you...they are duds.

On Obama and his (lack) of communication with congress I do not agree and you sound like his press secy....this has been his song since he got elected....he bypassed them, INCLUDING MANY DEMS on the health care bill....He uses this "oh woe liine" as part of his blame everyone but me.

Even Chris Matthews recently criticized this president because he makes very little or NO contact, even with Democrats.

I realize and support your criticisms of congress, but this President is well known since elected as a man who does not want to bother himself with congress.

"Moderate Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine, who is retiring at the end of this year, gives President Barack Obama very low marks for his outreach to Congress. "Close to failing,” Snowe said, when asked by ABC News what the president’s grade would be on that issue.

"A president should be reaching out to many on the opposite side of the aisle, to many Republicans on a bipartisan basis," the three-term senator said, according to The Hill.

Snowe said she hasn’t met with Obama in two years. "I think it was during the healthcare debate," she said, The Hill reported. "There was a meeting on energy, a meeting in the spring of 2010." Asked who in Congress Obama is cultivating now, Snowe responded: "Good question."

Snowe's complaints echo those of many others on Capitol Hill — that the president keeps his distance from Congress, showing a reluctance to meet even with congressmen in his own party, let alone Republicans.



Sen. Snowe: Obama Gets Poor Grade on Relations With Congress (http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Snowe-Obama-Congress-bipartisan/2012/03/27/id/434033)

He just recently gave 1.5 BILLION dollars to Egypt, DESPITE THIS from the US Congress, not mattter how bad, still in the constitution is this body.."has restricted and, in fact, halted military aid to Egypt until and “unless the State Department certifies that Egypt is making progress on basic freedoms and human rights"

BUT he still gave them the money on terms that HE decided on

Not a good point to criticize congress on really, although I will support most