DescentBB

CUDA wrote:...and I see you are still ignoring my post and the responsibility of the president. Why? Doesnt it fit you narrative?

LOL! I'm not ignoring the post, I wasn't really paying attention because, you know, most of what you say is just noise. But just so you don't think you have caught me in some sort of trap, I'll respond to your nonsense...

CUDA wrote:Obama is responsible. His call or not. He is in charge. And with a decision of that magnitude he should have known. And if he didn't then he is incompetent as a leader. But any way you cut it he takes the blame because......... He is in charge.

Let's fist look at that the GAO is. It is literally Congress' Office of Accounting. Their job is to investigate how funds are used. That's it. They are not part of the Judicial Branch. They have no power to do anything but audits, and the scope of their work is strictly financial. (I know every time someone does me an injustice I call my accountant instead of my lawyer, haha.)

Now if we look at the actual document in question, we will see there is no mention of the President's accountability anywhere. It simply says, according to Section 8111 of the DOD Appropriations Act (2014) the DOD didn't follow procedure in appropriating funds. So I guess they'll just have to pay that back with some budget adjustments next year. If your complaint is that the DOD used tax dollars in a prisoner exchange without going through the proper channels then, yeah, TOTALLY GUILTY on that one (even though the law may be contradictory to existing laws, which happens from time to time). But that's not what you are concerned about, are you? No. You want validation that Obama is evil. Unfortunately, this document will not give you that.

Who is responsible for the prisoner exchange? Well, that still falls under the DOD because "it is impractical for either Congress or the President to participate in every piece of Department of Defense affairs..." Maybe it was Republican Secratary of Defense Chuck Hagel, that "libertarian-leaning conservative?" Couldn't be! He's one of the good guys. It must be that evil President blackmailing Hagel. After all it was President Obama who appointed him "along with the advice and consent of the Senate" so he must be responsible! Well, I guess the Senate is partially responsible too since they advised and consented the appointment of such a weak-willed SoD, but "Down With Obama and the Senate and Hagel!" doesn't really fit well on a protest placard and is a little confusing as a sound byte, so let's just round everything up to Obama. Yeah. That will do.

The question, after your well orchestrated obfuscation, is: Did Hagel do this on his own or did Obama order him to do it. While you try to deflect by focusing on Hagel, you conveniently omit the part the president may of had to play.

vision the sycophant wrote:"Who is responsible for the prisoner exchange? Well, that still falls under the DOD because "it is impractical for either Congress or the President to participate in every piece of Department of Defense affairs..." "

The dog ate his homework again huh vision?
Poor little Barrack, he just can't seem to get a break with all these people running his administration doing things he wouldn't have done. But then according to you he's just a spokesman/puppet so he is very fortunate to have such a defender as yourself so invested in insulating him from any responsibility that you try to alter reality in order to prop up such a defense.
Too bad he isn't someone important to be worthy of all your effort.

 

so let's just round everything up to Obama. Yeah. That will do.

thats because he IS responsible. You refuse to get it dont you. You willfully ignore reality.

In the military, in the business world. The man at the top is responsible. It's only in vision world where we dont see it that way.
the president knew of the trade and he approved it. He had the authority to say no and chose not to. He IS responsible

The irony of this thread is that eight years ago the roles would have been, for the most part, reversed.

I'd be somewhat okay with either tact: the "minions will have minds of their own" along with the "the bucks stops here," if we consistently applied it across administrations and parties. I don't really see that happening, however.

woodchip wrote:The question, after your well orchestrated obfuscation, is: Did Hagel do this on his own or did Obama order him to do it. While you try to deflect by focusing on Hagel, you conveniently omit the part the president may of had to play.

All of you, in your furry against the President, can't seem to grasp what I have said over and over again. These decisions are made by committee with dozen and possibly hundreds of players. There is no clear way for us to know who is more to blame than another without actually being there. In essence, they are all guilty and accountable to some degree. I tend to give presidents, all presidents, a little more leeway since I believe they are, for the most part, spokespersons. They put a face on America and give speeches. They represent an ideal. It is easy to say "that evil Obama did it!" but doesn't really capture how our country is run and how decisions are made. Blaming the president for everything is for simple folks.

vision wrote:
All of you, in your furry against the President, can't seem to grasp what I have said over and over again. These decisions are made by committee with dozen and possibly hundreds of players. There is no clear way for us to know who is more to blame than another without actually being there. In essence, they are all guilty and accountable to some degree. I tend to give presidents, all presidents, a little more leeway since I believe they are, for the most part, spokespersons. They put a face on America and give speeches. They represent an ideal. It is easy to say "that evil Obama did it!" but doesn't really capture how our country is run and how decisions are made. Blaming the president for everything is for simple folks.

We quite understand that presidents like CEO's of large corporations, need to have a groups of people to give advice. What you don't seem to grasp is the leader of a organization takes that advice and then makes a decision. That decision is wholly owned by the leader. If he decides where the results are good, he gets to bask in the lime light. If it turns out bad then the leader has to accept the slings and arrows of ridicule. In this case Obama screwed up and now faces ridicule for his decision.

'Bush lied, but he was just doing the committees bidding, so, although people died, he deserves an apology.'

Make that correction to your T shirts all you liberals.

vision wrote:

woodchip wrote:The question, after your well orchestrated obfuscation, is: Did Hagel do this on his own or did Obama order him to do it. While you try to deflect by focusing on Hagel, you conveniently omit the part the president may of had to play.

All of you, in your furry against the President, can't seem to grasp what I have said over and over again. These decisions are made by committee with dozen and possibly hundreds of players. There is no clear way for us to know who is more to blame than another without actually being there. In essence, they are all guilty and accountable to some degree. I tend to give presidents, all presidents, a little more leeway since I believe they are, for the most part, spokespersons. They put a face on America and give speeches. They represent an ideal. It is easy to say "that evil Obama did it!" but doesn't really capture how our country is run and how decisions are made. Blaming the president for everything is for simple folks.

then take away the President's Veto power if he's just a spokesperson

This thread is by far the most idiotic one I've ever seen on this board, and that's saying a lot because woodchip, spidey, will, and cuda have all been here for over a dozen years. It's almost laughable how insanely dumb this conversation is.

"Oooh....a US soldier was brought back alive from years of captivity"
"Well geez, I hate everything Obama so I can't even be happy for an American family that got a son back"
"Why not?"
"Because Obama bypassed an extremely functional Congress and I firmly believe in the rule of law!"

"Since when?"

Z.. wrote:This thread is by far the most idiotic one I've ever seen on this board, and that's saying a lot because woodchip, spidey, will, and cuda have all been here for over a dozen years. It's almost laughable how insanely dumb this conversation is.

"Oooh....a US soldier was brought back alive from years of captivity"
"Well geez, I hate everything Obama so I can't even be happy for an American family that got a son back"
"Why not?"
"Because Obama bypassed an extremely functional Congress and I firmly believe in the rule of law!"

"Since when?"

and yet you felt compelled to add to it, what does that say about you?

Z.. wrote:...
"Oooh....a US soldier was brought back alive from years of captivity" ..

If that is what you think the criticism is all about then of course it is a dumb thread...to you who can't understand simple commentary.

The fact that a law might have been broken in the pursuit of his making, and forcing, a really dumb decision on us is merely an opportunity to highlight his arrogance and disregard for a lot of important standards that he wipes his butt with in the course of being who he is.

It is what he did, not how he did it, that has people pissed off.
And since you recognize the down side of trading 5 Islamofascist leaders for one deserter you have to come up with that false premise to try and construct his defense.

Your fu is flaccid and weak.

Z.. wrote:This thread is by far the most idiotic one I've ever seen on this board, and that's saying a lot because woodchip, spidey, will, and cuda have all been here for over a dozen years. It's almost laughable how insanely dumb this conversation is.

"Oooh....a US soldier was brought back alive from years of captivity"
"Well geez, I hate everything Obama so I can't even be happy for an American family that got a son back"
"Why not?"
"Because Obama bypassed an extremely functional Congress and I firmly believe in the rule of law!"

"Since when?"

And I thought we had a rule not to deal with terrorists. I'm sure the family of beheaded Foley wonders why 5 terrorists were not traded for their son/father/brother. What the heck, lets just trade everyone the terrorists catch for 5 of their own. When we run out of captured terrorist maybe we can trade some illegal immigrants instead,

Will Robinson wrote:

Z.. wrote:...
"Oooh....a US soldier was brought back alive from years of captivity" ..

If that is what you think the criticism is all about then of course it is a dumb thread...to you who can't understand simple commentary.

The fact that a law might have been broken in the pursuit of his making, and forcing, a really dumb decision on us is merely an opportunity to highlight his arrogance and disregard for a lot of important standards that he wipes his butt with in the course of being who he is.

It is what he did, not how he did it, that has people pissed off.
And since you recognize the down side of trading 5 Islamofascist leaders for one deserter you have to come up with that false premise to try and construct his defense.

Your fu is flaccid and weak.

the question is. Was he really a captive?????

Such pessimism here. I'm glad I got old without turning into a sour old coot, haha.

vision wrote:Such pessimism here. I'm glad I got old without turning into a sour old coot, haha.

Obviously you're to old to even keep up with the news.

You guys spin your gears all you want. Hell, have the normal conservative circle jerk for as long as you want. I don't care what any of you think about it, the soldier is home alive. Obama didn't notify some nutjob like Trey Gowdy, not going to lose a wink of sleep about it.

Keep going guys. Heard last week that the US Congress and DOJ is going to start asking the conservatives on this board for all the answers in life, since you all seem to have them. Make sure to name drop the DBB so I can say I knew ya!!

Z.. wrote:?.. Heard last week that the US Congress and DOJ is going to start asking the conservatives on this board for all the answers in life, since you all seem to have them. Make sure to name drop the DBB so I can say I knew ya!!

It wouldn't do any good they already offered the same answer we have and Obama ignored them....

And when did we get this towel boy named z to serve our circle jerk and do I have to tip him?

At least make it a comical comeback...

I'm glad your answer was ignored--nothing really more to talk about here anyways. Soldier is home. You guys can get all wound up but it won't change the outcome; it's not as if they would send Bergdahl back to captivity. It's hilarious to watch you geriatrics act like whiny five year olds when you've been demolished on an issue.

As someone that tends bar a couple times a week to pay off student loans, I can tell that you're a guy that leaves 12% and is proud of that. So save your change, you need it more than I do!

towel boy keeps saying there is nothing more to talk about...but he keeps coming around talking more...
no wonder he has student loans instead of scholarships.