BO gives our money to Palestine

H

Horn6721

Hook'em
BO thumbed his nose at Congress, again.
from link
"President Barack Obama has signed a waiver to remove curbs on funding to the Palestinian Authority, declaring the aid to be "important to the security interests of the United States."

A $192 million aid package was frozen by the US Congress after the Palestinians moved to gain statehood at the United Nations last September.

But in a memo sent to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, published by the White House, the president said it was appropriate to release funds to the authority, which administers the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

In signing the waiver, Obama instructed Clinton to inform Congress of the move, on the grounds that "waiving such prohibition is important to the national security interests of the United States."

The Department of State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs Appropriations Act of 2012 contained a provision that said none of the funds "may be obligated or expended with respect to providing funds to the Palestinian Authority."

The Link

Where will BO get the money since Congress specifically stated no money to PA?
What national interests?

When will the Dems in Congress say enough is enough
 
How many poor Americans could you feed with this $192 million? Instead we give it to a terrorist organization.

Freaking fantastic!
 
What about the humanitarian crisis here in USA?
We hear about the millions of people including children living in hunger
and the millions without health care
some would say our debt is the ultimate humanitarian crisis

so Congress specifically ties giving money. money we will have to borrow to give, to an action required by the PA. An action the PA does NOT take
and BO thumbs his nose at Congress and gives money we don't have away?
If that isn't the height of hubris I don't know what is.

Now trying to couch it in ' humanitarian" terms would be laughable if we weren't in such bad shape economically
 
Horn 6721, I don't recall your protestations when Bush requested a six-fold increase in aid given to the Palestinian authority (including 150 million in direct cash transfers) back in October, 2007. You may remember that Bush requested 435 million dollars in additional aid, on top of the 77 million dollars he had already requested. Of course, we were running record budget deficits back then, too.

So forgive me for saying that your indignation rings a little hollow to me now, 4.5 years later.

On the other hand, maybe you're finally coming around to a conservative ideology, instead of blind faith Republican fanboi-ism.
 
BI
why is everything with you people, but but Bush did it?

There are many things Bush did with which i disagreed

but you look like a fool for trying to say tie a relavancy to what is happening now when things are dire here to something that happened 5 years ago

One last question, had congress specifically refused to release money to PA back then?

Why must you supporters keep trying to justify BO's actions by trying to say it is like what bush did>


Oh wait I forgot You are an Independent>
rolleyes.gif
 
And this is the idiocy that is our foreign policy.

We are staunch supporters of Israel, vetoing every single UN resolution for Palestinians and against Israel.

We gives billions a year to Israel. We gave billions a year to Mubarak.

We give millions to the Palestinians.

We talk out of both sides of our mouth, and we take away from US taxpayers to give to people overseas when our own citizens need the money.

Clearly there is a problem...
 
BI??
Why does it maater what bush did 5 years ago? Are the circumstances the same?
Back in 07 Did Congress specifically prohibit giving aid to Palestine unless certain conditions were met .
I disagreed with many things Bush did and I still do
but Good God man
this is NOW.

Thefact that you supporters default to the " Bush did it" rant reveals what you really think about what BO is doing NOW
 
How about conducting military operations against Libya (an others) with zero congressional authority?

Or you might consider funding the government without a budget.

Passing giant bills with no time for anyone to read them.

Constant campaigning under the guise of governing.
 
Many prior Presidents have used/misued their war powers. Try again if you wish to make a criticism of Obama relative to prior leaders.

Funding the govt w/o a budget. What was he supposed to do? Shut the govt down?

Passing giant bills with no time to read them. You need to learn the basics of how our govt works. The President doesn't pass bills. That's congress' job.

Constant campaigning. Again, nothing more than partisan bickering.
 
Shiner:

My question was not "what do you dislike about the modern Presidency" but rather how has President Obama acted in a materially different manner than his predecessors.

As Perhams indicated, you have not provided any examples that could not apply in equal or greater measure to his predecessors.

On the contrary, I will give you one example of the Republican Congress that does show a disregard for democracy, and is unprecedented in its scope: the use of the filibuster. Since President Obama has become President, virtually every law passed by Congress has required 60 votes in the Senate to reach cloture and avoid filibuster. To be fair, this trend started with the Democrats under Bush, and following that lead the Republican majority has turned it into the default position for any legislation.
 
The President's budget proposal was defeated unanimously.

We sure do have a bunch of mean old republicans to force everyone to vote against the president's budget.

Then in the senate, Harry Reid won't even allow the budget on the agenda.

When did Harry become a mean old republican?
wtf.gif
 
I will assume from your prior two posts, which were not germane to whether this President is less democratic or more abusive of his power, that you do not have any actual examples.

I'll check in later to see if that has changed.

Thanks anyway.
 
Stay with me here, BBB, I will try to keep it very simple.

We are operating the government with no budget.

In operating the government, we are spending more than 25% of the nations GDP.

This is an abuse of power, usurping the democratic process.

The House of Representatives has passed a budget as per their duty and the Senate and the President have ignored the same.
 
It's sort of endearig how you are attempting to be pedantic with me. Nevertheless, you are equating irresponsble governing with "abuse of power" (I suppose that is at least a matter of opinion) and , more importantly, are using an example that (1) does not distinguish Obama from his predecessors who have had to rely on continuing funding bills and (2) curiously placing the burden entirely on a branch of government that doesn't actually pass the budget.

To stay on point, can think of any manner in which Obama shows disregard for the democratic process that distnguishes him from his predecessors?

I am sure there are some examples that you could at least take out of context to use?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. The Chiefs and that Swift gal. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top