While everyone was enthralled by the Hillary Clinton performance before the Benghazi special committee, there was something happening in Washington D.C. that will have reverberations across the world.Just when you think President Barack Obama couldn’t surprise you anymore, well, Little Lord Fauntleroy, pulls another doozy. Once upon a time the primary title of the president was commander-in-chief, but it now appears it has been replaced by spoiled brat. And yes, I sincerely mean that based on the actions of Obama Thursday.
As reported by Fox News, “President Obama vetoed a sweeping $612 billion defense policy bill Wednesday in a rebuke to congressional Republicans, and insisted they send him a better version that doesn’t tie his hands on some of his top priorities.In an unusual veto ceremony, Obama praised the bill for ensuring the military stays funded and making improvements on military retirement and cybersecurity. Yet he pointedly accused Republicans of resorting to “gimmicks” and prohibiting other changes needed to address modern security threats.
“Unfortunately, it falls woefully short,” Obama said. “I’m going to be sending it back to Congress, and my message to them is very simple: Let’s do this right.”
The rare presidential veto marked the latest wrinkle in the ongoing fight between Obama and Republicans who control Congress over whether to increase federal spending — and how. Four years after Congress passed and Obama signed into law strict, across-the-board spending limits, both parties are eager to bust through the caps for defense spending. But Obama has insisted that spending on domestic programs be raised at the same time, setting off a budget clash with Republicans that has yet to be resolved.”Let me be very clear, I know there are places where the Pentagon budget could be cut, but it is not our troops. Cut the defense bureaucracy. However, the $612 billion matches exactly what Obama sent to Capitol Hill as his budget requests. It appears Barack Obama doesn’t comprehend that the U.S. Constitution states “provide for the common defense” as opposed to “promote the general welfare.”
Seems that Obama wants to “provide general welfare” and is throwing a temper tantrum while playing with the national security of our U.S. military. What does his veto mean? It means our U.S. military has no authorizing document to send to the House and Senate appropriations committees for Fiscal Year 2016 funding.
Imagine this, with everything happening in the world, Barack Obama is holding our military hostage to his desire to expand the welfare state – that’s what this is all about. President Obama has his priorities severely confused at a time when the man he said had to go, Bashar Assad, was in Russia meeting with Vladimir Putin. And we continue to hear how Russia’s economy is failing — well, explain to us Mr. President how Putin can afford to deploy forces from Russia into Syria?We hear about obstructionism, but perhaps President Obama needs to understand what bipartisanship means. A statement from the House Armed Services Committee said, “Before vetoing the bill, President Obama said he would send the bill back to Congress, asking “Let’s do this right.” Mr. President, the NDAA passed the House by a vote of 270-156 and the Senate passed it by 70-27. A wide bipartisan majority in Congress knows that this bill already “does it right.”
The Fiscal Year 2016 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) did not fall short, it just failed to give the emperor what he wanted. Being a leader is not about having your demands met, it is about the ability to govern, not be given.
Here we are seven years into the Obama administration with a world on fire and Barack Obama is playing Russian roulette with our national security. Sadly, he is pointing the gun right at our men and women in uniform. As well, the funding for programs to support our military families is held up and y’all thought Obama cared so much for our military families?An issue that reflects the utter political nature of Barack Obama is this statement, “This legislation specifically impeded our ability to close Guantanamo in a way that I have repeatedly argued is counterproductive to our efforts to defeat terrorism around the world.”
But here, ladies and gents, is the truth as shared by the HASC staff led by Chairman Mac Thornberry (R-Texas) “FACT: The President has never submitted a plan for closing Guantanamo Bay. Despite years of campaigning and veto threats, he has never proposed where detainees too dangerous to release might be held, or what he would do with new terrorist captures. The NDAA requests that he submit such a plan. The restrictions on closing GTMO and transferring GTMO detainees to the U.S. are exactly the same as restrictions signed into law by the President every year since 2010.”
This demonstrates the embarrassing mentality of President Obama as he demands something contrary to what he himself signed into law. Furthermore, it is Exhibit One of someone who doesn’t grasp the concept of a Constitutional Republic — as opposed to a constitutional monarchy.
Obama’s veto of the NDAA was recognized by Putin, Khamenei, Rouhani, Jinping, Lil’ Kim, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, and the leaders of every militant Islamic terrorist group. Sadly, it was also seen by our allies, who are probably just beside themselves. And of course, Obama took great pride in this act by staging a photo op of affixing his veto.
As Fox states, “To side-step the budget caps, known in Washington as sequestration, lawmakers added an extra $38.3 billion to a separate account for wartime operations that is immune to the spending limits. The White House has dismissed that approach as a “gimmick” that fails to deal with the broader problem or provide long-term budget certainty for the Pentagon.”
Under normal circumstances this perhaps could be interpreted as a “gimmick.” But I do not call our men and women in uniform deployed and conducting combat operations in Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan a gimmick.
“Republicans lambasted Obama for prioritizing the domestic spending he seeks over the security of U.S. troops and the nation they protect. “This is the worst possible time for an American president to veto their national defense bill, and especially to do so for arbitrary partisan reasons,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said on the Senate floor.”
I am no Senator McConnell cheerleader, but his words in this case are spot on.
On Thursday the American people witnessed a commander-in-chief who refused to authorize his own military force because of ideology. We also witnessed someone who wants to be commander-in-chief who, with the current one, was complicit in abandoning Americans to die and then lying about it. Is this what we have come to accept in our America?