Posted on 03/02/2015 5:03:00 AM PST by LeoMcNeil
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is set to speak before Congress this week about the situation in Iran. The Obama administration has loudly opposed the speech, believing it undermines their position in Iran. On some level the Obama administration has an argument. Foreign policy is the domain of the executive branch under the Constitution. It is not a matter that really involves Congress, particularly the House which does not vote on treaties or foreign appointments. Those on the right are more than willing to watch the Obama administration fall apart over this issue. The larger question, which will go unanswered, is whether we on the right really want foreign leaders coming to our Congress to lecture us about what our foreign policy should be. If not, why does Netanyahu get a pass?
Part of the reason Netanyahu gets a pass is because Obama is so clearly wrong about Iran. The President is practically to the point where hes ready to announce a historic agreement with the Iranians. No doubt Iran will ignore the agreement and continue their nuclear program. Secretary of State John Kerry claims that the administration has earned the benefit of the doubt over Iran. After six years of Obama failures abroad, this President has earned the benefit of the doubt anywhere much less Iran. His deal with Iran is nothing more than another red line just begging to be crossed.
The riff between Obama and Netanyahu is so great that at least according to one paper the President threatened to shoot down Israeli planes if they tried to take out Irans nuclear facilities. If this is accurate Obama isnt an ally of Israel at all. On some level its too bad this did not happen. Most Americans support Israel, in fact its only the radical left that opposes the Israelis. Obama would have faced a massive political backlash here in the US. He certainly wouldnt have found support for a war against Israel. Its telling though that Obama is willing to go this far to protect his legacy. Keep in mind, Obama has been promising a deal with Iran since his 2008 campaign. Hes getting close to a deal and the only thing that stands in his way are those pesky Jews.
Anti-Semitic is on the rise here in the United States, almost exclusively among progressives. Obama has been influenced by the Muslim Brotherhood and other leftists who favor revolution in Islamic countries. In typical progressive manner, his contact with those who disagree with him is limited. He pushes Republicans and Israel away, limiting contact as much as possible. As such, hes insulated from their views and relies on the caricature of them created by the progressives hes surrounded by. Academics and northeastern liberals do this all the time, they have no idea what their political opponents actually believe they only believe the slanderous caricature of them created by those of like opinion. Obama has done this with Israel to the point that hes favoring their enemies and treating a long time ally as though it is the enemy of the United States. Hes doing this, in part, because hes intellectually lazy just like the other anti-Semitic progressives.
Ultimately Netanyahus speech isnt going to change much. Republican supporters will cheer wildly and vow to continue sanctions against Iran. Democrat supporters will cheer less enthusiastically for fear of reprisals from Obama supporting progressives. Opponents wont even show up and if they do theyll sit in stoney silence or if were particularly lucky theyll put on some ridiculous display of opposition that we can laugh about later. At this point sanctions against Iran are still in place, in theory the President cannot unilaterally remove them. Republicans probably dont have the 2/3 majority needed to override a veto to impose additional sanctions. Even if they did, this President has never been one to live by the rule of law. This speech is just a big dog and pony show. While Netanyahu takes the right position on Iran I keep coming back to the same nagging question. Should a foreign leader lecture our Congress? This is the only issue that makes me uncomfortable about the Netanyahu speech, otherwise its Obama threatening war with Israel that is cause for concern.
Those in congress who need it are not showing up and zer0 needs it. But none of them would listen anyway. They are Islamofacists and marxist buttwipes.
Silly question. There are no foreign leaders like Netanyahu.
Obama gets to speak once a year or more. How foreign can you get?
Absolutely...or would they rather rely on the press and Obama for crucial information concerning decision-making? I just wish it was question and answer Similar to a congressional hearing, with one exception, the question could only last 30 seconds...no congressional bloviating for the cameras.
Obama went on a world tour while campaigning for president....yet Obama says Bibi shouldn’t. Obama lectures Americans, yet Obama says Bibi shouldn’t. I see a pattern here that I do not like. Free speech is free speech. Congress can listen to anyone they want to, same as Americans. The only one/ones who don’t like it are Obama and his minions. I, for one, am taking names of all the whiners. I want a list of those never to listen to again. A list of those who don’t care for our rights of free speech.
Well, isn't that just fine and dandy? The administration does NOT have an argument on ANY level. Obama needs to be reminded that creating legislation is not the domain of the presidency like he has been doing by ignoring the Constitution and using executive action illegally without going through Congress.
The man can't have it both ways.
Too bad, Yawn Kerry couldn’t speak afterwords. ...the bambed village huts, poisoned food supplies and ravaged the country in a fashion similar to Jijis Kahn....
Pray for Bibi
This thread brings up two questions:
1) Why do I care about this question from some blog page?
2) If I did care about #1 above what would be my answer? My answer would be a third question. That questions is: “how did a foreigner become president of the United States?”
Yea, and this was a lecture. From the dude whose country is so sh*tty that his citizens are leaving in droves to come to the USA. And he dared to criticize how we were dealing with the problem he caused!
Notice all the anti-American democRATs applauding. They won't applaud Bibi, if they even attend.
I understand other foreign leaders have lectured Congress. Churchill did back in the day. The question is whether they should at all.
The Speaker is only third in line, not second. The House is generally not involved in foreign diplomacy, that is the exclusive realm of the executive branch. The Senate gets involved in foreign matters by way of providing advice and consent for diplomats and other appointed positions and by approving treaties. The House, as you note, is only involved in declaring war. It doesn’t appear Obama is prepared to ask for a declaration of war against Iran. Israel remains to be seen.
If “O” can sponsor Americans who are sent to interfere with the internal politics of OTHER powers... he ought to understand that OTHER powers can send spokesmen here to speak as well.....
The difference IS, when Israel sends their leader HERE .... it’s all taking place above board and overtly.
God only know WHAT “O” does by way of interfering with the internal politics of other powers. Funneling dollars to the domestic opposition of foreign leaders, fomenting discord, sending agents, etc.... is NOT above board. It’s called, ‘Fishing in muddy water’. Mind your own business, “O” or shut up and take your lumps!!
I agree that Obama is a hypocrite on this matter. However if we’re going to demand that he follow the Constitution then we must be prepared to have our side follow the Constitution as well. In that respect, foreign policy is the exclusive domain of the President. Congress has limited power to control the President’s diplomatic relations.
Keep in mind I’m not defending Obama here. I clearly pointed out that as a matter of policy I agree with Netanyahu. My issue is that I’m not particularly comfortable having foreign leaders lecturing our Congress. That’s true whether we’re talking about Netanyahu, Churchill, Merkel or any other foreign leader.
Lecture is inappropriate. Presentation would be more in line with what is actually happening, in my opinion.
Nope, the line doesn’t include the president. He is not in line waiting to be president.
In line are:
The Vice President
The Speaker of the House
An unwelcome ally: White Houses bizarre pique on Bibi invite
According to David Rogers of Politico, the speakers office had tried to coordinate with the White House on a prior invitation to Netanyahu, back in 2011, and got no response. More to the point: The speaker leads a co-equal branch of government.
He can invite or not invite anyone he wants, up to and including the president, who is only invited to give the State of the Union address before a joint session of Congress as a matter of tradition.
He likes to lecture.
Kristol on Obamas Reaction to Netanyahu Speech to Congress: What is Obama so Scared Of?
But the Obama administrations reaction to the Israeli prime ministers appearance suggests Netanyahus is more than just another speech. An administration that disdains the use of disproportionate force has been, to say the least, disproportionately forceful in its efforts to undermine Netanyahus message and discredit the messenger. What is Obama so worried about? What is he, if we may put it indelicately, so scared of? . . .
It’s better than having La Raza and millions of freeloading illegal aliens “lecturing” them all of the time. That crap is getting really old.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.