OThuga . . . as many Presidents of the past . . .
will achieve whatever thuggary and tyranny he can get away with.
The law . . . is whatever the oligarchy decides it is and makes effectively stick . . . as they have been demonstrating for decades.
Well, there are a lot of conservatives and GOP-ers that have a big legitimate beef with the Marxist and on many counts.
But, I just don’t think it pays to “make a case” out of something that *any President* can do... and have done in the past. There’s a mentality that exists that says, “If Obama is doing it, it’s automatically wrong and has to be opposed!”
However, the problem is, we see that Bush used some of the same methodology and procedures. And in fact, in terms of this particular issue of a “treaty obligation” it turns out that prior presidents have actually *signed treaties* without them being ratified by the Senate (they may have been ratified later, though...).
I believe there is one treaty right now (can’t remember which one, though, unfortunately) that a President signed, but is *still waiting* to be ratified by the Senate (most probably won’t be).
This issue is *not* something new — and neither is it an illegal activity either.
—
BUT, the next question that comes up after that consideration — is — whether we should continue Reagan’s START treaty or not. And that’s quite another issue. I seem to think that we should, as I think Reagan had the right idea on it. But, my guess is that if Obama were to work for the continuation of Reagan’s START treaty, that many here would be against it, simply on the basis of Obama being the one doing it. If Bush did it, then many here would be for the *very same thing* — just on the basis of Bush doing it.
I’m saying that one has to look at the details of this situation and oppose things based on those details. And in this case, there’s not a big deal, that I can see — in those details...
That’s my take on the whole thing, in this case...
BUT, then again — another habit that some FReepers have is that if one does not oppose every last single thing that Obama does, then they are an Obama supporter. Now, I call that idea crazy... LOL...
Anyone that I would radically oppose (of which Obama is in that group), I find that rarely will you *ever* find that this includes 100% of what they do. There just doesn’t exist a person on this earth, that I think you can find that you oppose 100% of everything that they do. So, I reserve, even for the most radically opposite of me, at least 10% that I figure will fall into agreement with me, just as a matter of my understanding of how these things work...