A few weeks ago I thought that writing on Obama’s hypocrisies would be a good topic for my blog. Since then, I’ve been keeping my eyes open for things that I thought would fit well with that theme. Wow, I knew the man was a hypocrite, but I really had no idea what a monstrous task I’d set for myself. So, what was going to be one post looks like it’s going to be at least 5, probably more. Progressive Insanity’s first multi-part story. Please, don’t forget to join my blog so that you don’t miss the next ones!
Obama Then vs. Obama Now – Hypocrisies Abound
United States Representative Steve Stockman of Texas summed it up best when he tweeted “Senator Obama is going to be irate when he finds out what the President has been doing.” He hit the nail on the head with that statement! Senator and candidate Obama said a lot of things that President Obama apparently does not agree with. The list is long, and covers a litany of different topics:
- War/USA’s role in war
- Budget/Fiscal Issues
- Enhanced Interrogation/Human Rights
- Medical Marijuana
- Executive Privelage use
Send me your examples of his hypocrisies and I will try to include them in one of the next installment of this series.
War – How, when and if we should involve ourselves
Senator Obama gave a few speeches in which railed against President Bush for Bush’s role in the Iraq War. Always, his underlying reasoning was that President Bush exceeded his authority when he started the Iraq War. In December 2007 Senator Obama told the Boston Globe that “the president does not have power under the constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation”.
However, in 2011, he did exactly that when he took us into war with Libya. Colonel Gaddafi posed no threat to the United States. At least Bush allowed Congress to vote on us going to Iraq, Obama didn’t even bother taking the issue to them.
In 2002, Sen. Obama opposed the Iraq War saying that it “will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.”
What effect then would a completely unjustified war with Libya accomplish? Joel Pollak, writing for Breitbart said: “The same is certainly true of assistance to the Syrian rebels, which–aside from a desire to end the regime’s atrocities, which also applied to Saddam Hussein’s Iraq–has no clear strategic objective. In fact, entering late, on what is apparently the losing side, poses great strategic problems.”
Spying – How far is too far?
In 2005 then Senator Obama decried Bush’s Patriot Act, saying
“…And if someone wants to know why their own government has decided to go on a fishing expedition through every personal record or private document – through library books they’ve read and phone calls they’ve made – this legislation gives people no rights to appeal the need for such a search in a court of law. No judge will hear their plea, no jury will hear their case. This is just plain wrong. Giving law enforcement the tools they need to investigate suspicious activity is one thing – and it’s the right thing – but doing it without any real oversight seriously jeopardizes the rights of all Americans and the ideals America stands for.” -emphasis mine
In August 2007, he pledged to “end the illegal wiretapping of American citizens”. But, just a few short years later, he defends his administrations right to go far beyond how Bush’s Administration used the Patriot Act.
Senator Mark Kirk of IL said
“This act by the Obama Administration is clearly unconstitutional. The federal government has no probable cause to believe that all users of Verizon phones are presumed the aiders and abettors to international criminals,” said the Senate staffer. He continued, “The 4th Amendment requires probable cause and it does not exist, unless if we are now to presume that all Americans are potential terrorists.”
The Administration has insisted the unprecedented invasion into innocent American’s privacy was instrumental in thwarting a major terrorist attack. However, they cannot disclose any information regarding any terrorist attack that was stopped using these means. As usual, their reply is, in essence, “trust us on this” … until we find out something new, and they change their reply again.
Let the debate begin!
Obama’s hypocrisies are worse than Romney’s, and that’s saying a lot. I’d be very interested in seeing the hypocrisies that you come up with. Please, send me an email or leave a comment with an example of his hypocrisy and I’ll try to get it into the next installment.