US Oath of Allegiance will Now be All Benefits and No Responsibilities

Seems pretty damn effective to me, particularly in combatting intransigent kneejerk opposition.

 

Effective? Like being AWOL for 5 straight daily presidential briefings leading up to Benghazi attacks, attending one on the morning after... that effective?

 

WTF? If a person won't answer to the commander-in-chief then he shouldn't be allowed to vote for a commander-in-chief.

 

capable? Obie is all too Capable....Capable of turning the USA into a turd world "paradise"

​

 

This was another Obama executive orders that was exposed earlier last month.

Just Obama ignoring the Constitution and bypassing Congress who are the ones who are suppose to decide what the oath of allegiance should be not the President. Just like our immigration laws, only Congress can write our immigration laws and the Executive branch is suppose to enforce those laws. Obama sees it differently.

It's just more liberal political correctness dumbing down American citizenship.

The real reason why Obama did this, there are hundreds of thousands of Mexican nationals who were either were awarded amnesty in the past or were given immigration visas under family reunification who are today eligible to apply for citizenship but these immigrants hold their loyalty to Mexico not America. Now they can become American citizens and vote the Democrat ticket but still hold their loyalty to Mexico.

Then there's the Muslim factor, there are many Muslim immigrants who put Allah and Muhammad above loyalty to any country. And we all know how many times Obama has defended Islam while bad mouthing America.

 

You could have just posted this, and saved us all some time.

 

They have to register but they don't have to go to war if it violates their sincerely held religious beliefs. You can thank Hobby Lobby and an activist SCOTUS for that one.

 

But then you would not have learned something new

 

Ha! Hobby Lobby!

This was not due to any court decision.

 

Not this stupid stuff again.

Not being at the meeting, does not in any way suggest negligence or indifference. It merely indicates that the President was busy doing other things and could not attend a face to face - yet he sure as hell got the briefing book and his various aides and support staff ensured that he was informed.

You guys just love interpreting stuff like this as an indication of poor performance, poor judgement or lack of caring which it might be if not for the FACT that the face to face is not the measure of the effectiveness of the briefing process, nor that the content of each is not delivered directly to him.

But such bumperstickers are solidly entrenched in the minds of the more vehement and uninformed segments of the right.

 

That's exactly what it suggests. Another word that come so mind in describing Obama is bored. Bored to perform his job; Obama himself said so many times over. Do you recall Obama describing the best aspect of his job, rubbing shoulders with celebrities?

Another example of Obama being bored on the job is Usama raid whereas he was so bored to watch the raid going on, he could not take it and had to leave situation room to play with Mr. love throu the night. Mr. Love reported this, and I'm sure seen the interview with Mr. Love, whom we have no reason not to trust.

Don't tell me about Obama's effectiveness.

 

I disagree. Having written, given, and sat in on briefings before, flipping from a briefing book is no substitute for a face to face briefing. A briefing is interactive, it's not just a collection of power point slides. A briefer has to be able to answer questions and respond about the material being presented. You can't get that from a briefing book. Military commanders get their briefings face to face so if they have questions on what's being presented they can ask and get an answer right then. That's just part of the daily schedule.

I would think particularly a President like Obama, who came into the office with no military or national security experience, really needs to be briefed in person every single day. The fact that he doesn't' do that does explain a lot though.

 

Okay disagree. I have also written and participated and received regular briefings (although not on national security) throughout my career. And having having a presentation of the material in the brief can be convenient, but is certainly not necessary. As for additional questions that may arise from reading it, I do believe that the president can get those questions answered almost IMMEDIATELY.

Funny how this is an issue for Obama, yet Reagan hardly ever attended them. Neither did Nixon. this is a total non-issue.

Another partisan "interpretation" of a fact that demonstrates almost complete ignorance of the process they are pointing to, yet is "accurate" to the extent that Obama has missed more than 50% of the daily briefing MEETINGS. But of course the implication that he doesn't care or can't be bothered with the contents is specious and frankly pretty stupid.

 

So you like the thought of living in communist Russia, or better yet Nazi germny. Yet rail against socialism and communism. Go figure. If I am correct the last two wars were started by a five time deferment war criminal, and the other Daddy shielded him from any real duty or responsibility.

 

No you're not correct, as always. On your other point, WTF is the Oath if not to swear an allegiance to one's new home? It goes like "...to protect America from all enemies, foreign and domestic". I should know, I've learned and have spoken these words many a years ago, and back then they had meaning. Today? Not so much.

 

Considering the alternative in the last two pres election, I don't think that was possible...

 

No doubts whatsoever, Romney be a real president, showing up to work everyday to do something other than to rub shoulders with celebrities

 

Reagan doesn't seem to have been caught as flatfooted by the Soviets as Obama has been by ISIS. I don't think it's stupid to say that not attending the briefings shows a disinterest in the topic. That seems to be the case. Last September it was reported that Obama had been getting intelligence on ISIS for a year in the PDB before he made his JayVee comment. As I recall, he tried to blame the intelligence agencies for him not knowing what was going on but he apparently was given the briefings. Whether he read them or understood what he was reading seems to be unknown.

You may not have been involved in briefings involving national security but I have, and a novice like Obama absolutely needs a daily brief with a briefer. Unfortunately, he came into office thinking he knew it all as sure as any college freshman, so the results seem obvious to me.

 

No so sure about that... I trust mormons even less than I trust obama.

 

No, Reagan go caught flat footed by another group of Islamic terrorists: Hizbollah. And then he proceeded to cut and run.

 

Well if Reagan had been caught "flat footed" by the Soviets he would have been the most incompetent President of all time, considering that the cold war had been raging for 40 years or so.

and at the time he made the remarks ISIS was the JV of AQ. Of course, after the US military spent tens of billions of taxpayer $$ and years supposedly "training" the new Iraqi army, there weren't many people who thought that they would "run away" at the first signs of a fight.

Seems to me the US military is damn excellent in actually fighting and rather incompetent at occupation and rehabilitation of enemies in the 21st century.

As for your insistence that Obama "needs" an in person brief, that is simply a partisan assessment that has nothing to substantiate it. Especially since he knows how to read, has a bunch of people who are MANDATED to focus on these intell issues, and can have any question he wants answered within a minute or two since NOBODY refuses the presidents calls.

I don't recall him "trying to blame" the intell community. Perhaps you can provide a link?

I find it also rather interesting that you ignore the fact that St.Ronnie hardly ever showed up at them, in Nixon's time Kissinger was the briefee(?) and Bush jr. also had a poor attendance record. NONE of them were intell or military experts either.

 

Although true, it's not relevant to this topic.

 

Well Fallujah had already fallen to ISIS at the time Obama made his Jay Vee remark in that New Yorker interview, so either Obama doesn't know anything until he reads the papers, as he often claims, or he has no ability to understand how large and dangerous ISIS was at that time. In either case, it shows a real need to attend his national security briefings.

What is partisan about insisting that the President do his damn job? Because you support his party you feel comfortable about excusing such lax dereliction? Now that's partisan!

I don't know about Ronnie or Nixon's national security schedule, but you're dead wrong about Bush Jr. He had his briefing in person every day.

Oh and the link you requested:

Fury as Obama blames intelligence agencies for Isil surprise

 

As a natural born citizen, I don't have to serve my country as either a combatant or non-combatant. Are you upset that there's no double standard in the US forcing immigrant citizens to a higher obligation than natural-born citizens?

 

As a naturalized citizen, I swore an oath to defend this country from all enemies, foreign and domestic. This oath has now been watered down.