Jump to content

Obama: The Message Is The Strategy


Recommended Posts

obama-the-message-is-the-strategyFlopping Aces:


Obama: The Message Is The Strategy

By: James Raider


Fifty years ago the brilliant and always challenging philosopher of communication theory, Marshall McLuhan, wroteUnderstanding Media, in which he exclaimed, “In a culture like ours, long accustomed to splitting and dividing all things as a means of control, it is sometimes a bit of a shock to be reminded that, in operational and practical fact,the medium is the message.” Scissors-32x32.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites



From the comments, a little ditty from Iowahawk:




In trying to explain himself when bombing foreign lands,
It behooves a modern president to keep his prose in hand.
One little slip in lexicon accounting for the rubble
Will end up in congressional investigative trouble.




I must admit the messaging is really quite atrocious
But if you say it soft enough, you'll always sound precocious,




In olden days they called this thing a stale three-letter word
But in this new millenium I find that quite absurd.
My unabridge-ed thesaurus is dog-eared through and through,
One syllable seems pitiful when thirteen more will do!




When you put it in that way it won't seem so ferocious.
Gargle first with Listerine in case of halitosis,


Um-twiddle-diddle-um-twiddle dee
Um-twiddle-diddle-um-twiddle dum


Unlike Bush adventurism, there's no "war" to fear
It's um... it's er... it's uh... it's mmm... let me be crystal clear
In days not weeks we cease it all, for "peace," or as you know,




A neologic tailor-made for media hypnosis
If you hear it long enough you'll drink until cirrhosis,


*Iowahawk reminds you: song parodies are the lowest form of humor

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Comments (27)

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:51 am

“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.” — Candidate Barack Obama, 2007

It’s rare that I agree with the chuckleheads at the New York Times editorial board, but I do here:


As the Pentagon gears up to expand its fight against ISIS, a fundamentalist Sunni militant group that controls large areas of Iraq and Syria, Congress appears perfectly willing to abdicate one of its most consequential powers: the authority to declare war. Scissors-32x32.png


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...


0Hot new legal theory: Obama has the power to declare war unless Congress objects



This story’s almost a week old but I stumbled upon it last night and want to make sure it doesn’t disappear. As the Times notes, courts have occasionally found in cases involving executive power grabs that Congress has tacitly consented to presidential authority over a policy matter by declining to oppose the president’s assertion of it.


But what if the president’s claiming a power that the Constitution explicitly grants to Congress, like, say, the Article I power to declare war? Can they tacitly consent to make that an executive power too, even though doing so would amount to a de facto constitutional amendment?


Answer: Maybe!


The House and Senate swiftly passed a rebel-training bill, but it did not address the executive branch’s claim about the 2001 and 2002 authorizations. Members of Congress have also introduced a flurry of bills that would explicitly authorize force against the Islamic State, but none repudiate the administration’s interpretation of existing laws, either. Scissors-32x32.pnghttp://floppingaces.net/most_wanted/hot-new-legal-theory-obama-has-the-power-to-declare-war-unless-congress-objects/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 1713481462
  • Create New...