House rebuffs Obama over Libya
June 24th, 2011
02:21 PM ET

House rebuffs Obama over Libya

The House of Representatives Friday rejected a bill that would have sharply restricted funding for U.S. military actions in Libya.  Earlier today, the House voted against a resolution expressing support for the U.S.role in the NATO-led military campaign in Libya.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney spoke to reporters on Air Force One as the president traveled back to Washington, DC from Pittsburgh.  "We think now is not the time to send the kind of mixed message that it sends when we are working with our allies to achieve the goals that we believe that are widely shared in Congress," Carney said.  But he insisted the move would not halt the U.S.involvement in the NATO-led effort.  "This is one vote," he said.  "[T]he writing is on the wall for Colonel Qaddafi, and now is not the time to let up.

(read more here)

Topics: Congress • Libya • President Obama • The News

soundoff (16 Responses)
  1. jean2009

    Talk about mixed signals the House is where our problems currently are based. We need to rescind the radical-right wing,in that body, who spend their time blocking any initiative taken by the president. They were blindly willing to follow George W. Bush into major blunders, and now fight this president who is trying to rectify those errors.

    June 24, 2011 at 3:15 pm |
    • Jay in NC

      Now you blame Libya on President Bush? Will Barry ever take responsibility for anything?

      June 24, 2011 at 3:32 pm |
      • jean2009

        Gee Jay...who said anything about Bush and Libya? I said "follow G.W.Bush into major blunders". Do I have to list them numerically on each and every post? i.e. Iraq, Afghanistan, costly tax cuts for the rich.

        @ Bill in Stl...for crying out loud to directly quote you ..".Oh by the way again, I ask if any conservatives have felt the need to demonstrate against President Obama"...and your answer is NO! Where have you been during the Teaparty rally invasion ... hiding under a on a remote uninhabited island? Are you vision and hearing impaired? Did you miss the banners, the swastikas, and burning effigies of Obama on the nightly news? it that you can't think of any other lie to pop on this comment section for rebuttal when you do post it better be a Doozy?

        June 25, 2011 at 2:30 pm |
  2. Liz Carter in Georgia

    Jean is NOT blaming Libya on Bush and you know it! She made the obvious argument about the attitudes, loyalties and respect that was afforded GWB, as compared to the evil, hateful, beligerent attitudes, no loyalty or respect that's being thrown at PRES OBAMA! And yes they ALL did willingly follow the BUSH lead into major blunders, with few backlash questions! The American People screamed and set up a few demonstrations, but the Bush Machine didn't give a d@mn! They went right on and did their thing anyway!

    June 24, 2011 at 8:00 pm |
    • Will from DC

      Liz just spoke the TRUTH!!!

      June 24, 2011 at 8:43 pm |
      • Fitnh

        Pirouz_2You write ” I don’’t think that we are egoistic and self-centered by nurate, the way supporters of the inevitability of capitalism suggest ”. Quite a lot of psychologists (even scholars in other fields on humanities) who are not experts in truly deterministic or quantitative sciences agree with you. I don’t.I guess if the brilliant Carl Marx was alive today he wouldn’t have tried to base a major part of his assertions on the “bad” oppressors and “good”oppressed people.Let us examine the issue closely. I think whatever anyone does, in long or short term, is neutral, harmful or beneficial to the “self”. The area we disagree is about the actions that apparently stem from “selflessness”. Actions such as being a keen and constructive member of the society, helping others or in the extreme case, endangering or destroying the “self”. (Such as instinctively jumping to icy water to save a drowning child , or in wars throwing Self on a soon to explode grenade). Is the last example a “heroic instance of absolute selflessness” or in closer examination is something different? The source of every single action is our brains which has evolved under the evolutionary force of Natural Selection. Evolution of humans and their culture under such force is fascinating to study and understand. I have read two engaging books from Richard Dawkins namely “The Selfish Genes” and “The God Delusion”. If you haven’t read them yet I am sure you are going to enjoy them. (These books, especially the second book have lots of hard words, so keep a dictionary handy). The Large Print of first book (384 pages) is downloadable free. Just Google search the title of the book + pdf to get to the site of the Selfish Gene. The Farsi Version of the second book is also downloadable free from > ketab sara > pendar e khoda.Studying these types of books shows you why butterflies (one of the tender symbols of selflessness in Iranian poetry) is attracted to candle light. By the rules of Natural Selection the species of butterflies who used the light of the sun and moon to move around or migrate survived. Some others in their group who didn’t evolve that way perished. That is the secret of butterflies getting attracted to candle lights not anything else conjectured out of the feeble imagination of buffelled humans.Natural Selection also secured the survival of human tribes who intertribally cooperated with each other and fervently fought with the neighboring tribes. In a similar process of the human evolution the tribes whose children were fiercely and blindly accepting and obeying the traditions, rules, beliefs and rituals of their elders got a better chance for survival. Story telling is the ritual of all human tribes. In nearly all the ancient stories you’ll find examples of the glorification of individuals who sacrificed themselves for their tribes and in wars, heroically gave their lives to save other members of the tribe. Put the above two factors of indoctrination and story telling ritual together then you’ll seel the links why a zealous soldier throws 'self' on a grenade.This and the important of Cultural Evolution' are long stories, I have other examples why we are born egocentric, duplicitous, hypocritic, pretentious liars.Dawkin’s books have list of rich references. Whenever I get the thirst to know more about “who we are’ I pick an Internet site from those references and enter the ‘wonderland’ of science. For me no other world deserves my trust but the realm of true verifiable science. Also now, for me the Iranian culture of becoming a poet rather than a specialist has to go to hibernation until full progress is achieved. At this time such a culture is poisonous and could delay the badly needed development of the country. Today in Iran if we have poetic psyche, science is where the captivating beauties abound not in “Shmm o gol o parvaneh o bolbol hamme jamaand, ey doust bia rahm be tanhai e ma kon”.As I had told you before, I am sure we have a lot in common, both in search of ‘just’ and ‘progressive’ rules that could take us out of these dark barbaric times. And you didn’t have to apologize for something which was not your fault at all, I should’ve warned you that I have replied to your commentAll the best.

        March 2, 2012 at 2:17 pm |
    • Bill in Stl

      Jeans points are falwed as are yours Liz. The 107th congress was in session when 9/11 happened That was a Democratic Senate and a Republican House. They would then include both Democrats and Republicans,,,

      The problem is not with the right wing or the left ... it is with the wing nuts on both sides like you and Jean...

      June 24, 2011 at 10:57 pm |
    • Bill in Stl

      Oh and by the way again I ask have any conservatives felt the need to demonstrate against president Obama.... No ... No One has done that ... Of course if they did you would scream racism and how disrepectful it would be... So if that is the case .... what were you liberals at he time?

      June 24, 2011 at 11:00 pm |
    • Alexander

      Humanist, Arnold, Kooshy, Castelio and eneyrove else;Regarding the development' of Japan, S. Korea, etc.:As I have said a number of times before, for me the best explanation of the global on goings comes from the cycle of accumulation of capital.Let's look at the whole global production over all. Based on capitalist mode of production, raw material is processed by the labour and is turned into a product of a higher value, and this product in turn could be consumed as it is, or be used as the raw material (to be processed by further labour) and turn into another product(of a still higher value).Given the state of technology and the demand of the market (which has a limit) there is so much labour which can be absorbed into the cycle of production, and the further technology advances the fewer workers will be needed to produced the same (or even more) quantity of the same product.The business owner, gives part of the gross profit to the workers (as the wage) and the remaining constitutes the net profit which goes to his pocket, and the ratio of this net profit over the original capital invested (including the wages paid) constitutes the so-called rate of profit . This growth that eneyrove seems to be so crazy about -in a capitalist society- is determined by this rate of profit.The higher the wages and benefits the workers gain the lower will be the rate of profit.Therefore if for the purpose of creating a wealthy middle-class (constituting the majority of the society) and creating social and political stability (no capitalist would want a riot on his hand in the middle of the core countries which dictate the global order and maintain his hegemony) a part of the gross profit is returned back to the workers as higher wages and more plentiful benefits. This will result in lower rates of profit, and as a result MUST BE COMPENSATED. How can this be compensated? Well the answer in my humble opinion is to extend the scale of the production by conquering new markets, new sources of labour power and new sources of raw material (ie. global expansion). Now, the over-all state of technology at a given time is a known constant, and the total demand of the market is also known. Therefore how many workers could be employed, based on the state of technology and the global demand could only be so much manipulated (sometimes by manipulating the wage of the workers, sometimes by conquering new markets etc.). The global population is well known, the progress of the state of technology and the decreasing necessary labour to produce any commodity is also a well-known trend. Therefore the question now becomes:HOW MANY JAPANS AND SOUTH KOREAS COULD WE POSSIBLY HAVE?If we give plentiful benefits and high wages to all global labour, what will happen to the rate of profit and the global growth?The bottom line is that for a few to prosper and become billionairs and to have a few 10's of millions live the middle class standards of S. Korea, YOU MUST HAVE BILLIONS IMPOVERISHED!If based on the threat of communist expansion (and after the debacle in Vietnam) the western imperialism shared a fraction of its profit with the workers in countries such as S. Korea, Hong Kong and Singapore for the prupose of show-casing in a desparate measure to prevent the spread of communism (once again EXCELLENT COMMENT HUMANIST), this does not mean that this can go on on a global scale.One must always remember the crucial word called population !Singapore and Hong Kong are tiny countries with the populations of 7 million and 5 million respectively; Tehran alone has a population of roughly 13 million!What are we going to do? Bring the life standards of all 6 billion people on the earth (from China and India to Afghanistan, Sudan and Somalia) to the level of S. Korea and Japan?!?!?If the core capitalist countries (ie. Western block) wants to maintain its life standards based on the current productive relations, FOR EVERY SINGLE PERSON WHICH IT RAISES TO THE LEVEL OF S.KOREAN MIDDLE CLASS IT HAS TO SINK 10 S OF PEOPLE INTO ABJECT POVERTY!

      March 2, 2012 at 1:10 am |
  3. Liz Carter in Georgia

    Bill, I've said many times, especially recently that OBAMAS' problems are coming from weak, scary Democrats too! Did you notice in my last post as I was defending Jean, I said they 'ALL' followed Bush...'? I know back during 911 the Senate was Democrat and the House was Republican! Bush wrangled them ALL in, didn't he? This shows me that the left is still afraid of the right! Now it seems with a Dem President, and since Nov, the same set up in Congress, the scary Dems are allowing the right to do it again!

    June 25, 2011 at 2:35 pm |
  4. jean2009

    LOL! MInd numbed.....What are you currently doing? Don't wet down my leg and tell me it is raining. I loved the "only reason I even respond" part of your drivel.

    Here it is folks...Jay the conservative is only posting here because....the devil liberals made him do it. That is rich....haahaa! I don't know if you can top that one Jay.

    June 25, 2011 at 2:42 pm |
  5. Liz Carter in Georgia

    'Have any conservatives felt the need to demonstrate against President Obama'?? Can you say Foxnews? MSNBC AM, CNN 60%, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Anne Coulter, Laura Ingraham, Sean Hanity, The right-wing pundits, contributors, and fearmongerers, The Teaparty, The GOP, a few scary, back-stabbing DEMS, The biggots, racists, haters, liars, and the grudgeful right-wing nut conservatives on this blog and others all demonstrate against OBAMA through their forums everyday, on everything, every chance they get!

    June 25, 2011 at 3:11 pm |
  6. geg

    i remember when the US was building allies to go in to kuwait,but when these same allies say join us against gadaffi its no profit no can do

    June 26, 2011 at 9:43 am |
    • Faik

      Dear Pirouz 2.0, Well thank you for confirming the point I made learier. It is my pleasure. Well thank you once again for confirming my point, we can see the generous “humanitarian” donations of lockheed martin, McDonnell Douglas and Dassault Aviation raining down on Libya. You are making a different point here. I spoke about the principles of humanitarian intervention, where as you seem to have a problem with the arms industry. Explain to me why you are fine with Gaddafi's weapons raining down on the Libyan people. quite contrary to you who think the British system is a “well oiled and well lubricated” democracy. Well, I hate to burst your bubble, but it is. If you could be so kind as to spend some of your valuable time explaining why it is not, I would be eternally thankful. But if you are too busy reading something else, then I totally understand, and apologise in advance for making such a wild request. Based on your version of pseudohistory You have to put aside your inferiority complex for one minute, and take into account the dire state that Iran was in in the late 19th/early 20th century. Iran sorry, Persia did not have a strong centralised government, its military could not protect its borders, its lazy, uninterested monarchy had sold off practically every single corner of the country to foreign powers, and it had an uneducated, disease-infested population. Reza Shah managed to put some order to the country, although not enough, as Iran was effectively invaded a few years later.The men you mention were victims of circumstance, and unfortunately Iran has a bloody history of assassinating its roshan-fekrs, or sending them into exile. This is not a problem confined to one specific period of history, this is a continuous curse that holds Iran back from maturing politically.Anyway, my original post that we are referring to described a brief time-line of foreign interference in Iran. You have managed to pick out a single point I made, rather than the whole context. Clutching at straws does no justice. you on the other hand have only slandered me. Calling you a Marxist is not slander. Why is it that Marxists are so sensitive about being called out for what they are? Otherwise, I did not slander you at all. By the way, who do you think you are to ask people for their CV before your majesty would allow them to express their opinion? And where is your CV anyway, Mr.-demand-is-infinite-in-a-capitalist-society? I am fully entitled to ask whatever I want, and people are fully entitled to answer/not answer. When people are bamboozled into saying that they are too busy to reply to something, and need to catch up on their reading instead, then they are fully entitled to do so. That is an answer in itself to be honest, but not a very convincing one. And there are many Americans here who make sweeping, neo-orientalist statements about the Middle East, even though they have practically no experience/knowledge of the region. I like to point them out.By the way, the infinite demand/finite supply problem is essentially the what is the meaning of life? question, but for capitalist economics. It cannot get any more fundamental, and as a result I wonder if you have actually studied economics. I have tried putting it into different contexts to help you understand, but to no avail as of yet. Let me try replacing the word infinite with perpetual, and see how that works with you. LOL…please Pak….you are not in a position to insult anyone’s intelligence on this site. I know, that is why I specifically said that I will avoid insulting your intelligence. Here is some advice to you: stop getting so aggressive. This is a virtual discussion, so throwing binary punches at me only makes you look frustrated, and I hate to wonder why you are frustrated.

      March 2, 2012 at 11:43 am |
  7. Liz Carter in Georgia

    CNN the word is R E B U T T not R E B U F F. I still wonder why didn't the HOUSE rebutt BUSH on IRAQ?

    July 1, 2011 at 11:40 pm |
  8. stevegee

    Is our economy recovering? NObama.
    Has unemployment improved? NObama.
    Is federal spending under control? NObama.
    Are illegal immigrants being stopped? NObama.
    Has our global militarism stopped? NObama.
    Is America better off than we were two and half years ago? NObama.
    Vote YES for Republicans in 2012.

    July 2, 2011 at 10:29 am |