Posted on 03/21/2011 9:56:26 AM PDT by Nachum
After studying the constitutional language governing the use of military force and the debates that the Framers had on the issue, Joe Biden determined that the Founding Fathers had vested the power to authorize even the limited use of military force in the Congress not the president---unless it was necessary for the president to act swiftly to repel an attack on the United States or to rescue U.S. citizens. Biden derided the opposite position—that the president could use military force without congressional authorization—as a “monarchist” view of presidential power. That was in 1998, however, when Biden was in the Senate.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
“Care to explain to me the constitutional authority cited for the Louisian Purchase?”
So...should we give it back?
So the ends justify the means? Why even pretend then that we care a whit about what the constitution says? Nothing I admire more than integrity. Just sayin’...
So should we give it back?
Simple question....yes or no....
A stupid and pointless question. You should have given up several posts ago. You are in over your head.
joey! They don't mean the folks who built the wooden frame for the US Constitution replica that hangs in your office....they meant the folks who actually composed it!!!!
Hang in there joey!! It'll all be over soon!
“A stupid and pointless question. You should have given up several posts ago. You are in over your head”
Painted yourself into a corner...
BUWHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
So I take it that you are OK with keeping the land west of the mississippi...even though you feel it’s purchase was unconstitutional...
Which of course means you are a hypocrite.
Now, do yourself a favor and buy a history book.
see you just don’t understand the liberal mindset yet ..
it is all bad when republicans do it, but okay when liberals do it.
you must not have gotten the presidential memo on that
I believe Obama has the power to do what he’s done so far under the War Powers Act. That said, it doesn’t make Biden less of a hypocrite.
Jefferson didn’t write the Constitution. He was our ambassador to France at the time.
Jefferson didn’t write the Constitution. He was our ambassador to France at the time.
However, I don’t see where an action against some pirates to keep shipping safe is in the same realm as declaring a state of warwith another nation, so I think his actions were valid.
That why the puppet master Soros selected him for ObaMao, his personal sock puppet.
Nope.
If Jefferson had not had Congress's permission, he would have been very embarrassed in 1805 when he had to get Congress to appropriate $60,000 to pay to the Pasha as part of the peace treaty.
“act for the Protection of Commerce and seamen of the United States against the Tripolitan cruisers” Passed February 6, 1802
The schooner USS Enterprise defeated the 14-gun Tripolitan corsair Tripoli after a fierce but one-sided battle on August 1, 1801.
Perhaps you can tell this ignorant soul which happend first?
Thanks.
So that means this falls under the Libya Is Different clause of the Constitution? What article and section? Jefferson was chasing pirates, who were menacing US merchant ships. Here, US citizens are not in danger. There is no vital US interest at stake here. The US has enough on its plate on two other fronts, Afghanistan and Iraq. If the US is getting into the business of fighting evil tyrants whenever they do some dastardly deed that the media notices, this will be a long 1.75 years.
“Definition of HYPOCRITE
1
: a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2
: a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings
— hypocrite adjective “
That about sums it up.
On May 15, 1801, the cabinet met and Jefferson put two questions to them.
1) Shall a squadron be sent to the Mediterranean?
2) What shall be the object of the cruise?
Answers:
1) Yes.
2) (The words following in quotation marks are in quotation marks in Toll.) The cabinet decided in favor of sending the frigates with orders “to superintend the safety of our commerce, and to exercise our seamen in nautical duties.” It would be characterized as a “squadron of observation”, with peaceful intentions. However, if it was discovered that Tripoli was waging war with the United States, the squadron would be authorized to retaliate against Tripolitanian ships and even to attack Tripoli itself.
Of course, as I said, when they arrived in the Med Tripoli was at war with the United States.
In those days Congress met only for a short part of the year and adjourned until the next year. Probably Congress was next in session around the beginning of February, 1802. But I must admit I do not know that for a fact.
I trust this makes the situation clear.
The public statutes at large of the United States of America, Volume 1
Second session of the Sixth Congress - November 17, 1800 to March 3, 1801.
First session of the Seventh Congress - December 7, 1801 to May 3, 1802.
Now Biden is channeling framers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.