Posted on 04/02/2011 1:09:40 PM PDT by Palter
bookmark for later.
I suppose this means it is a war after all...and not a humanitarian mission. Can’t have it both ways.
All wannabe Dictators need their very own war, don’t they? In this case, why not support our enemies while you’re at it?
The article is “moral equivalence” BS. The issue is what are the inherent national security powers of the president. The article doesn’t provide an analysis and misrepresents various facts.
Obamalini’s actions in Libya and HRC’s claim that the regime will ignore Congress in this matter are well beyond what previous presidents have done.
Boo hoo, fellas, boo hoo.
America was attacked on 9/11, which meets the War Powers Act criteria investing him as Commander in Chief in combating terrorism.
The power to detain American citizens as "enemy combatants" without benefit of a judge or specific Congressional authorization was a stretch on the President's part, in that the conflict did not meet the classical definition of a "war" in that no opposing nation could be identified. That left things more open-ended than they should have been. I really don't want to see that kind of power in the national government in this country.
As to the war in Iraq, Congress authorized military action. So in both these instances, President Bush exhibited at least some respect for both Statutory and Constitutional restrictions of his powers as President.
By contrast, the action in Libya is totally illegal. This leftist author just can't bring himself to admit it, needing the cover of parity to somehow portray himself as 'even-handed' in the eyes of his blatantly partisan readership.
Liberalism is a mental disorder. These guys will never get it. It does not matter what Party someone claims to be. They are all the same. They are all working for the same people with the same goals. Idiots! Useful fools!
NO BLOOD FOR OIL!
NO BLOOD FOR OIL! (its not about oil?)
NO BLOOD FOR PROTECTING CIVILIANS!
NO BLOOD FOR PROTECTING CIVILIANS! (oh what? we are bombing and killing civilians?)
THERE ARE NO WMDs IN LIBYA!
THERE ARE NO WMDs IN LIBYA! (not about WMDs?)
(well, what is it about? nobody knows?)
WELL UHHHMMM
NO BLOOD FOR SOME NONSPECIFIC REASON THAT NO ONE UNDERSTANDS!
NO BLOOD FOR SOME NONSPECIFIC REASON THAT NO ONE UNDERSTANDS!
BUSH IS A WAR CRIMINAL! (wait what? it wasn't Bush? well, at least was Cheney involve? what! Hillary!?)
Sure, he is partisan, but all people are.
Bush was brought up in the article to prove the point that Obama is basing his decisions under the status that he is the sole principle in deciding military action, as per Bush.
As for the Constitutional mertis of Iraq. Authorization of force, is not a product or use in the Constitution. Congress can declare War, that's it.
.
BILL AYERS is publically calling for the removal of all U.S. Military Forces from the Middle East.
OSAMA bin LADEN is publically calling for the removal of all U.S. Military Forces from the Middle East.
BILL AYERS = OSAMA bin LADEN
.
I knew it would finallY come out-—IT IS BUSH’s FAULT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Excellent summary and reminder!
ping
If congress can pass laws constraining the presidency then we would no longer have a balance of power. How ignorant are these libs?
Does this mean congress cannot intervene? No. It means congress would use its powers to fund or its power to impeach.
No need for 'laws'. The President has few powers, Congress is the one with the many enumerated powers, many of those setting the rules of the military, etc.
He says it is Lincoln's, Reagan's, HGW Bush's, Cheney's, ( Billary's) AND GWB's faults!
So assume congress decided to make the military disobey Obama’s commands by passing a law:
1. Would military obey that law?
2. Should they disobey the commander in chief or congress?
The short answer is the only control congress has over a president is found in the constitution, not in the statutes. It should never be different or we would have a president who was a puppet of congress.
Thanks for the ping!
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.