Wednesday, March 23, 2011

Should President Obama Be Impeached ?









The President does not have the 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.

-- Senator Barack Obama
December 2007

No one has argued, or even suggested, that Libyan government forces present an “actual or imminent threat” to this country. But in authorizing a military attack of Libya, President Obama has willfully ignored what he full well knows -- and argued. The quotation of his views as a U.S. Senator are bolstered by his years of teaching Constitutional Law, where he doubtless ran across the idea that enumerated powers in Article I are exclusively the province of Congress.


Congress declares war.


George W. Bush, his pig-eyed predecessor, committed the same wrong. But he had a colourable argument that Congress had authorized his action – provenance courtesy of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Act.

Today’s despot does not.


So what say you - should he be impeached?






2 comments:

Mister Parker said...

Skipping over the unlikelihood that Obama will be impeached, Congress ought to take it upon itself to debate the Libya question and vote up-or-down on whether to "authorize force" (our 60+ year old euphemism for "declare war") and if they vote no and our intervention continues, cut off funds, and if it still continues, well then, you've got a constitutional crisis on your hands.

But you over-estimate Congress's desire to be pinned down on the issue. Much better to play both sides of the fence and carp on cable t.v. than to have to defend a vote come election time.

Trust me, where undeclared wars are concerned, it takes two branches of government to tango.

Bellotoot said...

Jesus Christ! He's not even a citizen, and you want to impeach him!