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?


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!