By John Lillpop ——Bio and Archives--June 4, 2011
American Politics, News | CFP Comments | Reader Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
The War Powers Resolution of 1973 (50 U.S.C. 1541-1548) is a federal law intended to check the power of the President in committing the United States to an armed conflict without the consent of Congress. The resolution was adopted in the form of a United States Congress joint resolution; this provides that the President can send U.S. armed forces into action abroad only by authorization of Congress or in case of "a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces." The War Powers Resolution requires the President to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30 day withdrawal period, without an authorization of the use of military force or a declaration of war. The resolution was passed by two-thirds of Congress, overriding a presidential veto.In ordering the missile attack, Obama was quoted as saying,
"I want the American people to know that the use of force is not our first choice and it's not a choice I make lightly," Obama said. "But we cannot stand idly by when a tyrant tells his people that there will be no mercy.”The obvious question: What about Iran and Syria, sir? Back to Obama’s most recent impeachable offense. As reported at the reference, Obama has decided to treat the War Powers Resolution with the same disdain he has shown for border security, enforcement of immigration laws, health care legislation, and other important issues:
In an effort to satisfy those arguing he needs to seek congressional authorization to continue US military activity in accordance with the War Powers Resolution, President Obama wrote a letter to congressional leaders this afternoon suggesting that the role is now so “limited” he does not need to seek congressional approval. “Since April 4,” the president wrote, “U.S. participation has consisted of: (1) non-kinetic support to the NATO-led operation, including intelligence, logistical support, and search and rescue assistance; (2) aircraft that have assisted in the suppression and destruction of air defenses in support of the no-fly zone; and (3) since April 23, precision strikes by unmanned aerial vehicles against a limited set of clearly defined targets in support of the NATO-led coalition's efforts.” A senior administration official told ABC News that the letter is intended to describe “a narrow US effort that is intermittent and principally an effort to support to support the ongoing NATO-led and UN-authorized civilian support mission and no fly zone.”Obama’s latest transgression makes clear his cynical mindset. Namely, If the law or resolution conflicts with Obama’s leftist agenda or reelection strategy, he simply ignores the offending law or resolution. In a sign that cojones may be making a comeback in the U.S. House, that esteemed body delivered a message to the renegade president reminding him of the fact that America is subject to the rule of law and the U.S. Constitution, both of which presidents are obligated to follow, regardless of how brilliant said president may be. As reported in part, the House took Obama to the wood shed a delivered a much-needed scalding to our wayward president:
Crossing party lines to deliver a stunning rebuke to the commander in chief, the vast majority of the House voted Friday for resolutions telling President Obama he has broken the constitutional chain of authority by committing U.S. troops to the international military mission in Libya. In two votes — on competing resolutions that amounted to legislative lectures of Mr. Obama — Congress escalated the brewing constitutional clash over whether he ignored the founding document’s grant of war powers by sending U.S. troops to aid in enforcing a no-fly zone and naval blockade of Libya. The resolutions were non-binding, and only one of them passed, but taken together, roughly three-quarters of the House voted to put Mr. Obama on notice that he must explain himself or else face future consequences, possibly including having funds for the war cut off.What rich irony! The recipient of the most fraudulent Nobel Peace award in history is chastened by the U.S. Congress, including Democrat members, for violating U.S. law pertaining to war. Rich indeed!
Support Canada Free Press
View Comments
John W. Lillpop is a recovering liberal. “Clean and sober” since 1992 when last he voted for a Democrat. For years, John lived in the San Francisco Bay Area, the very liberal sanctuary city which protects, rather than prosecutes, certain favored criminals. John escaped the Bay Area in May and now lives in Pine Grove California where conservative values are still in vogue.