The NYT ran an article about the whole Libya fiasco. No, not that we're involved with a war (or whatever ya wanna call it). It's the War Powers Act, and Obama's desire to do whatever the fuck he wants to do, the Constitution be damned.
Hot Air sums it up thus
The main issue appears to be whether or not our actions in Libya are "hostilities". Hrmph. If we can't decide about that one, how about we ask Libya if our actions are friendly or hostile.
Why doesn't Obama just seek the appropriate approval, and if he's denied, then stop? Is our presence in Libya so essential to preserving the American way of life that we MUST maintain a presence there? (And if so, why cannot Obama provide this argument?) Has Obama's ego grown so large that he thinks he knows best and doesn't have to give justifications for his decisions?
Could this be grounds for impeachment? (Note: I'm not asking if Obama should be impeached.) I'm not be snarky. I just don't know, and I'm not in the mood to research it right now.
Hot Air sums it up thus
What they’re basically saying here, without actually saying it, is that the president’s own lawyers told him that the Libya war is illegal and he responded by looking around for other lawyers who’d tell him what he wanted to hear.
The main issue appears to be whether or not our actions in Libya are "hostilities". Hrmph. If we can't decide about that one, how about we ask Libya if our actions are friendly or hostile.
Why doesn't Obama just seek the appropriate approval, and if he's denied, then stop? Is our presence in Libya so essential to preserving the American way of life that we MUST maintain a presence there? (And if so, why cannot Obama provide this argument?) Has Obama's ego grown so large that he thinks he knows best and doesn't have to give justifications for his decisions?
Could this be grounds for impeachment? (Note: I'm not asking if Obama should be impeached.) I'm not be snarky. I just don't know, and I'm not in the mood to research it right now.
No comments:
Post a Comment