Obama Does an End Run Around Congress and the Constitution to Hit Libya, Where’s the Anti-War Movement? (UPDATE)

Code Pink must still be under its rock.

Via Hot Air.

Amazing. Not that The One would try an end-around Congress; that’s been his policy M.O. ever since the GOP took back the House. No, what’s amazing is that President Present took sole ownership of this very risky mission instead of forcing Congress to share the blame by demanding an authorization for the operation. If he had gone to Reid and Boehner and asked for an AUMF, he’d have stood a good chance of getting one. Progressives would have been nervous about another adventure and some tea partiers would have balked at the cost, but Democrats wouldn’t want to defy a president who’s up for reelection next year and Republicans wouldn’t want to undermine their hawkish credentials. It probably would have passed. (As I write this, the British House of Commons has approved the UK’s airstrikes by a vote of 557-13.) And if it didn’t, even better: Then Obama’s completely off the hook for whatever might unfold in Benghazi as Qaddafi’s troops roll in. If 100,000 people get put to the sword, hey — go complain to Congress. The White House wanted to act but that damned Article I tied his hands.

Instead, what we have now are a few sincere constitutionalists and war opponents complaining about Obama’s power grab alongside a bunch of others who are grandstanding even though many of them surely preferred not to be consulted beforehand. Most pols don’t like to take tough votes and this one would have been exceptionally tough: Vote yes and you’ll be blamed for whatever evils emerge from the post-Qaddafi Pandora’s box, vote no and you’ll be blamed for greenlighting a Qaddafi-led massacre of Libyan civilians. Obama, in full cowboy mode, spared them that difficulty — and gosh, are they angry about it. Whatever.

Obama’s weak, indecisive nature resulted in too little, too late. He’s got no endgame strategy, and no defined mission. Military action in Libya should include the objective of killing Qaddafi. Yeah, I know we’re not supposed to target foreign leaders, but didn’t we have it out for Hitler in WWII? Does anyone believe we wouldn’t have blown him to smithereens if we had the chance?

The anti-war shills are sparse. A whole 100 of them showed up outside the White House the other day. Whoop-dee-doo.

Neal Boortz weighs in:

When Joe Biden was a senator, he argued that the president could not use force without prior congressional authorization unless it was necessary to “repel a sudden attack.”  Oops!  Barack Obama said almost the exact same thing when he was a senator.

Democrat Rep. Ed Markey never lets a good crisis go to waste.  He explains how we got involved in Libya because of oil.

The New York Times, Newsweek, Time, MSNBC, and the rest of the leftist MSM had unbelievable fits when George W. Bush sent troops into Iraq and Afghanistan after making his case to the American people and Congress. Their messiah doesn’t bother to do either, and they’re hiding under their desks.

UPDATE: There’s been a few laughable spurts of indignation, but on the whole, the Left’s outrage has been predicably lame.

The rotund moonbat Michael Moore has demanded that Obama give back his Nobel prize. ROFLMAO! As if awarding Barack the Magic Negro the long-since meaningless Nobel, wasn’t a farce to begin with.

Ralph (Dangerous at Any Speed) Nader wants him impeached.

Calypso Louis Farrakhan wants to know who the hell B. Hussein thinks he is.

This is very entertaining.

Related articles:

1 thought on “Obama Does an End Run Around Congress and the Constitution to Hit Libya, Where’s the Anti-War Movement? (UPDATE)”

  1. butt neckid

    there’s a war???

    hell no I won’t go…

    unless there’s free beer………

    and hot wings.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Social Media Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com
Wordpress Social Share Plugin powered by Ultimatelysocial