ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
A hard-core group of liberal House Democrats is questioning the constitutionality of U.S. missile strikes against Libya, with one lawmaker raising the prospect of impeachment during a Democratic Caucus conference call on Saturday.
Quote:
Saturday’s conference call was organized by Rep. John Larson (Conn.), chairman of the Democratic Caucus and the fourth-highest ranking party leader. Larson has called for Obama to seek congressional approval before committing the United States to any anti-Qadhafi military operation.
“They consulted the Arab League. They consulted the United Nations. They did not consult the United States Congress,” one Democrat lawmaker said of the White House. “They’re creating wreckage, and they can’t obviate that by saying there are no boots on the ground. … There aren’t boots on the ground; there are Tomahawks in the air.
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
I posted up a couple more links in NUT's thread. Same story, different day. Same old intervention, except the people pulling the strings are different, the agenda is different, the end game is different, and the stooges to be instilled are different.
I posted up a couple more links in NUT's thread. Same story, different day. Same old intervention, except the people pulling the strings are different, the agenda is different, the end game is different, and the stooges to be instilled are different.
kucinich is calling for impeachment, that is what is different about the Dems... many times they do not just follow.
He's not calling for impeachment. I saw him on TV last night and he was asked about it. He wants no part of that. He wants to defund the operation. Remember though Kucinich is the guy who said he wouldn't kill Bin Laden. He is opposed to force, or death, in virtually all manners. That being said, it is good to see some dems voice their disdain for the process the president seems to have ignored with respect to congress. It's made me wonder where the limitations of the presidents authority are. Can he do what he did here, or is this indeed a violation of the constitutional process? I honestly don't know the legal answer to that.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him." Leo Tolstoy, 1897
Can he do what he did here, or is this indeed a violation of the constitutional process? I honestly don't know the legal answer to that.
That's actually a good question, and one I'd finally like to see go to the Supreme Court (however that would work in this case, and if the SC can be trusted to make a non-partisan decision). We've been involved in too many "wars that aren't wars".
__________________
We get what we deserve.
------------------ “On a day when they could have had impact players David Terrell or Koren Robinson..they took Georgia defensive tackle Richard Seymour, who had 1 sacks last season in the pass-happy SEC and is too tall to play tackle at 6-6 and too slow to play defensive end. This genius move was followed by trading out of a spot where they could have gotten the last decent receiver in Robert Ferguson and settled for tackle Matt Light, who will not help any time soon.”
He's not calling for impeachment. I saw him on TV last night and he was asked about it. He wants no part of that. He wants to defund the operation. Remember though Kucinich is the guy who said he wouldn't kill Bin Laden. He is opposed to force, or death, in virtually all manners. That being said, it is good to see some dems voice their disdain for the process the president seems to have ignored with respect to congress. It's made me wonder where the limitations of the presidents authority are. Can he do what he did here, or is this indeed a violation of the constitutional process? I honestly don't know the legal answer to that.
I think what he did is in compliance with the War powers Act. From my 1Am read of that while watching the Celts ( ), the language in that is pretty vague -- I'm guessing intentionally.
shirtsleeve claims in another thread that the act is unconstitutional, and I think many people feel that was, but I don't think it's ever been challenged. Neither party seems to want to go there.
Interestingly, Boehner is defending Obama (while wanting better reporting) while Kucinich and other further left Dems are criticizing him.
(I think what Obama did here is pretty similar to Reagan's actions in Grenada, though I certainly couldd be wrong.)
Liberal Democrats in uproar over Libya action
), the language in that is pretty vague -- I'm guessing intentionally.
Linear Mode
