Obama Admin being sued....

2»

Comments

  • Smellyman
    Smellyman Asia Posts: 4,528
    difference between Bush and Obama in regards to parties.....

    Every lib here criticizes Obama every day.

    Every con is still licking Bush's balls......and he is the one fucked up EVERYTHING.
  • Sludge Factory
    Sludge Factory Posts: 976
    markin ball wrote:
    I am ignorant on this so please help me out if you can. I was put under the impression that Obama was in the clear because these actions were under NATO jurisdiction and different rules applied.

    Anytime a President makes an act of war, Congress must authorize it within a certain amount of time regardless of what other outside entities clear it. Congress was never addressed with the issue of authorizing the activity in Libya by the White House. Even though the White House writes off our role as one of support, it is still considered an act of war as it is supporting an entity that is engaged in more realized acts of war. The timeframe for United States activity in Libya without Congressional authorization has expired and still the White House continues to issue American "support" while ignoring the Constitutionality of the situation.
  • unsung
    unsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
    Why I’m suing the Obama administration over Libya

    By Rep. Ron Paul

    http://dailycaller.com/2011/06/16/why-i ... z1PZP2HTyf



    There is no issue more serious than war. Wars result in the loss of life and property. Wars are also expensive and an enormous economic burden.

    Our Founders understood that waging war is not something that should be taken lightly, which is why Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution gives Congress — not the president — the authority to declare war. This was meant to be an important check on presidential power. The last thing the Founders wanted was an out-of-control executive branch engaging in unnecessary and unpopular wars without so much as a Congressional debate.

    Unfortunately, that’s exactly the situation we have today in Libya.

    That’s why I’ve joined several other members of Congress in a lawsuit against President Obama for engaging in military action in Libya without seeking the approval of Congress.

    Of course, in 2007, then-Senator Obama spoke passionately about the need to go after the Bush administration for violating the War Powers Act — the very same thing he’s doing now. In fact, while speaking at DePaul University in October of 2007, then-Senator Barack Obama said the following:

    “After Vietnam, Congress swore it would never again be duped into war, and even wrote a new law — the War Powers Act — to ensure it would not repeat its mistakes. But no law can force a Congress to stand up to the president. No law can make senators read the intelligence that showed the president was overstating the case for war. No law can give Congress a backbone if it refuses to stand up as the co-equal branch the Constitution made it.”

    We are now taking Barack Obama’s past advice and standing up to the executive branch.

    Of course, the War Powers Act is hardly an improvement on the U.S. Constitution because it does allow the president to go to war without the approval of Congress. But President Obama refuses to follow this law.
  • usamamasan1
    usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
    One term President.
  • Godfather.
    Godfather. Posts: 12,504
    usamamasan1 wrote:
    One term President.

    1 too many :D

    Godfather.
  • gimmesometruth27
    gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 24,470
    usamamasan1 wrote:
    One term President.
    honestly, who is going to beat him?

    and i am being absolutely serious, so please give me a serious reply.
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • bgivens33
    bgivens33 Posts: 290
    gimmesometruth27 wrote:
    usamamasan1 wrote:
    One term President.
    honestly, who is going to beat him?

    and i am being absolutely serious, so please give me a serious reply.

    I think a Romney/Bachman ticket could beat him. It will all depend on the economy and unemployment 3-4 months before the election. American voters have an extremely short memory.
  • gimmesometruth27
    gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 24,470
    bgivens33 wrote:
    gimmesometruth27 wrote:
    usamamasan1 wrote:
    One term President.
    honestly, who is going to beat him?

    and i am being absolutely serious, so please give me a serious reply.

    I think a Romney/Bachman ticket could beat him. It will all depend on the economy and unemployment 3-4 months before the election. American voters have an extremely short memory.
    i think that ticket would not appeal to conservatives. mitt is going to have to run AGAINST his own health care plan when before he campaigned based on the success and merits of his health care plan. the american people are not stupid enough to believe that he really despises and is now against the health care initiative he passed and implemented.

    then again, he is so ambitious he might just fall on his sword to pander to the tea party and the hard right...
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • usamamasan1
    usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
    Ambition is a good thing.
  • gimmesometruth27
    gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 24,470
    usamamasan1 wrote:
    Ambition is a good thing.
    yeah, not according to shakespeare. look what happened to caesar....
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • usamamasan1
    usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
    edited June 2011
    You're probably right. It's better to not do shit and have the gubment take care of all your needs. Food stamps, obamacare, housing assistance...

    Who needs ambition.
    Post edited by usamamasan1 on
  • EmBleve
    EmBleve Posts: 3,019
    it's not really about war or liberation of any country, is it?? It's about U.S. dogmatism and what [x said] country can do for US..in the name/for the sake of whatever the benefit is for the U.S. 'superpower'.
  • gimmesometruth27
    gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 24,470
    usamamasan1 wrote:
    You're probably right. It's better to not do shit and have the gubment take care of all your needs. Food stamps, obamacare, housing assistance...

    Who needs ambition.
    clearly your definition of ambition differs from mine...

    :roll:
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."

Categories