More Political Foolishness
June 17, 2011 - by
Talk about political double talk. President Obama says, Of course, it’s perfectly legal for him to make war on Libya without Congress ever declaring war.
How’s that?
Because, Obama explained, his war in Libya is not an escalating war. So, after two centuries of believing the Founders wrote only Congress could declare war, now we find Obama can declare war whenever he wants as long as it’s not something called an escalating war.
Which leads to another prickly question: He’s spent $700 million bombing Libya and he’s about to spend $400 million more so what’s his definition of escalating? Obviously, it’s not spending a billion dollars.
Obama also explained his bombing Libya isn’t a war because there’s no sustained fighting. He’s been bombing Libya for two months. Isn’t that sustained?
It’s not a war, Obama says, because they’re no active exchanges of fire with the enemy. In other words there is only fire going in one direction – us bombing Libyans. Under that definition Obama could bomb the Bahamas and it wouldn’t be an act of war.
Finally, Obama says, this isn’t a war because he’s sent no ground troops in Libya. So he could bomb Costa Rica and as long as he didn’t send in the Marines that wouldn’t be a war either.
Bill Clinton wasn’t the only President who knew how to parse words.
There’s another ‘missing link’: Congress. Why hasn’t Congress been hollering bloody murder about Obama trampling all over its right to declare war?
The answer is politics. Taking a stand for or against war with Libya is about the last thing a modern day Washington politician wants to do. No matter which side he takes he’s sure to make some voters mad. So the powers that be in the House and Senate are perfectly content to duck and dodge and not argue with Obama’s far-fetched interpretation of the Constitution.
Parsing words and buck passing: That’s Washington politics in a nutshell.
More Political Foolishness
June 17, 2011/
Talk about political double talk. President Obama says, Of course, it’s perfectly legal for him to make war on Libya without Congress ever declaring war.
How’s that?
Because, Obama explained, his war in Libya is not an escalating war. So, after two centuries of believing the Founders wrote only Congress could declare war, now we find Obama can declare war whenever he wants as long as it’s not something called an escalating war.
Which leads to another prickly question: He’s spent $700 million bombing Libya and he’s about to spend $400 million more so what’s his definition of escalating? Obviously, it’s not spending a billion dollars.
Obama also explained his bombing Libya isn’t a war because there’s no sustained fighting. He’s been bombing Libya for two months. Isn’t that sustained?
It’s not a war, Obama says, because they’re no active exchanges of fire with the enemy. In other words there is only fire going in one direction – us bombing Libyans. Under that definition Obama could bomb the Bahamas and it wouldn’t be an act of war.
Finally, Obama says, this isn’t a war because he’s sent no ground troops in Libya. So he could bomb Costa Rica and as long as he didn’t send in the Marines that wouldn’t be a war either.
Bill Clinton wasn’t the only President who knew how to parse words.
There’s another ‘missing link’: Congress. Why hasn’t Congress been hollering bloody murder about Obama trampling all over its right to declare war?
The answer is politics. Taking a stand for or against war with Libya is about the last thing a modern day Washington politician wants to do. No matter which side he takes he’s sure to make some voters mad. So the powers that be in the House and Senate are perfectly content to duck and dodge and not argue with Obama’s far-fetched interpretation of the Constitution.
Parsing words and buck passing: That’s Washington politics in a nutshell.