Obama needs Congressional Approval. Or Doesn't.

[The Rabbi]

Can this asshole make up his mind? First he wants to stage a military action. Then he decides he wants Congressional approval. Now he states he doesnt really need approval but he wants approval but if he doesnt get it he'll act anyway. Or maybe he wont act.
Is this really decisive leadership? No wonder he is the laughingstock of the world. Putin must entertain himself with Obama's statement every night.

Obama reserves right to buck Congress on Syria strike

 

[rightwinger]

Obama never should have offered Congress a say in the issue

God knows they haven't earned it

 

[Katzndogz]

No one is even wondering about what would happen if he asks for approval and doesn't get it. He can't go back and say he never needed it to begin with so a no vote is meaningless. He will have a specific prohibition.

Ordering a strike would be a criminal act.

 

[rightwinger]

No one is even wondering about what would happen if he asks for approval and doesn't get it. He can't go back and say he never needed it to begin with so a no vote is meaningless. He will have a specific prohibition.

Ordering a strike would be a criminal act.

Why would it be criminal for Obama to do it?

Was it criminal when Reagan or Clinton did it?

 

[TNHarley]

No one is even wondering about what would happen if he asks for approval and doesn't get it. He can't go back and say he never needed it to begin with so a no vote is meaningless. He will have a specific prohibition.

Ordering a strike would be a criminal act.

Why would it be criminal for Obama to do it?

Was it criminal when Reagan or Clinton did it?

it is crimunal for all of them. including lincoln. that tyrannical pos set the precedent. the legislative branch aint shit.
apparently all we need is the executive.. IE dictatorship

 

[Redfish]

the whole "going to congress for approval" thing is a political show, Obozo is going to ignore the will of congress if they vote no, he will blame them if they vote yes, and he is ignoring the 91% of americans that do not want us to get involved in Syria.

You on the left have shown yourselves to be nothing but unprincipled partisan hacks by supporting obama in his warmongering.

If a republican president was doing this you would be protesting in the streets------and you know it.

 

[rightwinger]

the whole "going to congress for approval" thing is a political show, Obozo is going to ignore the will of congress if they vote no, he will blame them if they vote yes, and he is ignoring the 91% of americans that do not want us to get involved in Syria.

You on the left have shown yourselves to be nothing but unprincipled partisan hacks by supporting obama in his warmongering.

If a republican president was doing this you would be protesting in the streets------and you know it.

The problem with Bush was that not enough people protested in the streets

 

[Redfish]

No one is even wondering about what would happen if he asks for approval and doesn't get it. He can't go back and say he never needed it to begin with so a no vote is meaningless. He will have a specific prohibition.

Ordering a strike would be a criminal act.

Why would it be criminal for Obama to do it?

Was it criminal when Reagan or Clinton did it?

Any president who goes to war without congressional approval when there is no US interest threatened, is violating the constitution.

a president does not need congress to respond to an attack or to stop a known planned attack on US soil or US interests. Neither apply in Syria.

 

[Redfish]

the whole "going to congress for approval" thing is a political show, Obozo is going to ignore the will of congress if they vote no, he will blame them if they vote yes, and he is ignoring the 91% of americans that do not want us to get involved in Syria.

You on the left have shown yourselves to be nothing but unprincipled partisan hacks by supporting obama in his warmongering.

If a republican president was doing this you would be protesting in the streets------and you know it.

The problem with Bush was that not enough people protested in the streets

congress approved and funded the Iraq fiasco. Bush did not do it alone. But you lies about recent history are noted.

 

[TooTall]

No one is even wondering about what would happen if he asks for approval and doesn't get it. He can't go back and say he never needed it to begin with so a no vote is meaningless. He will have a specific prohibition.

Ordering a strike would be a criminal act.

Why would it be criminal for Obama to do it?

Was it criminal when Reagan or Clinton did it?

UNITED NATIONS — U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Tuesday warned that any "punitive" action taken against Syria for an alleged chemical weapons attack last month would be illegal without Security Council approval or a sound case for self-defense.
U.S. Strike In Syria Could Unleash More Turmoil, UN Chief Ban Ki Moon Says

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Obama never should have offered Congress a say in the issue

God knows they haven't earned it

^ leftwhiner loathes the Constitution when a lolberal mutant is the one in the Oval Office.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

No one is even wondering about what would happen if he asks for approval and doesn't get it. He can't go back and say he never needed it to begin with so a no vote is meaningless. He will have a specific prohibition.

Ordering a strike would be a criminal act.

Why would it be criminal for Obama to do it?

Was it criminal when Reagan or Clinton did it?

Yes, it was. We have people in congress now who will act. I only hope we have enough of them.

 

[rightwinger]

Obama never should have offered Congress a say in the issue

God knows they haven't earned it

^ leftwhiner loathes the Constitution when a lolberal mutant is the one in the Oval Office.

The Commander in Chief is under no obligation to consult Congress on an air strike. It ties the hands of future presidents

Most of all.......why would anyone consult THIS Congress on anything?
They have shown themselves incapable of acting in the best interests of the American people

 

[Crackerjaxon]

Can this asshole make up his mind? First he wants to stage a military action. Then he decides he wants Congressional approval. Now he states he doesnt really need approval but he wants approval but if he doesnt get it he'll act anyway. Or maybe he wont act.
Is this really decisive leadership? No wonder he is the laughingstock of the world. Putin must entertain himself with Obama's statement every night.

Obama reserves right to buck Congress on Syria strike

“The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.” - Barack H. Obama, Dec. 20, 2007

 

[Crackerjaxon]

Obama never should have offered Congress a say in the issue

God knows they haven't earned it

^ leftwhiner loathes the Constitution when a lolberal mutant is the one in the Oval Office.

The Commander in Chief is under no obligation to consult Congress on an air strike. It ties the hands of future presidents

Most of all.......why would anyone consult THIS Congress on anything?
They have shown themselves incapable of acting in the best interests of the American people

“The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation” - Barack H. Obama, Dec. 20, 2007

 

[Redfish]

Obama never should have offered Congress a say in the issue

God knows they haven't earned it

^ leftwhiner loathes the Constitution when a lolberal mutant is the one in the Oval Office.

The Commander in Chief is under no obligation to consult Congress on an air strike. It ties the hands of future presidents

Most of all.......why would anyone consult THIS Congress on anything?
They have shown themselves incapable of acting in the best interests of the American people

please explain how killing people in Syria is in the best interests of the american people.

explain how spending 500 million dollars on missles to blow up buildings in syria is in the best interests of america.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Obama never should have offered Congress a say in the issue

God knows they haven't earned it

^ leftwhiner loathes the Constitution when a lolberal mutant is the one in the Oval Office.

The Commander in Chief is under no obligation to consult Congress on an air strike. It ties the hands of future presidents

Most of all.......why would anyone consult THIS Congress on anything?
They have shown themselves incapable of acting in the best interests of the American people

An air strike is an act of war.

The President has no authority to engage us in war without Congressional pre-authorization UNLESS there is an imminent threat to the country or an immediate need to retaliate for some act of war against us before Congress can weigh in.

Even if you accept as valid the War Powers Resolution, the foregoing is manifestly true.

Syrian asshole Assad may in fact be the shitsucker responsible for an atrocity against his own innocent people. HE may (in some moral sense) deserve to get bombed right up his ass. But that does not mean that the President in OUR Constitutional Republic has ANY authority to do that deed.

If there is no imminent threat, and if WE have not been attacked by Assad's forces, then military action against him DOES indeed REQUIRE Congressional pre-approval.

And yes. It is just that simple. And NO, that does not tie the hands of any President. The rule of law and the Constitution tie their hands. And that is as it should be.

 

[The Rabbi]

Obama has all the power he needs to order a strike in Syria. Reagan ordered an invasion in Granada and notified Congress like 2 days prior. GHW Bush invaded Panama and notified Congress a few days earlier. Obama could certainly order strikes on Syria without Congressional approval.

So the question is, Why all this business about consulting Congress? He either can or he can't do it. If he can do it, why get a vote? If the vote is no and he does it anyway, what was the purpose of the vote?

The whole thing makes him look weak and incompetent and makes any action we actually take nugatory.

 

[rightwinger]

^ leftwhiner loathes the Constitution when a lolberal mutant is the one in the Oval Office.

The Commander in Chief is under no obligation to consult Congress on an air strike. It ties the hands of future presidents

Most of all.......why would anyone consult THIS Congress on anything?
They have shown themselves incapable of acting in the best interests of the American people

please explain how killing people in Syria is in the best interests of the american people.

explain how spending 500 million dollars on missles to blow up buildings in syria is in the best interests of america.

I didn't say it was

This thread is on whether the President/Commander in chief has the authority

 

[rightwinger]

Obama has all the power he needs to order a strike in Syria. Reagan ordered an invasion in Granada and notified Congress like 2 days prior. GHW Bush invaded Panama and notified Congress a few days earlier. Obama could certainly order strikes on Syria without Congressional approval.

So the question is, Why all this business about consulting Congress? He either can or he can't do it. If he can do it, why get a vote? If the vote is no and he does it anyway, what was the purpose of the vote?

The whole thing makes him look weak and incompetent and makes any action we actually take nugatory.

I think it weakens the office of the President

Obama has the authority to act and precident is on his side. The decision needs to be his and his alone