Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The 60 days is up on Friday. No need for any action until Saturday.
Instead of criticizing someone elses actions, maybe you should check your own.
Nope. Military action is not even allowed unless we are attacked or there is a threat of immediate attack.
This whole 60 clock requirement is red herring.
The military action was illegal from the very start.
Again from the WPR
Section 1541(c) explicitly states that the war-making rights conferred by the statute apply only to "a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."
let's give credit for the bipartisan efforts being made to stop this "extra" war.
it was a democrat, brad sherman, who introduced this amendment, and it received support from both parties in the house. if i remember correctly, brad sherman was one of the few who opposed the bank bailout previously, both the failed bank bailout vote and the passed bank bailout vote.
ron paul also voted against the bank bailouts.
there are still people in congress who are looking out for us, but they are hard to find anymore. let me add something interesting that brad sherman said because i think it is important:
Sherman also pointed out that the U.S. has seized $33 billion from Muammar Gaddafi's American investments, but instead of using that money to fund the war, the government is using taxpayer money.
The fact of the matter is most GOP voting against Obama in this matter are voting yet again for partisan reasons....not some duty to uphold the Constitution and the law. Only a handful of Ron Paul types have a clear record of abiding by the law in this matter among the GOP. Then there are those like Boehner that are secretly in agreement with Obama, couldn't care less about breaking the law, and love aggressive military action...they are voting their true beliefs....Ironic.
Nice assumption. You have no idea how they would vote on authorization.
If I recall correctly Bush got authorization from congress for Afghanistan and Iraq.
As I said in the following post. Dems have an equal share of law breakers.
Some are voting for partisan reasons to help Obama, some just flat out agree with Obama, they couldn't care less about their duty to uphold the law, and love aggressive military action even if it is illegal.
Nice excuse but I'll call BS. IF Obama's violated the WPA it's already done, seems Boehner's just another politician posturing for the cameras, grabbing a little attention, and promptly forgetting what he was talking about.
let me add something interesting that brad sherman said because i think it is important:
Sherman also pointed out that the U.S. has seized $33 billion from Muammar Gaddafi's American investments, but instead of using that money to fund the war, the government is using taxpayer money.
how about that?
people might want to take the time to find out why we are actually in libya, and why they are betting against greece. i may not agree with everything keiser says, but he definitely explains what is going on now:
remember goldman sachs was doing business with kaddafi and libya, and as as matt taibbi puts it:
Libya was eager to join the big leagues of finance, and its investors were “awed” by an Arabic-speaking Goldman executive who urged them into an options deal that bet on the fortunes of companies including Citigroup Inc. C +0.23% , Allianz DE:ALV -1.33% and Italy’s UniCredit IT:UCG +2.08% .
The LIA, Libya’s sovereign wealth fund, was charmed by the demonstration and decided to go all-in with a $1.5 billion bet. Goldman very quickly lost them 98 percent of that money.
I never knew it was even possible to lose 98 percent of an investment that quickly. If you sent a blind, three-legged donkey into Caesar’s palace with $1.5 billion in chips, it could probably stay solvent longer than this options package Goldman sold to Qaddafi.
Last edited by floridasandy; 06-15-2011 at 05:03 PM..
No. "Congress" isn't suing Obama. If Congress gave a damn they could shut this thing down next week.
15 members out of 435 are suing Obama.
You can't get the simplest things correct.
Of course Congress is suing him. The suit is being file by 15 Congressman. I suppose the "football players" aren't suing the NFL. It's only Payton Manning. Sheesh. Use your head.
Nah - if Bush did something like this it would be an unjustified war. For Obama it's just a harmless diversion to keep him amused between golf games.
If Bush did this the libertarians would be in the streets smashing up storefronts of small businesses.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Congress is suing Obama.
