Obama tells Congress: ‘I Don’t Need Your Stinkin’ Permission for Libya’

Saturday, May 21, 2011

King President Obama sent a letter to Congress Friday suggesting the U.S.’s role in Libya is now so “limited” that he does not need to congressional approval.

The letter was a way for Obama to satisfy members of congress who argue he needs to seek congressional authorization to continue U.S. military activity in accordance with the War Powers Resolution.

Obama wrote:

“Since April 4, U.S. participation has consisted of: (1) non-kinetic support to the NATO-led operation, including intelligence, logistical support, and search and rescue assistance; (2) aircraft that have assisted in the suppression and destruction of air defenses in support of the no-fly zone; and (3) since April 23, precision strikes by unmanned aerial vehicles against a limited set of clearly defined targets in support of the NATO-led coalition’s efforts.”

From the start of the U.S. military intervention in Libya, the Obama administration has cited the 1973 War Powers Act as the legal basis of its ability to conduct military activities for 60 days without first seeking a declaration of war from Congress. The military intervention started on March 19; Congress was notified on March 21. Those 60 days expired Friday.

The issue involves Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, which reads in part: The Congress shall have Power to provide for the common Defense.

Obama’s argument is a lot like a drunk who imbibes and then crashes his car into a building. The drunk tells the judge, “but your Honor, I was only a little drunk.”

This entry was posted in International News, Libya, News, President Barack Obama and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Obama tells Congress: ‘I Don’t Need Your Stinkin’ Permission for Libya’

  1. Scott Dancer says:

    Obama’s argument is a lot like a drunk who imbibes and then crashes his car into a building. The drunk tells the judge, “but your Honor, I was only a little drunk.”

    Great simile! I find it laughable that Obama characterizes US involvement in Libya as “limited.” Consider:

    USS Mount Whitney (LCC-20), the command ship of the United States Sixth Fleet
    The Kearsarge Amphibious Ready Group
    USS Kearsarge (LHD-3), a Wasp-class amphibious assault ship
    USS Ponce (LPD-15), an Austin-class amphibious transport dock
    USS Barry (DDG-52), an Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyer
    USS Stout (DDG-55), another Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyer
    USS Providence (SSN-719), a Los Angeles-class nuclear attack submarine[Note 2]
    USS Scranton (SSN-756), a second Los Angeles-class nuclear attack submarine
    USS Florida (SSGN-728), an Ohio-class cruise missile submarine[45]
    USNS Kanawha a Henry J. Kaiser-class replenishment oiler[46]
    490 tanks
    240 mobile rocket launchers
    35 helicopters
    113 air-land attack fighters
    229 air fighters
    7 bombers
    120 Tomahawk cruise missiles at Tripoli

    Limited? As opposed to what? WWII?

  2. feminazi says:

    60 days and we’re still involved in Libya. Obama is such a damned liar. And the sad reality is, at a time of serious budgetary challenges, the US will be involved in Libya 60 days from now, and 120 days from now and a year from now. Once the US gets involved militarily anywhere in the world, you can assume it’s permanent.

  3. Joe in Colorado says:

    The Obama administration can try to parse Libya until the cows come home but as long as Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution is on the books, the congress must approves the launching military action. The size of the mission has no relevance here. I’ve read both Sen. Rand Paul and Rep. Dennis Kucinich have said they may go to the Supreme Court and ask for a ruling on whether Obama violated the law.

  4. Brigadoon says:

    Obama may fancy himself Winston Churchill but in reality, he’s just George W. Bush with a tan. Back in 2001 or 2002 Bush said, “If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I’m the dictator.” The difference with Obama, he is a dictator.

  5. ajihani says:

    Thanks for blogging this, Christopher.

    I’ve been all over the blogosphere this morning and the only cites I’ve discovered who are covering Obama’s illegal war against Libya is you and Firedoglake. It’s a sad day for America when any U.S. president plays fast and clever with the Constitution.

  6. Ypsilanti says:

    Using Obama’s logic, can we expect a “limited war” with Pakistan? Or how about with Syria. Iran?

    Skirting the US Constitution is not only wrong, it’s illegal and some scholars I’ve read say it is the basis for impeachment.

  7. Harry says:

    I’ll bet you $20 if Obama is reelected the US will be at war with Pakistan within a year of his inauguration.

  8. Chad Lebanon says:

    At issue is the 1973 War Powers Act which says if a president does not get congressional authorization 60 days after military action, the mission must stop within 30 days.

    You have to hand it to Obama: he’s one clever son-of-a-bitch. His letter to congress was sent on the 60th day so he knew good and well he’s on shaky legal ground. Legal experts familiar with the constitution are watching Obama carefully and some say we should prepare to say R.I.P to the War Powers Act.

    At least John McCain will be happy.

  9. Debbie Banuelos says:

    Letter, schmetter.

    The fact is, 61 days after Barry sent our military to bomb Libya, Muammar Gaddafi remains in power, thumbing his nose at the west and more importantly, at the USA.

    What have we accomplished? We killed Gaddafi’s son. Well, boo woo. If Barry is serious about removing the Libyan dictator from power it is going to demand ground troops, good old fashioned boots on the ground and for regime change, he must go to Congress or risk being impeached.

    Is Barry willing to drag this mess out until the election? I doubt it. What amazes me is, the Republicans have the cards needed to knock this dictator off his throne but Boehner and McConnell are so disorganized they don’t see the opportunity staring them in the face.

  10. fran says:

    Safe to say we can stop hoping for change.
    Apparently a Nobel Peace Prize recipient can be a war monger?

  11. Jolly Roger says:

    I don’t think we’ll ever get into a war with Pakistan, because US policy for 30 years has been to pick at the (perceived) weaklings, and Pakistan is a huge country with over 100,000,000 people. We’d have trouble dealing with them if we had a ground force of Vietnam size. Hell, even WWII size.

    I do think, however, that Libya might mark the swan song of the US as a contiguous entity. These are bills we can’t pay, and the Genius League of the Rushpubliscum Party are about to let the country go into default. Since we can’t ask the rich for any money, and we can’t pay the debts we’ve already run up, the Chinese might decide that it’s time to end their relationship with the Rushpubliscums and pull the plug on it all.

  12. Jim says:

    So frightening. How did we get duped by this guy?

  13. Mets Fan says:

    There needs to be a legal challenge over Libya. There are legal eagles out there versed in Constitutional law who should challenge Obama all the way to the SCOTUS.

  14. libhomo says:

    The Constitutional protections against reckless warmaking have been eroded for decades by corrupt Presidents in both parties. It’s good that people like you are speaking up.

  15. Americans Persecuted says:

    Hardliners racist Obama the great dictator his Attorney General Eric Holder Judge Timothy Williams and Chief Justice Michael L. Douglas, and great in persecuting Muslim families out of Las Vegas. They have homeland security come to your house and scar you trying to get you to shut up.

    They support rape crimes even when the lady came close to death and was on life support for three months having many surgeries to live. These crimes committed by Zionist terrorist Israeli Russian dual citizenship holder connected to Zionist Sen. Harry Reid and Zionist Rep. Shelley Berkley.

    They lie in court records denies all deposition for the victims side and punish victims for reporting crimes to the police following threw with the conviction. In civil suit they lie and protect Zionist terrorist then make you pay for the crime in which you and your child came close to death.

    We saw the Zissa Ramani Facebook shocking story of corruption

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s