ProPublica

Journalism in the Public Interest

Cancel

What Exactly Is the War Powers Act and Is Obama Really Violating It?

The Obama administration is certainly sidestepping the controversial law known as the War Powers Act, but in doing so he’s following a well-worn path.

« Return to Story

Sort by: Oldest Newest  <  1 2 3 >

Alan M. Dube

June 25, 2011, 8:09 a.m.

“...would not Obama have more credibility, authority, validity than Bush?”

Why would he? Although W. snuck into the presidency in 2000 he WAS re-elected in 2004 without any election shenanigans (that we know of). Obviously We The People wanted him. Christ, maybe he would have won MORE terms if not for the 22nd Amendment. Obama won the presidency solely due to the quality (or lack thereof) of the competition in 2008.

I’m really tired of every political discussion being reduced to left vs. right or, especially, W. vs. Obama. The question that should be asked is “Why doesn’t the presidency itself have more credibility, authority and validity?”. We The People have to make it so.

Let’s start by dumping the republicrats. There are enough political organizations already that could form a coalition and back third-party candidates. Hell, the coalition could back a NEW third party. This would be a virtual requirement for affecting more substantial changes later.

Long term, I believe we should limit top office-holders to one term only. That way, no president would waste time away from the job worrying about re-election. I envision a single six year term. Obviously, lesser office holders would be allowed to run for a higher office. Legislators- same deal. Move up at the end of the term or move out. Let someone else give it a try. Maybe after a specified time period, say two terms out, the individual could run for office again.

I’ve heard the argument that this would prevent talented people from staying in government. Maybe so but it would also make it difficult for any individual or group to exert undue influence over other legislators or, indeed, over another branch of the government. Any group would have a difficult time establishing and maintaining a power base. The cast of characters would be constantly changing.

Anyway, I’m open to suggestions. The status quo is unacceptable.

Innocent Victim

June 25, 2011, 9:23 a.m.

@John:  Democracy has always suffered from the gullibility of the “People”, whom you elevate with a capital letter P.  In the day of Pericles, he inspired them to war against Sparta, which led to the destruction of Athens.  People really do not wish to govern themselves.  It takes too much time and effort.  They want a leader whom they feel they can trust.  He is most often a conceited ass much like our recent and current presidents. 

Our system is far from a democracy, in which one can call the elected president,  the people’s choice.  The same two parties that control the federal government also control the state governments.  Therefore the ballots are effectively restricted to the two of them.  It is very costly, involving much litigation, to get on the ballot, if you are a third party.  We also have a winner-take-all rule and no run-offs.  To call such a system a democracy is a fantasy.  Both our major parties are war parties, parties of the corporations that profit from war and the exploitation of others.  Just look at what we have done to Haiti !

I don’t know of any remedy but a revolutionary change.  Change within our system is not possible.  Revolutions do not bring good results for decades afterwards, sometimes never.

Mark

June 25, 2011, 3:09 p.m.

What exactly is our commitment to NATO?
If we are signed on to assist when NATO asks.
What other options do we have?
Was all this not taken into account when NATO was formed?
Is NATO still relevent now that the EU exists.

Innocent Victim

June 25, 2011, 3:39 p.m.

According to what I have read,  a SCOTUS decision in the 1950s ruled that our highest law is the US Constitution.  This is clouded somewhat by treaties, which are our laws just as much as our tax laws, for example.  Thus, if we have ratified a treaty that commits us to military action on the vote of the Security Council or NATO, then we made that commitment when we ratified the treaty.  The Security Council is different from NATO, because we have a veto in the former.  In NATO, I don’t know if our sovereignty takes the form of a veto, but that is not so important since we control any decision by NATO as the most powerful military power.

Realistically, we use NATO as a cover for doing what we want to do most of the time.  In Afghanistan, we are the instigating power for war, and NATO obliges us with small numbers of forces.  In Lybia, I read that the Europeans, France and others were the ardent warriors seeking US military intervention, probably because they get much of their oil from Lybia, whereas we get ours from Saudi Arabia.  We felt obliged to follow the wishes of the Europeans because they have followed us, to their regret, in the past. 

I think that’s the story.

kim palmer

June 28, 2011, 6:55 p.m.

Mr Obama is clearly using Mr Clintons definitons on many terms and you know that MR Clinton’s Terms always changed on whether or not they would land him in prison or not. I also firmly believe that the ICC will change definitons to change the rules to fit what the pentegon ,NATO and CIA say occurred in libyia and clearly will not represent one truth about the situation.

kim palmer

July 3, 2011, 11:24 a.m.

There is certainly a common plan to circumvent the war powers act. The higher up the political level one goes the more the complicity to circumvent this war act increases. I also firm believe that there is a common plan to distort what is defined as military targets to locations that have no connection to military uses in libyia. It would also appear that there is a common plan to allow gross deviation from the UN reolutions in this matter to tolerate anything that NATO,PEntegon Nad CIA want done

kim palmer

July 5, 2011, 10:12 a.m.

The vote to continue the libyia operation is coming up and qquite frankly to continue this operation is to continue to support an illegal interpretation of the war powers act. In addition, continuing funding for this is providing monies for a gross violation of the law. This whole eposide is rather like what goes on at gutanamo bay where the highest law makers know the law but all agree to violate it to achieve the outcome they desire.

kim palmer

July 5, 2011, 3 p.m.

While we all believe that we have a functional democracy we really just give lip service to the word and we are o better than the man MR gaddfi that we call a dictator. The one difference between the USA and Libyia is that Libyia lacks democratic laws and we have the laws nut blatently ignore them. While we trult believe that we have a system of check and balances that prevent the abuse of power we truly do not. When the government wants to carry out those policies that violate legal rights they gather together the FBI,CIA,Congress,and the Senate and secretly agree to violate fundamental laws and this is exactly what we are attcking libyia for

kim palmer

July 6, 2011, 2:25 p.m.

Mr Hussein Obama is certainly writting a new version not only of the war power act but of the constitution in general that is so radical,delusional, and distorted that I am sure the founding forefathers of this country are rolling over in their graves. At the very same time Washington wants to foam at the mouth that they are in fiscal distress and if this is true why are they continuing to fund an illegal interpretation of the war powers acts.

Alan M. Dube

July 6, 2011, 3:52 p.m.

To: kim palmer

First of all- show a little respect. It’s PRESIDENT Obama. Maybe you have reasons for not liking him but it’s childish for you, or for anyone, to refuse to refer to him using the title that he has earned. He IS our President- get over it.

Secondly, the proposed changes to the War Powers Act came out of the Senate Armed Services Committee. That’s right- this is the work of our very own Senate, not the executive branch. President Obama is on record that he DOES NOT WANT the added powers contained in the so-called “War Without End” provision. I suggest you look it up to see who the real villains are.

As far as our forefathers rolling in their graves- I’m sure they would be if they could witness how little the electorate knows about how our government operates and how Constitutional powers are apportioned between the three branches of our government.

Alan M. Dube

July 6, 2011, 4:12 p.m.

BREAKING NEWS!
I’ll just paste the info from the email I just received…

“Dear Alan,

We’ve achieved a huge breakthrough. Tens of thousands of ACLU supporters like you spoke out, and our lawmakers listened. Because of our collective action, the Defense Authorization bill is headed for the Senate floor without an outrageous provision that would have granted this and all future presidents a blank check to involve the U.S. in a worldwide war without end.”

I have not seen the text of the proposed legislation but it looks like a win for democracy. To the right-wingers out there- get off the loony conspiracy web sites and actually follow the real news. Find out how things work, who the power brokers are and then follow through with action. Blaming all the worlds woes on Obama, Bush, Clinton or any ONE man doesn’t sound just a little simplistic to you?

Innocent Victim

July 6, 2011, 4:38 p.m.

@Alan Dube
Obama is not MY president.  He is a president elected in a sham electoral process:  two parties competed, the same two that control the ballot in every state.  The election is winner-take-all.  It is preceded by sham debates, again controlled by the two major parties.  The election campaigns are funded by corporate elites, among which are those that control the media.  Many other deadly-to-democracy flaws, too numerous to list.  Our political system is corrupted,  all three branches.  Only a handful of politicians, not including the president, deserve any respect.
Obama is a self-appointed assassin, a usurper, a protector of torturers and corporate criminals, polluters, a war criminal and a liar. 
Obama is YOUR president, which is the worst thing I can write about YOU!

@Dube

July 6, 2011, 5:49 p.m.

You wrote, ” Blaming all the worlds (sic) woes on Obama, Bush, Clinton or any ONE man doesn’t sound just a little simplistic to you (directed at another poster)?”

All the world’s woes, yes!  That is quite a stretch from justifiably blaming individuals who could have made a positive difference and chose to do otherwise.  You defend Obama, Bush and Clinton (GW and WJ, presumably).  Bush I need not dignify separately with a condemnation, because whatever I wrote about Obama applies to his predecessor.  The difference between them is that Obama was elected to change what Bush had done.  Obama had a popular mandate, which he wasted in favor of Wall Street, the MIC, big pharma and insurance. 

Clinton is to this day continuing the imperial oppression of the Haitian people.  Recall, it was he who had Aristide, the elected president of Haiti, kidnapped in the middle of the night and exiled to South Africa   It was Clinton,  along with Fruit of the Loom, Haynes, and Levis who installed in a phony election M. Preval, the puppet, to defeat a decent rise in the Haitian minimum wage.  That is one of Clinton’s most recent handiworks.  The biggie was in 1999, when Clinton gave the banksters a BJ in the Oval Office by repealing the law that had protected us against another 1929 crash for 65 years, the Glass-Steagall Act. 

No, we cannot blame one man for all the ills of the world.  But the villains I have excoriated inadequately in the limited space above are none the less villains whose acts of commission and omission are responsible for great suffering and destruction among the other ills of the world.  And you are their champion, Dube!

Alan M. Dube

July 6, 2011, 5:51 p.m.

To: Victim

“Obama is not MY president.”  Well, one possibility I didn’t count on was that you might not be an American. If so, my bad. Other than that possibility, President Obama IS your president. No, you don’t get to have your own. Check the Constitution for the fine print.

“...sham electoral process…”  That’s rather harsh. There are other countries that are far worse. In many countries, people get shot for supporting an alternative candidate. Our election process is too long, too slow, too convoluted and somewhat open to outside influences, but it IS orderly and usually free from violence. The best part- if you want to make changes to the process, such as the primaries, for example, you are free to start any time. Get involved. Get to work!

“Obama is a self-appointed assassin…” Yeah, yeah, I know. You can also say that about just about ANY president. My mother-in-law has hated every president since Nixon. The only common denominator among them all is the “hate” part in her diatribes. I see that’s pretty common now.

You might be surprised to learn that I am not an Obama supporter. I voted for a democrat last time around because I wasn’t going to vote for another republican war-monger. Obviously, he’s been a big disappointment but I don’t fault the system for that.

In closing, I think we all need to be a lot more civil on these forums and in the world-at-large. Throwing out insults at posters will get you nowhere. Throw out facts, instead. Make a cogent argument for your positions. Support a candidate, maybe several. Try working on a campaign, it’s a real eye-opener. Save the insults for those children who have yet to grow up.

Alan M. Dube

July 6, 2011, 6:17 p.m.

To: ????  {{please use your real name}}

“You defend Obama, Bush and Clinton…” Really? Reread my post. What I said was that it was simplistic for anyone to blame one man for all the shenanigans of our vast government. Obama this, Bush that, Clinton, etc. What about the other 535 co-conspirators in the other branch? What, they share no blame? They control the purse-strings. If they chose to do nothing then they validated the action of the executive branch.

I am their champion? I’m only guessing here, but I think they would be dismayed by the third-party candidates I’ve voted for in the past as “protest votes”. C’mon, is that all you got? Bring the A game next time.

Innocent Victim

July 6, 2011, 6:20 p.m.

I am a US citizen, native born, but I wish I had been smart enough to emigrate when I was young enough to receive a permanent residency in any of several other countries. 

Obama is the current US four-year war mongering king.  Remember, what the founders most feared was creating a war mongering king?  He holds the office of the President of the United States.  My president?  What guff?  Sounds like something out of an old WWII movie, where the obedient French sergeant takes the order to defend the position to the last man and replies,  “Oui, mon général!”  I am not that sergeant and Obama is not my president.    Wake up!  You are not Jean Gabin in an old, maudlin flick.

Innocent Victim

July 6, 2011, 6:27 p.m.

I don’t use my real name, because we are headed towards a police-state (euphemistically called a “national security state”).

Innocent Victim

July 6, 2011, 8:48 p.m.

Some mistake our political obligations to be like a military oath.  We do not have to respect a president who has done enormous harm to our country and to others in the world.  Our freedoms, our futures and those of our children are at stake.  Obama and his mentor, Bush, have undermined our country beyond the wildest hopes that its enemies, especially Osama bin Laden, could have had.  Obama has taken the baton from “Hank” Paulsen and from Clinton’s economic dummies (Rubin, Summers, Geithner, Bernanke, et al) to make whole our biggest corporate frauds while doing little to help their victims.  Obama has continued the unnecessary wars of Bush and added several more, killing, maiming, subjecting to disease, displacing from their homes, innocent foreigners, people who never harmed us.  At the same time, Obama’s wars against these people have taken the lives, limbs and mental stability of our own service people.  At home, Obama has so increased our indebtedness to other nations that both parties are now engaged in a conspiracy to overturn the social safety net created during the New Deal and the LBJ administration in order to reduce the deficit while continuing the warfare.

Obama is a tool from the watery grave of Osama bin Laden, who set his mind to destroy this country.  Osama died a successful enemy.  Bush and Obama, with the help of many others,  Reid, Pelosi, Kerry, McCain, McConnell, Graham, five on the Supreme Court who favored Citizens United,  all are destroyers of our country.  We don’t owe them respect, courtesy, civility.  All that we must do is obey the law.

kim palmer

July 7, 2011, 10:01 a.m.

I find it a bold faced lie that NATO is not acting in such a way that aids the rebels. Firstly they have very passionately said that they support these rebels,Secondly the head of NATO is srongly aligned with the royal circles that want to prevail in this matter such as Queen Beatice,Saudi Arbia,Sweden,Britain in addition to other democratic countries that want to prevail. In addition these countries have a majority zionist population whom want to prevail over the muslim world. Quite frankly as a tribal man MR gaddfi was only good enough to control drugs violence and bombings and after that they had no use for him and or his family. He was literally the garbage collector of issue the arab world and other radical countries found distasteful.

kim palmer

July 7, 2011, 10:32 a.m.

You know that in recessionary periods like the one we are in when military downsizing of democracy is occurring democracies become very obsessed with what stategic military alliances prevail. 50% of this battle in libyia is the forcing of zionist military alliances to prevail,which they are doing illegally. Quite frankly the USA would have never tolerated past alliances in egypt,tunsia prevailing as they were muslim and socialist countries. The USA,Britain,Canada,France,and NATO need to tell the whole truth not a fragment of it

Innocent Victim

July 7, 2011, 12:02 p.m.

@Kim Palmer
1.  It is urgent to convey to the Democratic leadership now that Barack Obama is totally unacceptable as the nominee for the 2012 presidential candidacy; that we recognize the immorality of voting for the lesser of two evils.  Voting for any degree of evil is immoral, and we are not responsible for how others vote.  If our refusing to vote for Obama results in the election of someone worse (inconceivable!), that is not our moral responsibility.  That is the burden of those who voted for whoever is elected.  For this reason, I write in clear terms my view of Obama as a killer, war criminal, liar, defender of corporate frauds, thieves, polluters, destroyer of our Bill of Rights, usurper and liar.

2.  I don’t believe we are in a recession.  If all the bubbles since the Reagan era had not occurred,  we should have been constantly in economic stagnation.  Today’s is worse, because the bursting of each bubble caused the loss of much wealth by ordinary Americans and added greatly to US debt obligations.  Add to those losses the costs of the successive wars our presidents have initiated, and the result is what we now have.  All of those losses plus the losses our economy has sustained due to the expatriation of jobs and US investment, and the picture is complete.  We have been colonized, our wealth extracted and our people deserted by our own elites.  What we have now is not a depression.  It is the new normalcy.

Innocent Victim

July 7, 2011, 12:24 p.m.

@Kim Palmer II
I have neglected the thrust of your comments on NATO and Zionism:  I think you would agree that NATO does not act out of love for Israel.  The interests of NATO member nations are economic, controlling the energy resources of the Middle East and Central Asia.  Those interests produce a convergence with Israel.  That convergence should not be mistaken for Zionism.  Remember, the nations of NATO have historically treated Jews with hatred.  Only the horrors of WWII brought some degree of shame to them and caused them to change their patent attitudes towards Jews.  Another factor is the influx to the former colonial powers of destitute peoples from the Muslim world over whom the powers formerly ruled.  Now, they are finding themselves invaded and do not enjoy it.    When Israel is not useful to NATO,  it will be on its own.

Alan M. Dube

July 7, 2011, 3:17 p.m.

“...  all are destroyers of our country.  We don’t owe them respect, courtesy, civility.”

With that I agree, but it is not the point. The point is that if you act like a tool, many people will not agree with your stand on issues due to the fact that you are not a good spokesman. Articulate your views without rancor. Use the facts to convincingly convey your viewpoints. Preaching to the choir doesn’t result in any additional votes. The swing voters must be convinced rather than being scared away. Be a leader instead of just another angry voice in a mob.

Innocent Victim

July 7, 2011, 3:31 p.m.

Suffering may eventually persuade Americans to overthrow the government.  It will take time for our brainwashed countrymen to realize that the normal course of our politics does not work,  that the system is stacked against them.  The Greeks, Irish, Icelanders and other Europeans have learned that they must take to the streets, because their politicians do not represent them.  The French students and workers know this, too.  We, most of us, still think we have a democracy.  The Europeans have learned from two world wars, that they and their children do not count to their elite rulers.  We have not learned.  We elect narcissistic celebrity-types who serve the rulers.

It probably is too late, as Chalmers Johnson speculated in his “Nemesis”.  I really don’t write to persuade anyone; just to let off steam.

charles varner

July 12, 2011, 4:01 p.m.

I really cant believe that there is not more of an uproar over this, We The UNITED STATES OF AMERICA actually invaded another country without provocation, we were not attacked in any way. I understand the Humanatarian aspect of saving people from a so called massacre, but to invade another country without congressional approval has got to be an impeachable offense.  To say that there is no hostility going on then what about the bombing of troops sounds pretty hostil to me.  Dictator Obama can do anything he wants without any consequences we do have a constitution.,

Alan M. Dube

July 12, 2011, 5:23 p.m.

“I really don’t write to persuade anyone; just to let off steam.”

That may be, but in doing so you still wield the power to persuade. Your post may be the last one someone reads when they finally change their mind on an issue. Use that power responsibly.

Innocent Victim

July 12, 2011, 5:34 p.m.

Mr Varner:  Our Constitution was based on the idea of separation of powers.  That works only when each branch jealously protects its own powers against usurpation by another.  Regrettably, for reasons unclear to me,  the founders thought badly of political parties but did nothing to protect us against domination of the government, all branches and all of the states by two of them.  That is what we have now, a duopoly, as Ralph Nader calls it.  The duopoly is financed by wealthy individuals and institutions, the plutocracy.  They give themselves tax breaks, and they determine our imperialistic policies, invasions and occupations.  It is hard, very hard to break the duopoly’s grip, because it controls the ballots in the many states and makes access to it difficult, lawsuits, injunctions, etc.  At the same time, the duopoly controls the US Supreme Court, and the Court decided that campaign finance is free speech and removed any possibility of controlling the power of money in our election system.

The effect is to make separation of powers subordinate to party loyalty.  No majority in congress will impeach its own president, even if he usurps the war-making power that constitutionally belongs to congress, or if he violates the Constitution in many other ways, as Barack Obama has (as did GWB). 

The Constitution is a dead letter.  It is not respected by any one of the three branches.  They pay lip service to it.  This is no longer a constitutional republic.  It is an empire and will continue to cause us much impoverishment at home and to bring bloodshed overseas through our military projections around the globe.

Innocent Victim

July 12, 2011, 5:40 p.m.

Mr Dube:  I’ll thank you not to tell me what my responsibilities are.  You do as you please to the best of your limited abilities but confine yourself to improving your own efforts and do not preach to me.

Alan M. Dube

July 13, 2011, 2:22 p.m.

“...and do not preach to me.”

And just what are you doing with your diatribes?

Roy C Tremain

Aug. 2, 2011, 7:21 a.m.

The War Powers Act had been put in place by the founding fathers of the United States to control a president’s ability to wage war on any sovereign nation without the express consent of the U.S. Federal Congress.It was also designed to enable the Congress to control the purse for any war initiated by a president based on a declared emergency for sake of the nation’s security.President Obama has clearly violated this act and he must be held to account which is mechanism by which the War Powers Act was to be enforced.War is not an answer to anything and only escalates conflict,perpetuates poverty,and promotes the mass destruction of the most crucial social and material infrastructures of social society.It is an unacceptable form of human behavior and must be stopped before it destroys us.President Obama while accepting a peace prize,used the occasion to garner support for the wars of aggression against Afghanistan and Iraq,and even implied that Dr. Martin Luther King would have advocated such wars if he were alive as of the day of his acceptance speech; he did however,say that there were others more deserving of such a prize.It became clear to me after hearing his speech that either he hadn’t read most any of MLK’s works,or had,but didn’t understand what he’d been reading; otherwise,he had deliberately lied.

Alan M. Dube

Aug. 2, 2011, 5:48 p.m.

“The War Powers Act had been put in place by the founding fathers of the United States…”

Umm, the War Powers Resolution was passed over President Nixon’s veto in 1973. The sticky issue is that Congress continues to fund these wars. Does that make said wars legitimate? If so, does that mean that Obama’s continued involvement in these wars does NOT constitute a violation of this Act? If we blame him, what about the other 535 co-conspirators (obviously minus the legislators that voted AGAINST these wars)? Ultimately, the blame lies in the misguided electorate that keeps voting for these immoral thugs. Like it or not, most people could care less that we’re at war. Until the economy crashed, it was hardly mentioned at all. Now, a few people will object to them if someone brings up the topic during a conversation. Do they write their local newspapers? Write their Congressmen? Write to the President? Most people do absolutely nothing and THAT’S why the government doesn’t listen to us!

Lester Winick

Oct. 28, 2011, 5:43 p.m.

As someone who served overseas during WW2, I say Bless our President for saving my grandchildren (and yours) lives in a possible future conflict. This man was today’s version of Adolph Hitler. Think of the lives that would have been saved if someone killed Hitler before that conflict started.

Erich Kuerschner

Oct. 28, 2011, 5:54 p.m.

Lester:

As someone who was on the other side of WII (as a young child), I do not share your view WWII, nor of Hitler. I concur that those who order others to kill are by definition committing evil. So Hitler was that sort of person, but so was Churchill.  I find very little difference between the morality or ethics of these two men, nor of our President.More recent accounts reflect that.

As WWII Sect of War, Henry Stimson wrote in his memoirs:

“Unfortunately, I have lived long enough to know that history is often not what actually happened but what is recorded as such.”

John Henry Bicycle Lucas

Oct. 29, 2011, 9:27 a.m.

We are supposed to be a nation that follows the rule of law. Laws for the common good of those governed.  It is supposed to be a republic.

We can debate here on who did what when, but when it comes down to it, all of the presidents since the war powers act became law have in one way or another, ignored it, or justified it by some method that they can justify somewhere before someone, I’m not quite sure who that is…
Since the law was enacted over a veto from the president, it should be crutial that the law is followed and those that ignore it have action taken against them under due process of law.

Today as I write this, we have recently set up bases in Africa to fly armed drones over areas that someone somewhere is ordering. These drones are armed and will kill human beings. We have become quite good at it.
Our current President (I use this term because it doesn’t seem to matter who is President) recently had Alwaki killed, and made it a point to bring it before the people by way of the news media. Oh, and lesser reported, he also killed Alwaki’s 16 year old son shortly afterward by the same method.

Well, does that make our current President a hero?

In fact, these two people were Citizens of the United States. No matter what they had done, who they had influenced, where they were when they were killed, they were supposed to be protected under the Bill of Rights of our Constitution as to have “due process of law.” These men were targeted by our current President. I fully expect this current trend to continue.

What does this make our current President? A defender of our common good? Is he defending our nation? A great warrior?

I charge you that will read this, it only makes him an assasin.

All those in the chain of command down to the guy that pressed the button also. Someone should have had the wherewithall to stand up and say, “no, this is not lawful, I will not do it!” It is an unlawful order, plain and simple.

You can witness what is being done to other people in other countries by our leaders on the media. How long do you think it will take the drones to get around to us? Drones are already being used on our border with Mexico. Fact. Maybe unarmed, but it is good for practice.

Do you really have enough confidence in our system of government as it is now to defend our rights? How is this being done? Waging wars and armed conflicts in other countries? Choosing single citizens of our own country to be assainated?

If anything should stir our country to protest and occupy anything, this should be it. We should be in the streets of our capitol with banners and marching, yes Mr. President, we should put on our marching shoes as you suggest. We should march for our rights that our govenment has deprived us of, that we once had!

Once we totally loose the rest of the few rights we have left, a job or a little money is not going to matter. Those in the occupy movements really don’t get it.

Each time we go to an airport to board a plane we are subjected to unwarranted search and seizure. Fact.

Fast and Furious, well here is an interesting subject. How does this make us more secure? Thank God for those whistle blower agents that had the gumption to stand up and expose this travesty of law. It is unlawful to allow the sale of guns in this manner! Our law enforcement people at the top of our government decided to once again, circumvent a law that was enacted to protect us, and where does it get us?

By the way, I do personally excercise my 2nd Ammendment rights.

If find myself confused now about who I am, I used to consider myself a patriot, but now I find out, by what I am, I might be considered to be subversive…
Funny how the media considers people in other countries that are overthrowing their govenments to be either “rebels” in one instance, or “insurgents” in another. Seems like it depends on how the media wants to spin what is going on to their own ends to influence watchers or readers.

After 12 years of ineffective leadership, I hope we still have enough of what used to be our great nation to salvage.

In conclusion, when we get away from our rules of law in reguards to the war powers act, we are still killing people in other countries either way, it is merely if we are going to call it legal or not.

Aleksandar

Nov. 14, 2011, 6:49 p.m.

What caused the War Powers Act of 1973?
And what effects does it have on our government today?
|what happened in 1973 which sparked the war powers act?
|I heard somewhere that President Bush could extend his term in office in the event of an Israeli/Iran conflict. I know we have had a War Powers Act on the books for a long time and that it has undergone lots of revisions and has been subject to various interpretations. Is there a scenario under the War Powers Act where this is possible? Details, please.
|These “obamas war is unconstitutional” posts are so annoying.

Have you never heard of the War Powers Act? The President cant deploy troops for 90 days in a police action. Lrn2bsmrt.
“So when Bush did this it is labeled as a war crime.
When Obama did this it is fine.

Seems like one group is being hypocritical in their support for war.”

Bush tortured people. Maybe you forgot. That is the war crime allegation, not simply the invasion of Iraq.
|The War Powers Act says you have to go back and get permission from Congress to continue military action 60 days after it started.  Sixty days has passed since the bombing of Libya began.
@isurvived:  If he really wanted to follow the constitution he’d have gotten permission for the bombing before he started.  Constitution says only Congress can declare war.
|He has passed the maximum 90 day mark permitted by the law for the President to get approval from Congress after engaging in hostilities. This is a violation of the War Powers Act of 1973 since use has not asked for or gotten an extension on hostilities or a declaration of war from Congress.

Should he be impeached for this violation of Federal law? Or is is above the law?

And no, Bush did not violate the War Powers Act with Afghanistan or Iraq - he got Congressional declarations of war for both actions.
|And is the War Powers Act constitutional?
|Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution
“The Congress shall have power to….......
Declare war, grant letters of Marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water.”

Article 2, Section 2 of the US Constitution
“The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, WHEN CALLED INTO THE ACTUAL SERVICE OF THE UNITED STATES.”

I couldn’t find any article of the Constitution that states that Congress shall have the right to advocate their responsibility to call the military into the actual service of the United States by not declaring war.

What am I missing here? What part of the US Constitution justifies the War Powers Act?
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html
The United States Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net
|I have seen many of my neo-con friends talk about how President Obama is about to break the law by not complying with the War Powers Act, so before I fall for their bait, did President Bush ever comply with the War Powers Act in regards to Iraq & Afghanistan?

As a Libertarian, I like to get the facts before I attack either side.
|The War Powers Act of 1973 was one of the most significant pieces of legislation in the modern era. Identify its provisions and discuss its impacts
___________________________________
Aleksandar
http://engineering-leveling-guide.com/

pgillenw

Nov. 15, 2011, 10:39 a.m.

Following “a well worn path” does not either make it legal or ethical and moral. Here lies the problem in Washington be it Democrat or Republican once one does the opposing party never give up the power the act brings be it undeclared wars or insider trading. The act becomes the norm.

John Henry Bicycle Lucas

Nov. 15, 2011, 2:16 p.m.

pgillenw, I agree 100%!

Dave

Oct. 5, 2012, 12:06 a.m.

National Defense Authorization Act, which sets the budget and policies of the Department of Defense and generally expands the power of the government to fight the war on terror.

The Act permits, among other practices, the indefinite detention of terrorism suspects without trial. Fein encouraged those in attendance to contact their members of congress about repealing it.

Enacted by G.W. Bush. Both Bush and Obama
Constitutional Crime Of Bush and Obama
http://keentalks.com/constitutional-crimes-bush-obama/

John Henry Bicycle Lucas

Oct. 7, 2012, 8:39 p.m.

After 12 years of ineffective leadership, I hope we still have enough of what used to be our great nation to salvage

It does not take a slide rule and calculator to understand that to enable a certain contractor to get no bid contracts in a war in the middle east we had to find someone to go to war with. Based on “bad intel” it seems like it is all smoke and mirrors to me, to line someone’s pockets.

After the war is over, this country has a embassy that is capable of holding 15,000. The only embassy in the world that needs 15,000 people in it.

Well I say this, fine, make money just not at the expense of our youngest and brightest blood shed in another land, for a flat out lie.

I charge all that may read this, does it matter if it is a right boot or left boot on your neck?

Keep infighting each other over the democrat and republican theme, it is just what those in power want. Why do you think that an “internet kill switch” is needed? Free exchange of ideas is dangerous to certain people.

Hank Moody

Oct. 29, 12:52 p.m.

John Boehner is pizzed

rischdaddy

Oct. 29, 1 p.m.

hey aleksandar- you dont know anything. if you keep running your mouth im gonna have to show up to your door and beat u like a drum son. you aint scared of me

Barack Obama Supporter

Oct. 29, 1:01 p.m.

Does obama ever do anything wrong? No.

chilln'

Oct. 29, 1:02 p.m.

@rischdaddy hi

rischdaddy

Oct. 29, 1:03 p.m.

dawson grimes u cant even make a fire boy

chilln'

Oct. 29, 1:04 p.m.

@rischdaddy lol its not dawson

rischdaddy

Oct. 29, 1:05 p.m.

never said it was, it aint even risch

chilln'

Oct. 29, 1:05 p.m.

@rischdaddy oh really

Peasant

Oct. 29, 1:08 p.m.

Mick you are mexican and dont know what you are talking about.

john ewdards

Oct. 29, 1:11 p.m.

I heard you’re feeling nothing’s going right
Why don’t you let me stop by
The clock is ticking, running out of time
So we should party, all night
So cover your eyes, I have a surprise
I hope you got a healthy appetite

If you wanna dance, if you want it all
You know that I’m the girl that you should call

Boy when you’re with me
I’ll give you a taste
Make it like your birthday everyday
I know you like it sweet
So you can have your cake
Give you something good to celebrate

So make a wish
I’ll make it like your birthday everyday
I’ll be your gift
Give you something good to celebrate

Pop your Perignon
We can get it on
So hot and heavy
Till dawn
I got you spinning
Like a disco ball
I’ll have them playing
Your song

We’re living the life
We’re doing it right
You’re never gonna be unsatisfied
If you wanna dance
If you want it all
You know I’m the girl that you should call

But when you’re with me
I’ll give you a taste
Make it like your birthday everyday
I know you like it sweet
So you can have your cake
Give you something good to celebrate

So make a wish
I’ll make it like your birthday everyday
I’ll be your gift
Give you something good to celebrate

Happy birthday

So let me get you in your birthday suit
It’s time to bring out the big balloons
So let me get you in your birthday suit
It’s time to bring out the big, big, big, big, big, big balloons

Boy when you’re with me
I’ll give you a taste
Make it like your birthday everyday
I know you like it sweet
So you can have your cake
Give you something good to celebrate

Boy when you’re with me
I’ll give you a taste
Make it like your birthday everyday
I know you like it sweet
So you can have your cake
Give you something good to celebrate

So make a wish
I’ll make it like your birthday everyday
I’ll be your gift
Give you something good to celebrate

Happy birthday


Read more: Katy Perry - Birthday Lyrics | MetroLyrics

Obama is my hero

Oct. 29, 1:12 p.m.

You guys are immature go back to 8th grade

Add a comment

You can also register to post a comment.

Email me when someone responds to this article

Get Updates

Stay on top of what we’re working on by subscribing to our email digest.

optional

Our Hottest Stories

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •