Cliff Kincaid,Accuracy in Media
If you want an indication of why Republicans may lose to Obama in 2012,look at the pass they are giving him over his illegal war in Libya. Nothing is more important than committing a nation to war. The military intervention could be the basis of impeachment charges. But Republican leaders in the House—and Republican Senator John McCain in the Senate—don’t want to hold Obama accountable.
On the other hand,there is growing media fascination with “Weinergate,” in which the Democratic Rep. Anthony Weiner has obviously stonewalled about the origin and distribution of a lewd photo sent to a coed.
In contrast to the Weiner affair,the facts about Obama’s violations of the law and the Constitution are clear.
If Weiner should be held accountable for an embarrassing sexual matter,which may or may not result in his resignation,why not enforce the law and the Constitution when the president goes to war?
Columnist Ann Coulter jokes that the Weiner case should go to small claims court. Obama’s war in Libya is a matter of the highest constitutional importance and not a joking matter.
House leaders could bring impeachment charges. Instead,they want to avoid doing their duty.
The Wall Street Journal reports that “House Republican leaders on Wednesday abruptly canceled a vote on a resolution forcing U.S. withdrawal from Libya amid signs” that it would pass. House GOP leaders “fend off vote on Libya resolution,” The Washington Post proclaims.
“U.S. House leaders pulled a bill calling for the U.S. military to withdraw from Libya after a group of liberals and conservatives said they back the measure,” UPI noted.
In the Senate,McCain,who has turned into an advocate for Al-Jazeera,has been an enthusiastic supporter of the war,conducted with the approval of the Arab League and the United Nations but not Congress. Al-Jazeera,committed to the victory of the Muslim Brotherhood in the region,openly backs the “pro-democracy fighters” in Libya,playing down their links to al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups.
Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi,once a prime sponsor of anti-American terrorism,gave up his terrorist aims and nuclear program after the U.S. invaded Iraq and removed Saddam Hussein in 2003. Gaddafi thought he might be the next target. Little did he know that he would be targeted by a liberal U.S. President enforcing a novel UN concept known as the “responsibility to protect.”
The evidence is overwhelming,even though most of the media will not cover it,that Obama’s war in Libya is illegal and unconstitutional. Columnist George Will got most of it right in a recent column,“Is Obama Above the Law?” The war is a violation of the War Powers Act,which says the president can go to war on his own only if there is an imminent threat to the U.S. and there is a 60-day deadline for the withdrawal of forces.
Obama has violated both provisions of the law. There was no direct or immediate threat to the U.S. from Libya and Obama has ignored the 60-day deadline for approval from the Congress.
George Will notes that McCain has said that no president “has ever recognized the constitutionality of the War Powers Act,and neither do I. So I don’t feel bound by any deadline.”
Will commented,“Oh? No law is actually a law if presidents and senators do not ‘recognize’ it? Now,there is an interesting alternative to judicial review,and an indicator of how executive aggrandizement and legislative dereliction of duty degrade the rule of law.”
Rather than hold Obama accountable,the Journal says that “Republican leaders are working to come up with alternatives that are less far-reaching than the Kucinich provision to allow lawmakers to vent their displeasure.”
The Kucinich provision,named for Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH),itself falls short of the articles of impeachment that are required.