Sunday, July 10, 2011

Constitutionality of the President Declaring war

Article 1, Section 8 THE POWERS OF CONGRESS
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

It is clear from this section of the constitution that it is the congress that has the power to declare war, not the president. Just because he called it something other than a war doesn't change what it is. When you use the military to attack another nation there is really nothing else you can call it but an act of war. It is certain that is how the other country will view it.

The war powers act has nothing to do with it except in so far as it would be another law the president was breaking, but that doesn't not change the fact that he has violated the constitution itself and as such is by far the more severe of the violations.

We have a president who disdains the constitution and sees it as an impediment to the things he wants to do. Still his views do not violate the constitution except insofar as he swore to uphold and defend the constitution.

On at least several occasions he has ignored judges rulings and again has gotten a pass on these things. How many times will we let him flaunt the law and the constitution before the congress will take some kind of action. If we don't do something about it he will continue till the constution is shreaded. No doubt in the future other presidents will follow suit with their reason being, "BUT HE DID IT!" which is the same as precedent.

Of course who expects anyone in our congress to actually know what's in the constitution. Yes, they carry it around with him, but it doesn't seem to mean very much too them and it is widely known that most of them never read it. It is nothing more than a patriotic symbol to them.

Every member of congress ought to be completely outraged anytime a high official violates the constitution. But then we have people in congress who are far more concerned about keeping people in their party safe then they are in keeping the constitution safe. You would think they took an oath to uphold and defend the party rather than the constitution.

We need to hold our non-representing representative's feet to the fire on every issue of the constitution. As some have recommended, for every law they pass, most especially at the federal level they should be required to show where in the constitution they get the power to do the thing they propose. It should not be proposed and then passed and then have to go to judges to determine if it is constitutional. By that point the people are already under it and as such it becomes ever more difficult to get rid of it. This has been the case with Obama Care.

The president has a right to direct a war once it's been declared, even as a general does not have a right to declare or start a war, but only has the power to prosecute it once it has been declare so it is with the president. He is over all the generals. He is like a general of the generals, but he is not empowered by the constitution at all to declare war.

Congress has busied itself creating laws to give the president loopholes to declare war where no loophole exists in the constitution or any of its amendments. If they want to give the president such a right then the constitution needs to be amended.

This has nothing to do with whether the war is a good war, a bad war, a necessary war or otherwise. It is only about whether the president has the power to start a war, and HE DOES NOT!

Where is the congress on this?! Where is the outrage of the people? All of the people! Not just the people of the opposing party!!!

Liberals are notoriously against war for any reason, unless their side starts it, then as far as they are concerned it should not be questioned for any reason.

Again where is the congress on this? Where is the outrage or even the impeachment proceedings and I don't mean a slap on the wrist, I mean a real impeachment. He has violated the constitution. Is there any higher crime a president can commit?!

No comments: