2007 Obama: President Cannot Unilaterally Authorize Military Attack

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by pspr, Mar 21, 2011.

  1. pspr


    As a presidential candidate, Sen. Barack Obama (D.-Ill.) emphatically stated that the Constitution does not give the president the authority to unilaterally authorize a military attack unless it is needed to stop an actual or imminent attack on the United States.

    I guess, in Obama's eyes, it depends upon who the President is.

  2. 377OHMS


    Democrat presidents don't think they need Congressional approval for military involvment in UN actions ala Korea.

    After all, the UN has more authority than the United States Congress, right?
  3. Lucrum


    Personally I think he only said that to sucker more supporters into to voting for him, which did work obviously.

    Question is will the same people be as gullible in 2012?
    Was JFK/LBJ's Vietnam war ever "declared"?
  4. Odumbo lied about so, so many things. He literally conned his way into the WH. It's amazing nobody cares to hold his feet to the fire for it.
  5. pspr


    Obama's just another Teflon Don. Until November 2012.
  6. I take no consolation from that notion. He's already done a LOT of damage to America and over the next 2 years can do much more.

    Then... he could campaign again as a centrist (lying centrist, of course), but the masses of voters are so naive, stupid, and greedy... he might get reelected in spite of his evil.
  7. pspr


    Like others have mentioned here, it is going to depend upon what the economy looks like in late 2012 and the price of gas and food that will be the biggest determiners of Obama's 2012 chances.