Obama Continues Bush Practice of Shredding the Constitution

From Chris Hedges, former New York Times Middle East Bureau Chief:

Stopping Gadhafi forces from entering Benghazi six months ago, which I supported, was one thing. Embroiling ourselves in a civil war was another. And to do it Obama blithely shredded the Constitution and bypassed Congress in violation of the War Powers Resolution. Not that the rule of law matters much in Washington. The dark reasoning of George W. Bush’s administration was that the threat of terrorism and national security gave the executive branch the right to ignore all legal restraints. The Obama administration has made this disregard for law bipartisan. Obama assured us when this started that it was not about ‘regime change.’ But this promise proved as empty as the ones he made during his presidential campaign. He has ruthlessly prosecuted the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, where military planners speak of a continued U.S. presence for the next couple of decades. He has greatly expanded our proxy wars, which rely heavily on drone and missile attacks, as well as clandestine operations, in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and Libya. Add a few more countries and we will set the entire region alight.

Read full article here.


Comments

5 Responses to “Obama Continues Bush Practice of Shredding the Constitution”
  1. gregzaller says:

    I was expecting to see the reasoning behind the assertion that Obama shredded the constitution. I might or might not agree with you then. I don’t know.

  2. Don Pelton says:

    ” … bypassed Congress in violation of the War Powers Resolution … ” etc.

    Feel free to read Hedges’ entire article, then agree or disagree with him.

  3. depelton says:

    “The ACLU on Obama and core liberties”
    http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/index.html

    Excerpts:

    ” … there is ample evidence that the Obama administration continues to use torture by proxy and rendition/CIA-black-sites by proxy as well)”

    ” … the ACLU emphasizes that this Obama fixation — wildly expanded programs of targeted killings even of U.S. citizens far from any battlefield — is as threatening to the rule of law, and at least as dangerous, as any policy implemented by Bush/Cheney.”

    “Using Patriot Act authority, the Bush Administration started — and the Obama Administration has continued — to conduct wholesale ‘preventive’ surveillance of innocent Americans without judicial review.”

  4. gregzaller says:

    I did look at the article from the perspective of whether Obama shredded the constitution and was not satisfied that the assertion was justified.

    We would most probably agree that baseless claims are coming from every direction. Here’s an article supporting Obama’s position. http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0611/Reid_backs_Obama_on_Libya_War_Powers_Act.html

    Was this a police action or a war, and was it a good decision in the long run? I don’t know.

  5. depelton says:

    Thanks, Greg. That’s an interesting article from Politico. In fact, I picked up their widget and made it a part of my right-hand column, as you may notice.

    Regarding the constitutionality of the Libya war, I agree with Obama Version 2007, and disagree with Obama Version 2011:

    “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation” — candidate Barack Obama, December, 2007.

    And …

    “No more ignoring the law when it’s inconvenient. That is not who we are. . . . We will again set an example for the world that the law is not subject to the whims of stubborn rulers” — candidate Barack Obama, August 1, 2007.

    From “The illegal war in Libya