Town Square

Obama’s Actions in Libya--Unconstitutional?

Original post made by Cindy Cross, Parkside, on Jun 17, 2011

Obama’s Actions in Libya--Unconstitutional? By Cindy Cross

This story contains 520 words.

If you are a paid subscriber, check to make sure you have logged in. Otherwise our system cannot recognize you as having full free access to our site.

If you are a paid print subscriber and haven't yet set up an online account, click here to get your online account activated.


Like this comment
Posted by Night Owl
a resident of Birdland
on Jun 17, 2011 at 4:06 am

Cindy states: "It appears very simple; all Obama needs to do is talk to Congress."

Good laugh! Cindy appears not to have followed partisan politics over the past decade or so.

Grammatical note: 'Congressmen' has a distinctly sexist ring to it. Oh, and it's 'both sides of the aisle,' not 'isle'.

Another: Cindy asks: "Why can’t NATO and the European’s take care of removing Qaddafi on their own?" Well, first Cindy, the US is part of NATO, which _is_ going about it on its own; second, 'European's' should be Europeans - no contraction necessary.

Have you read Strunk and White's Elements of Style yet? You might find it valuable.

Like this comment
Posted by steve
a resident of Parkside
on Jun 17, 2011 at 8:32 am

Night Owl-your claim of partisan ppolitics (when is that not the case?) is a sad excuse for not communicating at all. Obama is supposed to be a leader----what is he afraid of? Verbal confrontation? Should the leader of free world be afraid to explain his plan, if he has one?
Politicians on both sides of the aisle are questioning the lack of a clearly stated mission objective. Don't you think it's time to step up and clear the air?

Like this comment
Posted by Blossom
a resident of Stoneridge Orchards
on Jun 17, 2011 at 11:02 am

I agree with steve!!! His cmments are ppurfect. Killing Osama Bin Laden was just about the most ppartisan act by a president I've ever seen! And so was Obama's speech after Gabby Giffords was shot. The ppartisan pandering was too much to bare.

Now I clearly understand that the U.S. has taken a supportive role with the partisan group NATO, and I read in the lamestream press that he has kept apprized House and Senat intelligence committies. But what could be better then stating more then is needed to the public so that the nonppartisans can snipe away? I'm sure whatever he'd have to say would just sit peechee-keen with all his nonpartisan critics.

Like this comment
Posted by steve
a resident of Parkside
on Jun 20, 2011 at 8:26 am

blossom--or moonbeam-or whatever your name is: have someone read the Constitution to you. Your elected representatives (even the bleeding heart liberals) are questioning your messiah on this latest front in the war on Middle Eastern countries. All the while NATO is blowing up civilians....where's your Code Pink buddies now? Not preaching for peace--they are busy assaulting Republican politicians.
Fade away, blossom, unless you can add some value (other than nitpicking every keystroke).