Oust Obama

Pres­i­dent’s globalist doc­trine un­der­mines Amer­i­can sovereignty

The Washington Times Daily - - Metro - By Jef­frey T. Kuh­ner

The Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion be­lieves it is above the law. It now openly claims that Pres­i­dent Obama can go to war with­out con­gres­sional au­tho­riza­tion. This is a fla­grant — and dan­ger­ous — vi­o­la­tion of the Con­sti­tu­tion. It is a naked abuse of power. It begs the ques­tion: Is this an im­peach­able of­fense? A con­gres­sional res­o­lu­tion has been in­tro­duced to warn that such high crimes and mis­de­meanors will trig­ger im­peach­ment pro­ceed­ings. It’s about time.

De­fense Sec­re­tary Leon E. Panetta re­cently gave con­gres­sional tes­ti­mony say­ing that the United States no longer needs the ap­proval or con­sent of Congress be­fore launch­ing a ma­jor mil­i­tary of­fen­sive. In par­tic­u­lar, Mr. Panetta — to the amaze­ment of Sen. Jeff Ses­sions, Alabama Re­pub­li­can — ar­gued that the ad­min­is­tra­tion needs only “in­ter­na­tional per­mis­sion” to en­gage in war. In other words, Mr. Panetta stressed that in­ter­na­tional ap­proval from the United Na­tions or NATO trumps the sov­er­eign au­thor­ity of Congress. The ad­min­is­tra­tion is now con­tem­plat­ing whether to top­ple the bru­tal regime in Syria or wage dev­as­tat­ing airstrikes on Iran’s nu­clear fa­cil­i­ties. Mr. Obama seems to view Congress and our sys­tem of checks and bal­ances as a nui­sance. He is en­gaged in a mas­sive power grab, be­hav­ing more like a Ro­man em­peror un­fet­tered by the will of the peo­ple and its duly elected rep­re­sen­ta­tives. His world­view is clear — and omi­nous: Amer­ica is no longer a self-gov­ern­ing repub­lic, but a supra­na­tional state.

This brazen as­sault upon con­gres­sional con­sti­tu­tional pre­rog­a­tives has in­spired re­mark­ably lit­tle re­sis­tance. Like an­cient Rome, re­pub­li­can in­sti­tu­tions are slowly be­ing drained of au­thor­ity, power flow­ing to an ar­ro­gant, ever-grow­ing le­viathan. One con­gress­man, how­ever, fi­nally has drawn a line in the sand. Rep. Wal­ter B. Jones, North Carolina Re­pub­li­can, has is­sued a res­o­lu­tion stat­ing that should Mr. Obama — or any other pres­i­dent — use of­fen­sive mil­i­tary force with­out prior and clear au­tho­riza­tion by Congress, this would con­sti­tute an im­peach­able of­fense.

“The is­sue of pres­i­dents tak­ing this coun­try to war with­out con­gres­sional ap­proval is one that I have long been con­cerned about,” Mr. Jones said. “Just last week, Pres­i­dent Obama’s Sec­re­tary of De­fense Leon Panetta told the United States Se­nate that he only needed to seek ‘in­ter­na­tional’ ap­proval prior to ini­ti­at­ing yet an­other war, this time in Syria. Congress would merely need to be ‘in­formed.’ This ac­tion would clearly be a vi­o­la­tion of Ar­ti­cle I, Sec­tion 8 of the Con­sti­tu­tion.”

He added: “Enough is enough. It is time this coun­try up­holds the Con­sti­tu­tion and the prin­ci­ples upon which this coun­try was founded.”

Mr. Jones is a pa­triot. He is a rare breed in Congress: a con­ser­va­tive con­sti­tu­tion­al­ist who be­lieves in putting Amer­ica first. He rightly seeks to reim­pose con­sti­tu­tional and le­gal lim­its upon the pres­i­dent’s abil­ity to make war. Mr. Jones has im­ple­mented a trig­ger mech­a­nism to po­ten­tially rein in the law­less, scan­dal-rid­den ad­min­is­tra­tion. His res­o­lu­tion en­shrines one ab­so­lute prin­ci­ple: The Con­sti­tu­tion ap­plies to Mr. Obama — as it should to ev­ery pres­i­dent.

Mr. Obama has al­ready pushed the con­sti­tu­tional lim­its. Take his war in Libya. The decision to over­throw Libyan dic­ta­tor Moam­mar Gad­hafi was done with­out con­gres­sional au­tho­riza­tion — some­thing Pres­i­dent Bush re­ceived for his mil­i­tary in­ter­ven­tions in Afghanistan and Iraq. Hence, the Libya ad­ven­ture was ar­guably un­con­sti­tu­tional. It was a war un­der­taken with­out even the le­gal fig leaf of con­gres­sional con­sent. It vi­o­lated the War Pow­ers Act, which in­sists that any mil­i­tary ac­tion past 60 days must re­ceive con­gres­sional ap­proval. Mr. Obama sim­ply cir­cum­vented Congress. His be­hav­ior was that of a creep­ing dic­ta­tor.

More­over, he in­sisted that the Libya op­er­a­tion was le­git­i­mate be­cause it had U.N. ap­proval. Un­ac­count­able in­ter­na­tional bu­reau­crats are to have more au­thor­ity over U.S. armed forces than Congress. Mr. Obama also en­coded the per­ni­cious prin­ci­ple of “lead­ing from be­hind.” In other words, the world’s su­per­power must en­gage in na­tional self-ab­ne­ga­tion for fear of up­set­ting Washington’s coali­tion part­ners. In­stead of lead­ing NATO, Mr. Obama wants Amer­ica to be sub­sumed by it. The re­sults of the Libya war were dis­as­trous. Gad­hafi’s mur­der­ous regime has been re­placed by an Is­lamist Libya. Al Qaeda and the Tal­iban have in­fil­trated the coun­try’s mil­i­tary, its large stock­piles of weapons plun­dered. Shariah law is be­ing im­posed. Libya is be­com­ing a hot­bed of ji­hadist rad­i­cal­ism. In other words, Mr. Obama waged an il­le­gal war that ended up em­pow­er­ing Amer­ica’s mor­tal en­e­mies. If that is not a “high crime and misdemeanor,” then what is?

The ad­min­is­tra­tion is hop­ing to en­trench the Libya model. This was the pur­pose of Mr. Panetta’s com­ments. From now on, Mr. Obama will launch mil­i­tary in­ter­ven­tions based on a new doc­trine: glob­al­ism. He hopes to erect a new world or­der where in­ter­na­tional bod­ies su­per­sede Amer­i­can na­tional sovereignty. U.S. mil­i­tary power is to be­come a tool of transna­tional so­cial­ists. Ge­orge Soros is in, Ge­orge Washington is out.

It is not just for­eign pol­icy. Mr. Obama has re­peat­edly be­haved in an au­thor­i­tar­ian, law­less fash­ion. He abused con­gres­sional pro­ce­dures to ram through Oba­macare. He has named nu­mer­ous pol­icy “czars” with Cab­i­net-like pow­ers with­out the Se­nate’s ad­vice and con­sent. He has made re­cess ap­point­ments while Congress was not in re­cess — a bla­tant trans­gres­sion of con­sti­tu­tional au­thor­ity. He has sued states, such as Ari­zona and Alabama, sim­ply for try­ing to en­force fed­eral im­mi­gra­tion laws, which the pres­i­dent is legally ob­li­gated to up­hold.

This is why vot­ers must con­duct the ul­ti­mate im­peach­ment: Re­move him from of­fice in the Novem­ber elec­tion. Un­til then, should Mr. Obama at­tempt an Oc­to­ber sur­prise by bomb­ing Syria or Iran in or­der to cyn­i­cally win re-elec­tion, Mr. Jones has given Repub­li­cans the fire­wall to stop him. We don’t serve the pres­i­dent. He must serve us.

IL­LUS­TRA­TION BY HUNTER

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.