Posted by
flagwaver on Monday, June 27, 2011 12:34:10 AM
This is absolutely amazing to me people! I start working nights, miss a few days of news, and the next thing I know the Congress is holding two votes on the Libya Un-War, as it has been so aptly called elsewhere. What is getting my goat, though is how the Congress is trying to have it's cake and eat it on this issue.
As I have been on record as saying, I remain convinced that this action is Libya is one of the most blatantly lawless acts in the annals of this most lawless of administrations. The President committed our troops to a shooting war without even a nod to the Congress, but with plenty of support/permission from the Arab League, NATO, the UN, and any other international body the Obamanation felt the need to grovel before to launch his assaults aimed at. ..ahem..."protecting civilians from Qadaffi's forces". All this while ignoring the constitutional role that Congress has to play in the decision making process of engaging in military hostilities. And to add the cherry to the top of this schnit sundae, we have seen air strikes aimed deliberately to kill a head of state that ended up killing, you guessed it, civilians!
Now comes the House of Representatives to the fray, after seeing the role of the Congress ignored like Meagan Fox at a gay pride parade, to take two votes on the Libya fiasco. The first was offered as an authorization of force for the ongoing "kinetic military action" that involves US planes, pilots, bombs, and no doubt special operators. This was a mostly symbolic vote, since whether it passed or failed the military action was going to continue apace; did anyone think that Obama was actually going to heed this vote? To paraphrase from that legendary comedy Blazing Saddles, "We don't need no steenking authorizations!" To the surprise of absolutely no one, the resolution failed, with 70 Democrats joining the GOP majority in denying Obama the symbolic authorization.
The second vote was one that actually had teeth, as it was an opportunity to back up the symbolic vote that would have changed nothing with a vote that would have changed everything. The resolution, introduced by Speaker Boehner sought to cut off all funding for ongoing military operations in Libya and would have had the same results that a similar measure in 1973 had on the Vietnam War---ending our involvement.
What is surprising is that after all the shouting about the way the administration took us to war, and the ongoing questions about the legality of our involvement there, is that the resolution was rather soundly defeated with 89 Republicants voting against the measure...some of whom voted FOR the resolution Dennis Kucinich brought forth the end all military actions in Libya immediately. Now I understand that some of the congressmen felt that defunding the operation would allow for the administration to use NATO as cover for intervening, but it seems to me that Obama and company were already doing that.
See, my problem is that we are either for military intervention in Libya or against it. There is no middle ground here, and I had thought that Congress, especially the GOP led House was in full-throated opposition to engaging in military action that could not possibly be spun to contain any national interest. But when the rubber met the road, it was easier to continue funding a war that you pretend to oppose than to call a halt to the illegal usurpation of congressional power by a power mad White House, or to turn off the money spigot on a war that the White House refuses to call a war.
I wanted to believe that the new GOP led house had the courage of their convictions, but actions like this make you wonder whether this about doing what's right or trying to preserve an issue for the upcoming election cycle.