The great "communicator"

Nothing he does is Constitutional.

He signed a presiential finding that allowed him to send in special ops two (maybe three) weeks before the actual bombing began. A CIA linked aircraft was spoted flying out of the country before the action started. Not only THAT but al-Queda has got ahold of some of Lybia's surface to air missles during the uprising. http://politicsreport.com/news/obama-signs-finding-libya http://righttruth.typepad.com/right_truth/2011/03/al-qaeda-gets-libyan-missiles.html http://current.com/news/93102343_cia-linked-extraordinary-rendition-plane-landed-in-libya-while-un-approved-libya-incursion.htm

If this was the right thing to do, then Obama should have known that three weeks ago. That would have given him lots of time to consult Congress, explain his reasons, let us know why this is in the best interests of the country, get Congressional authority to spend the money and still go to the UN Security Council. Maybe it wouldn't have happened until just now, or maybe it would have all been done sooner, with less loss of civilian life. If the long indecision made this one of those situations where now Obama had to act quickly without getting the necessary authorizations, then it was the long period of indecision that was wrong - even if Obama is right to act. Even if he had the right to act. The biggest problem with Obama defending his actions as Constitutional is that his own words belie his defense: 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. – Barack Obama, December 20, 2007 If Obama, the Constitutional scholar, is going to defend his actions under the scrutiny of his own interpretation of the President's Constitutional authority, he's going to have to show us the "actual or imminent threat" to our nation. Whether you agree with the decision to join the coalition and the attacks on Libya, Obama owes us an explanation - either he's changed his mind on the Constitutional powers of the president or he needs to tell us what the threat is. He met with Congressional leaders 90 minutes before announcing his intentions. The UN approved this but Congress did not take a vote on it. If he doesn't start talking soon, he gives the impression that he is taking orders from the UN and has given them the power to declare which wars the US must be involved in. His own party turning on him in this has a lot to do with his Lone Ranger decision-making. Not to mention the fact that it hurts the "it's Bush's fault" excuse if he never stops doing what Bush did and keeps copying Bush's speeches. He's probably okay legally IF he does the right thing now to correct the errors he has made thus far. The majority of the public supports this action in Libya. But as we know, everyone is for freedom and justice if the fight is short and successful. If he doesn't clearly state the objective and then wrap it up as quickly as possible, the public will sour on this every bit as much as they have on every other military action since WWII.