Tim Pawlenty: We Need More, Bigger Unconstitutional Wars!

Ben Johnson, The White House Watch

In election years, candidates inevitably promise voters they will do more than their opponents. In practice that usually means increased debt-spending and expanding unconstitutional encroachments on liberty. Now one Republican presidential candidate has doubled-down on the most blatantly illegal action of this presidency, saying Barack Obama has not gone far enough in waging war-by-decree in Libya — and those who want to follow the Constitution are bead-wearing hippies bent on dragging America down in disgrace.

On Tuesday, former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty gave what he dubbed a “major” foreign policy speech to the Council on Foreign Relations. In it, Pawlenty pouted, “parts of the Republican Party now seem to be trying to out-bid the Democrats in appealing to isolationist sentiments.”

“America already has one political party devoted to decline, retrenchment, and withdrawal,” he said. “It does not need a second one.”

He fleshed out what he meant in the speech — calling on Obama to “commit America’s strength to removing Ghadafi” and recognize the rebels as Libya’s legitimate government. During a question-and-answer session afterward, TPaw agreed with President Obama that the War Powers Resolution “does not apply” to the war in Libya.

In March, Pawlenty told students at Vanderbilt University that getting Congressional authorization for a war, as required by the Constitution and the resolution, is “a very complex matter and it’s not something that lends itself to an easy answer.” He added, “we need to make sure we don’t tie the executive or the commander in chief’s hands so tightly that he or she can’t respond in an emergency quickly or in a situation that deserves and needs a quick response.” Pawlenty told the CFR on Tuesday he would consult with Congress “as a courtesy and gesture of respect.”

His speech and his attack on his fellow Republicans raises (at least) 15 questions this author would like to ask Gov. Pawlenty:

  1. You have stated the War Powers Resolution does not apply to the war in Libya. However, the administration’s best lawyers disagreed with your assessment. Attorney General Eric Holder reportedly sided with them. The highest legal scholar in the administration to hold to your view is Harold Koh, who advocates “transnationalist jurisprudence,” who once branded the United States a member of the “axis of disobedience,” and who often co-authors articles with members of the Center for Constitutional Rights — a pro-terrorist legal house founded by Marxists. How can a self-identified “conservative” find himself to the Left of Eric Holder? If elected, will you rely on the advice of Koh or others of his ideology?
  2. The Founding Fathers clearly placed the war-making power in the hands of Congress alone — in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution as well as their deliberations before its passage and their practice following its adoption. Since the Constitution has not been amended, what legal precedent do you believe suspended and nullified the Founders’ intentions?
  3. Since you do not believe Congressional authorization is necessary to initiate hostilities, at what point, if any, would you consider Congressional authorization necessary to continue military interventions abroad in which American personnel or weapons were killing or attempting to kill foreign nationals (referred to as “hostilities” in the War Powers Resolution)?

Read more.

Poll: 60% of Tea Party, Nearly Half of GOP Support Impeaching Obama

Ben Johnson, FloydReports.com

A new poll reported in an unlikely source shows a broad majority of Tea Party members and roughly half of all Republicans support impeaching Barack Obama. More than 1,000 registered voters were asked, “Would you support or oppose the impeachment of President Obama?” Among those who describe themselves as Tea Party members, a full 60 percent support impeachment. An additional 16 percent are unsure.

Among Republicans, 48 percent support impeachment and 22 percent are unsure.

A Democratic Poll on a Left-Wing Website

Public Policy Polling, which is described as “an American Democratic Party-affiliated polling firm based in Raleigh,” conducted the survey from March 4-6. Its results appeared on the left-wing website the Daily Kos.

Overall….

Read more.

A “Conservative” Paving the Way for Islamic Jihad?

Don Feder, GrassTopsUSA.com

The night they drove old Hosni down — and all the neo-cons were singing. Weekly Standard Editor Bill Kristol was the kapellmeister.

Prior to the exit of Beast Mubarak, Kristol (in yet another of his Olympian pronouncements), thundered: “The United States must support the Egyptian awakening, and has a paramount moral and strategic interest in real democracy in Egypt and freedom for the Egyptian people. The question is how the U.S. government can do its best to help the awakening turn out well.”

How do we know neo-cons aren’t really conservatives? Conservatives are realists. They confront reality without ideological blinders. They do their best to perceive the world as it is, not as they wish it was.

Neo-cons think democracy is the magic elixir — good for what ails the downtrodden, regardless of their benightedness and barbarism. The neo-cons’ touching faith in the universalism of democratic longings is like the liberals’ faith in economic interventionism.

In the case of the Egyptian masses (better they should go back to sleep), popular sovereignty would mean amputating the limbs of shoplifters, killing Christian converts on the spot, a Cairo-Tehran alliance (possibly with Iranian missiles in the Sinai), abrogating Egypt’s 30-year-old peace treaty with Israel, the merger of mosque and state — and, please welcome the Muslim Brotherhood.

Kristol is incensed — incensed I tell you — over Glenn Beck’s warning that the “Egyptian awakening” may be a milestone on the road to a caliphate.

“When Beck rants about the caliphate taking over the Middle East from Morocco to the Philippines (Kristol’s knowledge of geography is akin to his understanding of history), and lists (invents?) the connections between caliphate-promoters and the American left, he brings to mind no one so much as Robert Welch and the John Birch Society,” Kristol sneers.

An alliance between the Left and radical Islam? How preposterous! Oh, Beck, you old Bircher.

Let’s see, the Left is anti-American, and “caliphate-promoters” are anti-American. Both hate Israel even more than they detest capitalism.

In the war on terror, both would hamstring law enforcement and intelligence agencies. Both rely on useful dupes (Bill Kristol?). But only a certified member of the lunatic fringe could conjure up a connection between militant Islam and the totalitarian Left.

Jealousy may play a part in Kristol’s attack, reminiscent of the cruder smears of the Left. According to the latest stats, The Weekly Standard has a circulation of just over 103,000, while between 2.5 million and 3 million watch Beck’s television show every weekday evening. Kristol has his thousands, Beck his millions.

Egypt isn’t Kristol’s first democracy binge-drinking bout.

Read more.

Gay “Conservative” Group Tears Conservatism Apart

Floyd and Mary Beth Brown, FloydReports.com

The American Conservative Union (ACU) and the granddaddy of all conservative conferences, CPAC, are endangered. Many of the traditional sponsors that supported the conference through thick and thin years have abandoned ship.

The issue over which the Media Research Center, Heritage Foundation, Family Research Council, and others have left the room is CPAC’s insistence that GOPProud, an organization of homosexual self-proclaimed conservatives, be given a booth inside the conference. For many conservatives, including us, this recognition of GOProud signifies an acceptance of the open promotion of the gay lifestyle inside the tent of conservatism. As a director of ACU, Floyd is acutely aware of the power struggles this controversy has unleashed inside the organization’s boardroom.

Donald Devine, in an excellent essay available on the ACU website under the title, “Why We are Conservative,” lays out the framework of ideas that built ACU and the modern conservative movement. Devine, a professor of political science, former Reagan administration official, and longtime director of ACU harkens back to the editorial debates at a small publication named National Review in the late 1950’s and early 1960’s.

Devine writes, “Before the 1950s, there were no conservatives. There were traditionalists and libertarians who opposed the dominant welfare state liberal ideology, and there were Republicans who were ‘do it slower-than-the Democrats,’ moderates. But there were no conservatives in the modern sense. Modern conservatism was invented at National Review magazine in the mid-fifties, primarily by editors, William F. Buckley, Jr. and Frank Meyer.”

And then Devine shares the brilliant nugget of compromise that launched the movement and helped it rise to prominence….

Read more.