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.

“Why Do We Need to Pay Them to Hate Us?” Obama’s Foreign Aid Policy Makes No Sense

Kevin “Coach” Collins, FloydReports.com

Recently Texas Republican Congressman Ted Poe reintroduced an idea whose time might have finally come. He addressed Congress asking that we review the foreign aid we are sending to countries around the world, with the purpose of cutting most of it.  Referring to the many countries with their hands out looking for foreign aid, Poe asked a direct question: “Why do we need to pay them to hate us?”

Poe’s fact-filled, but brief, speech contained some compelling points.

We are giving foreign aid money, our tax dollars, to 150 of the 192 countries of the world. Some of these counties are ungratefu,l but most of the biggest recipients are outright hostile toward us and can fairly be accused of hating us.

Among the countries Poe singled out were Venezuela and Cuba, which gets $20 million of our money….

Read more.

Is There an Iranian Missile Base in Cuba?

Chet Nagle, The Daily Caller

Hugo Chavez, the yanqui-hating dictator of Venezuela, will not accept Washington’s proposed emissary and has dared the United States to break diplomatic relations. It seems Ambassador-select Larry Palmer’s sin is that he did not applaud Chavez when he used his rubber-stamp parliament to perpetuate his dictatorial regime. The State Department’s limp-wristed response was to cancel the visa of the Venezuelan ambassador. That, and silence from the White House, told the megalomaniac in Caracas exactly what the United States will do when Iran finishes building a nuclear missile base in Venezuela — absolutely nothing.

Like Marxist Fidel Castro was in the 1960s, Caudillo Chavez is today’s darling of American liberals and the international left. They are enchanted with his underclass roots, his anti-imperialist posturing, and insults he hurls at the United States in media shows that are crowd-pleasing combinations of Keith Olbermann rants and videos of “The Big Guy from Brooklyn.” More ominously, Chavez has imitated Castro, and like Fidel he has found a big brother to give him the nuclear military clout to dominate Latin America: The Islamic Republic of Iran.

Planning for Iran’s penetration of the Western Hemisphere is well underway.

Read more.

Human Rights Violators Prepare to Criticize U.S. at the UN

Ben Johnson, FloydReports.com

Thanks to the Obama administration, the United Nations is prepared to judge American “human rights violations” tomorrow in Geneva. And human rights violators are lining up to testify against the United States.

Cuba, Venezuela, and Iran have lined up to criticize the Land of the Free during a three-hour hearing before the UN Human Rights Council scheduled for tomorrow in Geneva. The “universal periodic review” hearing – which is presided over by a troika of nations including France, Japan, and Cameroon – sets aside two hours for criticism by foreign nations. According to UN sources, Cuba began aggressively lobbying its allies to take America down a peg during the proceedings.

Other nations that have expressed a desire to speak out include North Korea, China, Libya, Egypt, and Russia.

Zohreh Elahian, a member of Iran’s UN delegation, said the motley crew of witnesses intends….

Read more.