Not a violation of the Constitution, but the War Powers Act. Still, I didn’t hear many people object when Bush pushed for war in Iraq and Afghanistan back in Sept. 2002. It passed the House by a vote of 297 – 133, and the Senate by a vote of 77 – 23. Not until much later did anybody say he did the wrong thing when it turned the war was a protracted thing, unlike Gulf War I.
Obama did not lie to the American Public (and the world) at his State of the Union Address to get us into Libya. Rethuglicans (read Chaney, Bush & Haliburton) are just pissed off that they won’t make 100’s of billions of dollars on this action because there are no troops on the ground. This is about people not money and that is why Dems support is and Rethuglicans don’t.
Nebulous Premium Member almost 13 years ago
Rethuglicans were happy when Bush started the first two wars, why are they upset with Obama and the third?
hotdogger almost 13 years ago
Not a violation of the Constitution, but the War Powers Act. Still, I didn’t hear many people object when Bush pushed for war in Iraq and Afghanistan back in Sept. 2002. It passed the House by a vote of 297 – 133, and the Senate by a vote of 77 – 23. Not until much later did anybody say he did the wrong thing when it turned the war was a protracted thing, unlike Gulf War I.
cyzicus almost 13 years ago
Obama did not lie to the American Public (and the world) at his State of the Union Address to get us into Libya. Rethuglicans (read Chaney, Bush & Haliburton) are just pissed off that they won’t make 100’s of billions of dollars on this action because there are no troops on the ground. This is about people not money and that is why Dems support is and Rethuglicans don’t.