In the first Debate, both President Obama and Governor Romney stated that the first obligation of the United States President, as Commander-in-Chief, is the preservation of the nation's security from foreign attacks. Well, yes and an emphatic no - the Constitution does indeed appoint the nation's President as Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces, but reserves to the Congress the exclusive authority to unleash the "dogs of war". Only the Congress can authorize the President to don his CinC hat and direct the Army, Navy and Air Force in foreign combat that could lead to victory over the nation's enemy, or our destruction, should the President fail in the exercise of these most difficult executive responsibilities. Art. 1; Section 8.
This is not some arcane proposition relevant only to the "Dead Scholars Society", but absolutely timely to the conduct of the upcoming second debate on Foreign Policy, the election on November 6th, and the conduct of the 48th President in his first months in office, commencing January 2013. Everyone agrees that Iran - with its goal of the destruction of Israel, and the United States as well, in seeking to destroy the "Great Satan" so that the eternal reign of Allah world-wide can finally be established - constitutes an existential threat to our national security, should they give nuclear bombs to terrorists in suitcases, or even bigger packages. Accordingly, how the two candidates articulate their policy approaches to this national security challenge facing America should be topics one. two and three for this second debate.
To date, this political discussion over the last two years has been dominated by a disregard for the Constitutional limitations on Presidential power. Even our most staunch ally, Israel, with an identical commitment to the Rule of Law, demands that President Obama announce himself what bomb building stage Iran needs to achieve in order for the United States to unleash hell on Iran, and bomb that nation's territory. Senator Schummer of New York, who has sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution, recently stated that upon his re-election, President Obama will be far more likely to attack Iran than would be a President Romney. Absolutely incredible - can anyone envision a sitting Senator announcing to our nation's deadly enemy that a future President will not fight to stop their bomb making, and doing so for no purpose other than partisan advantage in the upcoming election. Giving an enemy assurance of safety may not exactly constitute treason, as in giving "Aid and Comfort" to that enemy, but telling the Iranians that a President Romney will allow them to get a nuclear weapon should disqualify him for holding high office when he faces the electorate at his next election.
Senator Schummer's announcement that the decision to attack Iran's bomb making facilities is a act or power given solely to the nation's Chief Executive - without the concurrence of the people United States, acting through their elected Congress - is even more outrageous, indeed it is an impeachable offense for a Senator to abdicate this most crucial of Congressional powers. A nation of 300 million citizens can not Constitutionally be put on a path to possibly total destruction by going to War on the judgment of just one man, or some day, one woman. Exercising the Power of National Life or Death is the ultimate governmental responsibility, and for that very reason, our Constitution authorizes that decision is to be made only by all of us together through our elected representatives - obviously, when we all will literally have our skin the the game, we all get to decide whether to risk burning that skin to a cinder. Should America continue as a nation of laws, and not the rule of (a single) man, we must all demand that the Congress just do it job, whoever is elected our next President.
No comments:
Post a Comment