Why would President Barack Hussein Obama place the United States, its citizens and allies, at further risk from Jihadist retaliation from an unconstitutional act of war against a foreign sovereign nation and risk impeachment and a trial in the Senate for violating the Constitution of the United States?

Could it be the revelation that Obama’s battle against eligibility challenges are hitting a bumpy road? Revelations about Benghazi? Inoculation from 2014 charges that the democrats are weak on foreign policy and Obama lacks leadership skills? A threat against our economy?

Why would Obama risk disaster for no apparent reason? Ego? I don’t think even Obama is that much of a narcissist. Perhaps he wants to be impeached, before any real crimes come to the public’s attention. You never know with Obama – a man who would stand before the American public and the world and tell a big Benghazi lie about a non-existent protest over a little seen video. Something is going on behind the scenes – and it must be big. Big enough for Obama to risk a showdown with Congress.

But then again, he might just point to the Republicans and say “They kept me from protecting all those poor innocent Syrians.”

There is trouble on the horizon when one of the most progressive socialist democrats, Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice openly warns Obama and others …

Today, Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice, issued the following statement on the prospect of the use of military force in Syria:

The Constitution requires that, barring an attack on the United States or an imminent threat to the U.S., any decision to use military force can only be made by Congress -- not by the President.  The decision to go to war -- and we should be clear, launching a military strike on another country, justified or not, is an act of war -- is reserved by the Constitution to the American people acting through their elected representatives in Congress.

Since there is no imminent threat to the United States, there is no legal justification for bypassing the Constitutionally-required Congressional authorization. “Consultation” with Congress is not sufficient. The Constitution requires Congressional authorization.

The American people deserve to have this decision debated and made in the open, with all the facts and arguments laid out for public review and debate, followed by a Congressional vote. If the President believes that military action against Syria is necessary, he should immediately call Congress back into session and seek the Constitutionally-required authorization.

Historically, We did nothing in the face of genocide in Rwanda and the Sudan. We did nothing in 1988 when Saddam Hussein gassed thousands of Kurds in Halabja, Iraq and used chemical weapons in Iraq’s war on Iran. No western power did anything more than bloviate. So why now?

Bottom line …

If Obama fires one Cruise Missile at Syria without Congressional approval, he is firing that Cruise Missile at the Constitution of the United States.

-- steve

“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS