Comment: Okay

(See in situ)


Okay

this is where Kerry showed his ignorance, as many politicians now do.

Rand Paul asks Senator Kerry if he agrees with what Obama, as a candidate, said about a president, under the Constitution, NOT being able to unilaterally authorize a military attack.

Kerry responds by saying "I respect that.. look you can be absolutist and apply it to every circumstance. The problem is it just doesn't work. There are some instances, when 10,000 people are about to be wiped out by a brutal dictator, and you need to make a quick judgement about engagement you certainly can't rely on a congress that has proven itself unwilling to move after weeks and months sometimes..."

This is where Kerry is wrong, and something Ron Paul warns about, which is nibbling away at the Constitution. Of course you're supposed to be absolutist about it. If something "doesn't work" then amending it is the correct and authorized route. Short of that you don't unilaterally make decisions picking and choosing what to follow and what not to. That's how things get out of whack.

As for a brutal dictator in another country that's not our problem unless the American people want it to be. And you can call for quick congressional action. The U.S. Senate voted 89-8 to approve legislation to avoid the fiscal cliff despite having only 3 minutes to read the 154-page bill, so don't argue "congress only moves slowly".

A president has the emergency power to DEFEND our country, as in "make war", but not "declare war". Kerry and politicians read more here:

http://www.libertyclassroom.com/warpowers/