Now is the time at Ed Driscoll.com when we juxtapose:
The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.
As Commander-in-Chief, the President does have a duty to protect and defend the United States. In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent. History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the Legislative branch. It is always preferable to have the informed consent of Congress prior to any military action.
— Sen. Barack Obama, December 20, 2007, as quoted by the Boston Globe.
“What’s a proper way for journos to refer to this? To me, it’s a war. But since there’s no Cong. declaration, technically it ain’t.”
— Marc Ambinder, White House correspondent for the National Journal, 15 minutes ago.
Or to put it another way, as Jim Treacher writes:
Remember all the stuff Obama said about Iraq during the ’08 campaign? Yeah. Never mind.
Update: At the Washington Examiner, Timothy P. Carney on Obama’s “flippant beginning to another war.”
(Concept via SDA.)