Rand Paul's Amendment Causes Reid To Adjourn Senate

He merely asked that Reid reaffirm Obama's own words in a nonbinding "sense of the Senate" resolution:

To make his point, Paul quoted, in the legislative language, from Obama’s 2007 remarks on the subject: “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.” According to Paul’s office, “the measure aims to put the Senate on record affirming Congress as the body with constitutional authority on matters of war.”

Reid didn't even want Democrats to have to vote to table this motion, so he adjourned the Senate.

See if you can follow Dick Durbin's logic here:

[D]uring a testy floor exchange Wednesday with Sen. Dick Durbin (D., Ill.), the Kentucky freshman argued that his amendment deserves a vote, and fast. “In Afghanistan and Iraq, with all the complaints from many people on these wars that we were involved in, President Bush did come and ask for the authorization of force,” he said. “We’ve had two to three weeks of this issue. They had time to go to the U.N. They had time to go to the Arab League. They had time to go to everyone. I think you should be insulted the way I am insulted they never came to Congress.”

Durbin fired back that Bush, by coming to Congress, actually “broke precedent.” Paul looked on, bemused.

What? Bush "broke precedent" by following the Constitution?

posted by Ace at 12:43 PM

| Access Comments