But O'Donnell then jumped into constitutional fantasy-land himself in an attack on Republican Senator Rand Paul. Paul is arguing that Obama's Libya military aggression lacks congressional authorization and is thus unconstitutional. Congress has weighed in on this issue before, with the War Powers Resolution:
(c) Presidential executive power as Commander-in-Chief; limitation
The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to
(1) a declaration of war,
(2) specific statutory authorization, or
(3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.
Paul's position, when viewed through the plain wording of the constitution and the War Powers Resolution is certainly reasonble. O'Donnell responded to it last night by attacking Paul via Senate Resolution 85, which passed on March 1st by unanimous consent. O'Donnell seems to think S. Res. 85 provides some form of congressional authorization for Obama's action in Libya. It just doesn't. It does nothing of the kind.
First, here's O'Donnell's segment:
Now, here is the Senate's own summary of what its bill actually does (bullets added):
