"You can't have 435 Commanders in Chief," said President Bush

FLOOR SPEECH: MAINTAIN CONSTITUTIONAL SEPARATION OF WARTIME POWERS by Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah)

Under Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution, the President is the “Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States.” However, Congress’ role is limited in Article I, Section 8 which, in part, reads “…The Congress shall have power to …provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States… To declare war…to raise and support armies…to provide and maintain a navy… to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces; … to provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions… to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States…”

Mr. President, these are very different powers; they are not shared. The Constitution provides for only one Commander-in-Chief. Our troops are facing enough challenges in the weeks and months ahead -- they do not need to worry if there will be 435 Commanders-in-Chief.

~@~

"You can't have 435 Commanders in Chief," President Bush said the other day.

"I've read the Constitution. [ Congress has ] the right to declare war and I have the right, as Commander in Chief, to fulfill my responsibilities . . . "

~@~

Hatch: 'I hope' Obama not delaying troop decision to help Corzine and Deeds 

Lawmakers split on timing of Afghan decision ~ 3mins ago

Washington – Top lawmakers sparred Sunday over the timing of President Barack Obama 's decision on how to move ahead in Afghanistan , with Republicans urging a quick move to boost troop levels and Democrats counseling patience.

~@~

General has forgotten who is the commander in chief ~ October 17, 2009

Do the words “commander in chief” mean anything?

That’s not so clear anymore, after Gen. Stanley McChrystal publicly disagreed with President Obama over sending more troops to Afghanistan.

~@~

Just like FOX News was 95% pro-war during the Bush administration and, is now condemning President Obama for exercising his authority as Commander-in-Chief. The Congressional Republicans are now speaking out as if they have some form of consultation powers, claiming President Obama is taking too long to make a decision regarding Afghanistan. Why is it under President Bush's administration and it's taking this nation to war footings in two countries, they were crying about Democrat opposition saying: "The Constitution provides for only one Commander-in-Chief. Our troops are facing enough challenges in the weeks and months ahead -- they do not need to worry if there will be 435 Commanders-in-Chief. " ?

Will the American people recognize the hypocrisy in the Republicans vitriol and hyperbole in this regard?