Article

2007-05-04 Home Front: WoT

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2007-05-04 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11131 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 See also on FREEREPUBLIC.com. OTOH, THE HILL > interview wid CINDY SHEEHAN > MOTHER CINDY says HILLARY is "BAD" FOR AMERICA. There goes the reunion.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2007-05-04 02:35|| 2007-05-04 02:35|| Front Page Top

#2 This may well be unconstitutional, since the Separation of Powers inherent in the Constitution does NOT require congressional permission to wage war. Also, the War Powers Act that the Democrats like to cite has NOT been ruled on by the US Supreme Court which leaves its actual legality open to question.
I expect President Bush to veto anything this stupid like he did the other bill, but it may be necessary to fight this in the courts to discourage this sort of stupidity in the future.

Posted by Shieldwolf 2007-05-04 03:43|| 2007-05-04 03:43|| Front Page Top

#3 Bi+ch. Democrat's version of taquiyya, I guess.

Posted by gorb 2007-05-04 03:55|| 2007-05-04 03:55|| Front Page Top

#4 Perhaps now would be an opportune time to revisit what had been US Policy since 1998.

It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime.

The Iraq Liberation Act

Posted by doc 2007-05-04 08:54|| 2007-05-04 08:54|| Front Page Top

#5 I would like to see that picture on the front pages of every paper in the country.

Larry Kudlow is right, there is no presidential material in the donk party.

Posted by wxjames 2007-05-04 09:57|| 2007-05-04 09:57|| Front Page Top

#6 She's so worried about Obama that she's willing to dump her "hawk" credentials just to kick the can down the road.

Posted by danking_70 2007-05-04 10:08|| 2007-05-04 10:08|| Front Page Top

#7 Can isn't going to be kicked down the road. Joke's on her, but we'll all pay for her folly.

Posted by anonymous2u 2007-05-04 10:50|| 2007-05-04 10:50|| Front Page Top

#8 Shieldwolf-

The War Powers Act is indeed of at best dubious legality. So far it's not been flat out challenged, but it is very likely that were it to go in front of SCOTUS, it would die a quick and final death. As far as changing the original UMF resolution to add in a clause that convienently kills the UMF upon approval, that won't go anywhere either. It's veto-able, and nobody's going to override it.

Mike

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2007-05-04 12:27|| 2007-05-04 12:27|| Front Page Top

#9 This is the Democrat's partial birth abortion of the Iraqi democracy. Doctor Hillary is the abortionist.

Posted by WTF 2007-05-04 15:25|| 2007-05-04 15:25|| Front Page Top

#10 I really have to disagree here.

Congress has the power to start or end a war, and it should be that way. The Founding Fathers had experience with executives who could start wars on their own.

The fact that the current Congress is in the hands of those who want short-term political advantage, regardless of what it does to the country, and out-and-out disloyal traitors, doesn't really change that.

Congress (effectively) declared war on Afghanistan and Iraq. They did not do so on Serbia or Haiti.

Posted by Jackal">Jackal 2007-05-04 15:32|| http://home.earthlink.net/~sleepyjackal/index.html]">[http://home.earthlink.net/~sleepyjackal/index.html] 2007-05-04 15:32|| Front Page Top

#11 Love the graphic. Is it a real picture or a cartoon?

Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2007-05-04 15:48|| 2007-05-04 15:48|| Front Page Top

#12 Jackal, re-read the Constitution please. The President is Commander in Chief, not Congress. The two powers Congress has in regards to wars are : 1) Power of the purse - approve or deny funding; and 2) Power to formally declare war. Congress can declare war all day long and if the President refuses to commit troops, that is the end of it. Look at the law that Congress and Clinton passed in the 1990s about removing Saddam from power : Clinton signed it and then did NOTHING, even though the law made it a formal policy of the US government to remove Saddam by any means.
In war, the Congress can propose but the President can choose to not dispose.

Posted by Shieldwolf 2007-05-04 17:06|| 2007-05-04 17:06|| Front Page Top

#13 Will someone please put THAT WOMAN in a mental institution where she belongs, and throw away the key? I absolutely refuse to use her name, in any form, ever again. She makes her husband look like a saint.

Posted by Old Patriot">Old Patriot 2007-05-04 18:26|| http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/]">[http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/] 2007-05-04 18:26|| Front Page Top

#14 1) Power of the purse - approve or deny funding; and 2) Power to formally declare war.

Pretty minor shit all together.

Posted by Shipman">Shipman 2007-05-04 19:05|| 2007-05-04 19:05|| Front Page Top

#15 Oh No,No,No, She "Wants to build on Bill's Legacy" Didnchya know?

(First thing out of my mouth "WHAT LEGACY?'0

Posted by Redneck Jim 2007-05-04 19:23|| 2007-05-04 19:23|| Front Page Top

#16 Technically speaking, this is what they did after the Senate refused to ratify the Versailles Treaty at the conclusion of WWI. Congress just repealed the declaration of war. Still doesn't alter that a state of war can still exist without one. The 19th century is validation of that with military operations against ~~insurgents~~ natives throughout the western territories being conducted without a declaration of any sort. When the Donks were in the 'punish the Army' mode after the Civil War, it took another incursion by the Apache out of Mexico to 'encourage' the Donk Texas delegation to put their constituents [and their need for reelection] ahead of party power politics to get the Army funded for a year.

Posted by Procopius2k 2007-05-04 20:19|| 2007-05-04 20:19|| Front Page Top

#17 I wish the donks would dig their heels in as hard in fighting this war as they do to oppose anything Bush does.

Posted by JohnQC 2007-05-04 21:00|| 2007-05-04 21:00|| Front Page Top

#18 SW:
It's more of an AND function. While Congress can't force the President to actually attack somewhere, he is not allowed more than defensive measures without a DoW.

Remember that even after Pearl Harbor, FDR, certainly not one to believe in a weak Presidency, went to Congress for a DoW on Japan.

So I like the Constitution giving Congress the authority to enable or disable the President's use of the military. I also agree that it's a purely OFF/ON switch and it has no authority on how he conducts the war.

Posted by Jackal">Jackal 2007-05-04 22:22|| http://home.earthlink.net/~sleepyjackal/index.html]">[http://home.earthlink.net/~sleepyjackal/index.html] 2007-05-04 22:22|| Front Page Top

#19 FOX NEWS Pert > USA may see DOW as high as 18,000 by = circa Year 2010. Should be higher than that by my calcs/formulas, but what the hey - close enuff for Gubmint work, close enuff for me to celebrate wid for SUBWAY = QUIZNOS Hoagies.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2007-05-04 22:58|| 2007-05-04 22:58|| Front Page Top

#20 As a reminder, SPACEWAR etal. > IRAN will have a LR ICBM miiiiiiisssslllleee, very likely capable of carrying a nuclear payload, and also likely capable of striking the US of A, + Europe, by or circa Year 2010. *Also, NEWSMAX > DE BORCHGRAVE article > AL QAEDA/Terror "sleeper cells" inside USA + around the Weld, AWAIT OPPORTUNITY = ORDERS TO STRIKE.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2007-05-04 23:04|| 2007-05-04 23:04|| Front Page Top

#21 I sent what I thought was an interesting de Borchgrave article to James Taranto of The Best of the Web some years ago, and he wrote back explaining exactly why he didn't think much of the gentleman's opinions. I don't remember the details, JosephM, but it was quietly scathing.

Posted by trailing wife 2007-05-04 23:37|| 2007-05-04 23:37|| Front Page Top

23:59 Sid 6.7
23:55 trailing wife
23:52 JosephMendiola
23:51 bruinge
23:48 trailing wife
23:42 trailing wife
23:38 trailing wife
23:37 trailing wife
23:36 USN, ret.
23:27 Zenster
23:25 JosephMendiola
23:24 trailing wife
23:22 Eric Jablow
23:16 Redneck Jim
23:12 trailing wife
23:10 Redneck Jim
23:09 trailing wife
23:07 Pappy
23:04 JosephMendiola
23:01 CrazyFool
22:58 JosephMendiola
22:57 Redneck Jim
22:51 JosephMendiola
22:51 trailing wife