No, in many ways Syria doesn't compare to the European war in the 1930s and 1940s. But I'm curious as to how DUers feel about this.

Of these choices...

By letting Congress hold nonbinding votes before bombing Syria, our President is proving that he goes the extra yard in hearing everyone's opinion before being the decider. But some on the fringe, like Sen. Rand Paul (R.-Ky) and Sen. Barack Obama (D.-Ill.) have questioned President Obama's claims - Sen. Obama went so far as to say: Barack

“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.”

Fortunately, help has arrived for our unfairly-criticized President. Obama's claims are now strongly echoed by UC Berkeley Law Professor John Yoo, formerly of the George Bush administration. Yoo, who you'll remember had the breakthrough realization that the president is permitted to crush a child’s testicles if he alone thinks he needs to, concurs with Obama in his bold editorial Like it or not, Constitution allows Obama to strike Syria without Congressional approval.

I think that Yoo's opinion should put this question to rest for all Americans If both sensible Democrats like President Obama and sensible Republicans like Professor Yoo can agree, then this is mainstream opinion. Settled law. Fringe players like Senators Paul and Obama can go back to their extremist caves and sulk while we in-the-know types move forward with getting The People’s Work done.

Those people being Jamie and Lloyd, of course.

Regards,

Third-Way Manny

While news sources substantially or significantly supported by foreign governments can be useful, they can also cause great mischief. And I know of your (warranted) concern around RT.

Would it be useful to add a field in the LBN submission form where the submitter can acknowledge if the item comes from a source such as RT, al Jazeera or Fox News (the House of Saud)? Perhaps a list of suspect sources could be on the form.

Then when the news is displayed, a caveat to the reader could be displayed with it.

Thanks for all of your good work!

- Manny

The President has said that he'll give Congress the ability to express an opinion before attacking Syria, but that their vote will not be binding on him.

Seems to me that Congress should insist that their decision be binding. Unless the US is in imminent danger - which we clearly are not - Congress must vote to begin hostilities. The Imperial Presidency needs to end.

Which of the following have the most credibility in this matter?