Congress officially warns * on Iran....GOOD JOB!

[Sperk]

I don't know if it's been posted already, but it's really important that everyone see this.

http://www.buzzflash.com/alerts/06/05/ale06050.html

Bush has been warned NOT to take any military action against Iran without Congress' approval.

It's says biparisian but it doesn't list party with name. Does anyone know which Rep.s are repugs? I hate to give Kudos to Repugs but it must be done this time.

Marty Meehan is a Dem and my Rep. THANKS MARTY!

[graywarrior]

1. Godd for them, however

Nov 2006 is a big motivator

[welshTerrier2]

2. fantastic ...

thanks for posting this ...

now maybe the Senate Dems will get on board ... if the opposition to Iran takes too long to organize, we'll be arguing about why bush shouldn't have attacked Iran instead of fighting to keep him from doing so in the first place ...

bush is desperate to change the politics and his horrible poll numbers ... a wounded animal is always the most dangerous ...

recommended !!!

[quiet.american]

3. Beautiful, baby! "....'everybody does it' is not a legitimate defense..."

While presidents in the latter half of the 20th Century have initiated military action without prior authorization by Congress, "everybody does it" is not a legitimate defense to ignore the plain words of the U.S. Constitution, the clear intent of the authors of the U.S. Constitution, and more than 150 years of legal precedent.

Contrary to your Administration's broad reading, nothing in the history of the "Commander-in-Chief" clause suggests that the authors of the provision intended it to grant the Executive Branch the authority to engage U.S. forces in military action whenever and wherever it sees fit without any prior authorization from Congress. The founders of our country intended this power to allow the President to repel sudden attacks and immediate threats, not to unilaterally launch, without congressional approval, large-scale preventive military actions against foreign threats that are likely years away from materializing. With respect to Iran, according to the most definitive U.S. intelligence report, Iran is likely a decade away from developing a nuclear weapon. Even the most pessimistic analysis by outside experts puts the timeline at least three years away, but that's only if everything in Iran's development program proceeds flawlessly, which would defy the history of nuclear programs around the world, including Iran's.

"When Attorney General Alberto Gonzales was White House Counsel, he came up with a novel legal theory that the president can take whatever military action he wants without getting prior authorization from Congress," DeFazio said. "My letter calls on the president to follow the law as set by Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution and get authorization from Congress before taking military action against Iran. Members of the House of Representatives have been elected by their constituents to participate in major decisions like initiating military strikes against other countries, and it is an injustice to the American people to deny them that prerogative. Our founders intentionally put the responsibility for deciding whether to send our troops into battle into the hands of the Congress because they did not want the president to have the power of a king. The president saying otherwise does not make it so."

[No New War]

10. THAT Brightened my day a bit, thank you (n/t)

[Oversea Visitor]

4. Ron Paul

A good Republican Congressman.

[Lib Grrrrl]

5. Ron Paul Is NOT A Repuke

He's really a Libertarian. He's just pragmatic enough to know he would never be elected as a Libertarian, and so he runs as a Repuke, knowing that will help him, especially in Texas.

I used to live in a Congressional District adjacent to Ron Paul's, so I know him well, and I can tell you this is true.

He is actually a Libertarian.

[Oversea Visitor]

8. Haha

When I use Republican I mean they are Americans
When I use REPUKE they are crooks.

[Lib Grrrrl]

9. Wait....

All Republicans are crooks. They are all REPUKES.

[Oversea Visitor]

22. Now now

that is like trying to get me to beleive that all Americans are bushbots.

[Lib Grrrrl]

23. Well

I never met a Republican I liked. Or one I thought was a decent human being.

[Oversea Visitor]

25. Wow

Your MSM did good brainwashing job.

[Lib Grrrrl]

26. Not Really

Just that, most of my life since I have been policially aware I have lived in Kentucky, Texas and Pennsylvania.

Now, I think it should be pretty obvious no Kentucky or Texas Republican is a decent human being. As for Pennsylvania, here we get Santorum and Specter...who is no real prize, either.

so come on...when have I had a chance to encounter a Republican who was also a decent human being?

I'm sure there are some out there...I'm just saying I never met one.

And, remember...RON PAUL IS NOT A REPUBLICAN!! He runs as one because he has to to get elected. Fact is, he's really a Libertarian.

Now, I do not agree with many Libertarians on economic policy...but on social issues, I think I can find a lot of common ground with your average Libertarian.

[Truthy Nessy]

11. I agree, Rep Ron Paul is more a libertarian than a Republican

I am not a Republican but I do read his website from time to time. http://www.house.gov/paul/legis_congrec.htm

He wrote a statement on Iran on April 5, 2006 It's quite long but very good.
EXCERPT:
Iran: The Next Neocon Target

"The significant question we must ask ourselves is: What have we learned from three years in Iraq? With plans now being laid for regime change in Iran, it appears we have learned absolutely nothing."
For the whole statement link to: http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2006/cr040506.htm

[jody]

6. 62 out of 435 congresspersons isn't much progress. n/t

[Cocoa]

16. was there such a letter before Iraq?

if not, then it's progress by definition.

I don't understand your dismissive reaction.

[jody]

18. My dismissive reaction is based on experience. It's possible the letter

is just material for the signers political campaigns. :shrug:

[kurth]

7. FYI - Complaints, warnings, requests to the Bush White House are given

immediate attention by the janitor, and properly disposed of.

[Vidar]

12. Good start.

[quiet.american]

13. kick. n/t

[readmoreoften]

14. I see a lot of Dem names. Let's see if we can find the republicans.

Lloyd Doggett: Liberal from Austin, Texas
Sheila Jackson-Lee: Liberal from Texas
Jerry Nadler" Liberal from NYC

Sanders, Conyers, McDermott, Jose Serrano (D, NYC), Major Owens (D, NY), Peter DeFazio (D, Oregon), Peter Stark (D, California), Marcy Kaptur (D, Ohio), Tom Allen (D, Maine), Bobby Scott (D, Virginia), Jay Inslee (D, Washington)

I hope the bipartisan is more than just Ron Paul. Everyone knows Ron Paul isn't really a Republican. He hardly ever votes with the party.

[Lib Grrrrl]

24. Hmmm....

I'd sure like to think that Kanjorski (D, Pennsylvania) would be on that list.

ON EDIT: Just checked...he's not there. That a little disappointing to me.

At least Doggett signed it. I once was a constituent of Lloyd Doggett's. I even worked for his campaign a couple years ago in the then-new 25th District of Texas (he'd been my Rep. previously in the old 10th District...when redistricting happened, I ended up in the new 25th District.)

Now, of course, I'm in Pennsylvania, and I don't like the absence of Paul Kanjorski on that list.

Yeah, okay...so the rest of you probably never HEARD of Kanjorski before...nevertheless, he's my 11th-term Democratic Congressman.

[bornskeptic]

27. There are two Republicans.

Ron Paul and Jim Leach

[Liberty Belle]

30. Filner's a Dem from San Diego.

[Maraya1969]

15. It probably hasn't passed all the way around yet. I don't see Ted

Kennedy's name and I am positive he would be a signer.

[jody]

19. Why would you expect a senator to sign a letter from the house? n/t

[Maraya1969]

28. Cause I don't know the difference. Why can't they all sign?

[PATRICK]

17. Repeating patterns

So is going to be a WH adjustment or is it the exact same thing as last time with Bush sabre rattling then doing nothing until well after the midterms when he knows what he will be facing in Congress. Last time they knew they controlled the vote and propaganda. Things are different this time maybe, but there is actually more e-cheating in place than ever and Bush has less respect or concern for Congress.

So, all things considered, is this set to blindly repeat with some caution until next spring, or is desperation and indifference going to have Bush blow by both the UN and Congress that were vague hindrances last time? It seems amazingly, lazily lockstep, a longterm plan with no regard to the contemporary reality of the situation we are in today. For the simple reason that Bush has not been stopped. Period. Picking off some of his people who eventually can be pardoned. Putting all the eggs into the rigged vote basket and the still lapdog media.

So far it looks like they are miffed by the world not falling in according to plan but all actions and results ticking off the agenda anyway. In this period the Bush team looks desperate, miffed and in the eyes of the sane, even vulnerable. According to pattern they settle down with almost visible signs of relief and steam ahead to war, wider crimes and worse management.

It is similar(purely as a historical analogue mind you, Heaven forfend that I equate anyone with Nazis)to the blind continuance of Hitler parallel to the holocaust executioners, who despite looming defeat and foreseeable consequences pursued policies as before- as if defying reality would again be enough and people would THANK them in the long run for wiping out the Jews.

The disturbing difference is that that there is no cut and dry total war against the Bush regime by anyone but undergrounds, no stark imminence of defeat. Therefore the probability is extremely strong they will go ahead with their plan in full view of the world at their own whim and on their own timetable. There is nothing else they can or want to do even if total ruin is certain. These are fixed people, no matter how cowardly or how failing.

[nicknameless]

20. K&R!!!

[sutz12]

21. We really need to repeal the War Powers Act...

That's the basis of all this since Vietnam.

[FredStembottom]

29. Posted to wrong thread

[roody]

31. I am happy to see Mike Thompson's

name. He tends to be timid.

[OneBlueSky]

32. Important! . . . this is far more than a warning to Congress . . .

this letter is also intended to educate/re-educate the American people about their Constitution and who has the power to do what . . . and who DOES NOT have the power to do what . . .

let's see what kind of coverage this gets in the next 24 hours . . . if the media treats it like they did Rush's court appearance or Colbert's remarks, we'll have to mobilize quickly to make sure it IS covered . . . everywhere . . .

this letter MUST be printed in every newspaper in the country . . . and it may be up to us to see that that happens . . .

[Douglas Carpenter]

33. excellent!!!!

http://www.dontattackiran.org

[Inland]

34. How said is it that Congress has to remind of limits on his power

Most congresses would have thought the job done by the mere existence of the War Powers Act, but no, this one has to tell Bush that they really, really mean that shit, so...

I guess the thought is that Bush takes statutes plus resolutions more seriously than mere statutes, or if he nearly needs reminding. But he doesn't. He does as he pleases secretly and when caught, dares congress to stop him. All he will bother to do is gin up some causus belli and after attacking tell congress that they had better start supporting the troops. The only thing that makes sense is impeachment before the fact.

[wiggs]

35. This MUST be introduced as a resolution on the floor.

Let's see it debated and see who votes for and against it.

The original letter was written almost two weeks ago, yet today is the first time anybody hears of it? If I'm writing a letter like that...if I care deeply that our administration is acting illegally to plunge us again into war, I publicize the letter in bold font in the NY Times and LA Times...I read it on the house floor, I post it on the internet....I get constituents to email their congressmen....I launch a signature campaign (a la Conyers) and march the signed letters to the WH gates....