Feingold saying wants Bush to set date to withdraw troops by next

[rodeodance]

summmer. If not, he will introduce bill demanding this be done.

Listening to the local news here in WI.

[Kagemusha]

1. Demand how?

We all know that the Constitution states that the President is Commander in Chief. No binding act of Congress can force him to move troops in a particular manner. So is this a) a symbolic move with no binding force, b) a money bill, or c) some sort of declaration that the US is at peace with Terror?

[Vincardog]

2. Congress can approve money for the re deployment of the troops out of the Civil War

and the end of the illegal occupation will result. They can not approve any money for sustaining the illegal occupation.

There has been no declaration of war as required by that old rag
THE US CONSTITUTION.

[Kagemusha]

3. Well the declaration of war thing's too long to argue here but

my point is that unless this is a bill that affects money for the military in the manner you succinctly describe, the bill will be a waste of ink and trees.