War was declared Sept.14, 2001 (their argument)

[underpants]

From UVa's Robert Turner-you might have seen him on C-Span yesterday morning before the Gonzales appearance in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
http://sixtiessurvivor.org/shockhorror/node/91

For constitutional purposes, the joint resolution passed with but a single dissenting vote by Congress on Sept. 14, 2001, was the equivalent of a formal declaration of war. The Supreme Court held in 1800 (Bas v. Tingy), and again in 1801 (Talbot v. Seamen), that Congress could formally authorize war by joint resolution without passing a formal declaration of war; and in the post-U.N. Charter era no state has issued a formal declaration of war. Such declarations, in fact, have become as much an anachronism as the power of Congress to issue letters of marque and reprisal (outlawed by treaty in 1856). Formal declarations were historically only required when a state was initiating an aggressive war, which today is unlawful.

[wtbymark]

1. If there is no "formal" declaration of war anymore

then monkey boy shouldn't enjoy the powers of commander and chief

rewrite the rules for declaration of war - congressional approval, limited executive powers, no tax cuts, industries have to donate a % of their gross

MAKE IT A PENALTY TO WAGE WAR
then war WILL be the last resort

[JHB]

2. What a Pile of Horsedump!

(And I thank the late, great Marine Smedley Butler for that ripe phrase)

That's not an interpretation of the Constitution, that's a rewrite.

And if it now takes such a low threshold to count as "declaring war" under the Constitution, exactly what does it take to END that state of war?

[underpants]

3. F**kin' Eurasia!

That the beauty of it-it never ends.

But but but

Hold it (points to sign on wall) WE ARE AT WAR!!!!

[mdmc]

4. Dems voted lock step out of fear