This is getting eerie. I remember it very similarly.
The public was absolutely for the war--any war in light of the attacks of 9-11. Congress demanded the chance to go one the record in a very popular war so that the President would not have a political advantage.

It was some time after that vote that political strategists advised the dems that there was no advantage in simply agreeing with the President. The only way they could get an advantage was to oppose the President and sell their version to the people. They were much better at that salesmanship than was the President who failed to use the power of the bully-pulpit.

__________________
1982 300SD " Wotan" ..On the road as of Jan 8, 2007 with Historic Tags

How do you figure that? That's like saying that I didn't break the law when I rolled through that stop sign on the way to work this morning. Why would we need a court to prove whether I complied with the law?

I'm not saying that W broke any laws, but the lack of a court finding doesn't have much to do with it, IMHO.Maybe so, but I think you might be mixing apples and oranges. I don't know what the governing law says about either situation, but Obama's method sure seems to be working out better that W's, for what that's worth.

1. Until convicted it's an allegation of wrongdoing. The degree to which it is, or is not well-founded is a personal opinion. The whole 'innocent until proven guilty" thingie comes into play. You may declare your own guilt, I'm fine with that.

2. So if a particular leader's method works we should go with it? That's an interesting idea for a democracy operating under rule of law.

No problemo..'Just a bunch of poor Muslims, who pose no threat, and cant do anything about the U.S. killing them anyway-who gives a crap."

__________________
CHILCUTT~
The secret to a long life. Is knowing when it is time to leave.

Then you believe that Obama has complied with all laws with regard to our involvement in Lybia?As a legal matter, that concept has a much narrower application than you are giving it. Under the law, that concept means that criminal defendants are presumed innocent and that the government bears the burden of proof. AFAIK, this conversation involves the powers of the president to use military force of various sorts. As a legal matter, the presumption of innocence has nothing to do with that.

As a matter of fairness, I agree that people generally should get the benefit of the doubt, but we are not required to wait for a court to tell us the truth about every single thing that happens with our government. That's not what the courts are for.Of course, I said no such thing.

Crime?

Fraud at a minimum.

All I said was the pres did not act in good faith. It was B who responed by saying it had not been proven in court. Seems to be a case of screaming before injured. (by the old adage it is the sign of guilt on the screamers part).

__________________
[SIGPIC] Diesel loving autocrossing grandpa Architect. 08 Dodge 3/4 ton with Cummins & six speed; I have had about 35 benzes. I have a 39 Studebaker Coupe Express pickup in which I have had installed a 617 turbo and a five speed manual.[SIGPIC]

..I also have a 427 Cobra replica with an aluminum chassis.

I am with you on that. The point I was trying to make was that Congress does not get a pass simply because W and his people acted in bad faith. Once the Iraq war became unpopular, we heard democrats saying that W misled them and that's why they voted to authorize force. I say that the evidence is otherwise. There was never any reason to think that Saddam was an imminent threat to us and they knew it.

The US Constitution declares that any treaties signed and ratified by the Senate are 'the law of the land'. Did Congress authorize him to violate the UN Charter?

I agree the congress needed to grow a set. Most knew Sadaam was no threat but did not want to pay the political price to oppose the president at a time when it was percieved that the voters wanted military action. \

That does still not make the Bush administration less deceatful in their presentation of the evidence.

__________________
[SIGPIC] Diesel loving autocrossing grandpa Architect. 08 Dodge 3/4 ton with Cummins & six speed; I have had about 35 benzes. I have a 39 Studebaker Coupe Express pickup in which I have had installed a 617 turbo and a five speed manual.[SIGPIC]

..I also have a 427 Cobra replica with an aluminum chassis.

I find it quite ironic that the very president who when running for office pledged to clean out Gitmo and bring the troops home from Iraq now sends in "advisors" (Yeah, I'm old enough to remember that term from when JFK used it) into a country where there are no possible interests for the US.

His left wing cronies are eating it up too. Just goes to show that the Bozo's in DC, and I mean both parties, will reverse their so called opinions on a dime. There's not a single one of them in either party with enough character to take a stand on which direction the Sun will rise tomorrow morning.

__________________
2001 SLK 320 six speed manual
2014 Porsche Cayenne six speed manual

Annoy a Liberal, Read the Constitution

Oh come on, just admit it, you don't like him taking military action against those good god fearing christians thats all.

__________________
CENSORED due to not family friendly words

I don't care if they're Christians, Muslims, Budhists, Hindu's or whatever else you've got. Sending in "advisors" is nothing more than recycling JFK's BS and most of you here aren't old enough to remember what that led to.

We have no business there to begin with, but what happened to BO's idea that he would pull the troops out of Iraq before years end? Now he's gone into Libya and now this, and even without congressional approval. He's just a shark in the water smelling the blood and enjoys it.

__________________
2001 SLK 320 six speed manual
2014 Porsche Cayenne six speed manual

Annoy a Liberal, Read the Constitution

1. No matter how you spell the country, I think he has probably followed the law. I doubt a leader short of somebody like President Hugo Chavez would intentionally break the law. Mr Obama ain't my favorite president but he ain't Hugo Chavez, either. However, I believe the constitutionality of the law is open for question but apparently nobody can jump the hurdle of legal standing to bring suit.

2. Me too.

When did we invade Libia?

I must have missed that one.

I was reading how O gets kudos for Kadaffi being out without spilling so much as a drop of US blood.

__________________
[SIGPIC] Diesel loving autocrossing grandpa Architect. 08 Dodge 3/4 ton with Cummins & six speed; I have had about 35 benzes. I have a 39 Studebaker Coupe Express pickup in which I have had installed a 617 turbo and a five speed manual.[SIGPIC]

..I also have a 427 Cobra replica with an aluminum chassis.

Oh nice, I like the sound of that. Please tell us how JFK wronged you. We would love to hear all about it.

Last I checked we're actually doing that unless you have special super secret information you would like to share?

To be honest I missed that one too but not to fear, Larry is on the job to sort it all out for us.

__________________
CENSORED due to not family friendly words