Either way they are doing it to advance their own agenda. bottom line that is what their lack of action is all about. Their own agenda.
-- Leif Ericksen On Mon, 2007-10-29 at 12:03 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 12:35:04 CDT, Leif Ericksen said: > > > Yes the president can send the troops to war. > > Congress is needed to declare war (the president can not do it) > > See the following: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_war_by_the_United_States > > > > After World War II, Congress voluntarily limited its use of the power to > > declare war to issuing authorizations of force. > > Right. And Congress wussed out and gave Bush basically a blank check > and hasn't gone back to change its mind. They gave him that authorization. > > > Two weeks ago, during a hearing in the House International Relations > > committee, > > > > ****I attempted to force the committee to follow the Constitution and > > vote to declare war with Iraq.**** > > > > COMMENT: If Ron Paul is the author of that Vote for me and I will end > > the war he is contradicting himself the the statement found in the link > > I have provided and just outlined. Does that mean a lie? Dishonesty? > > No, what he did, near as I can tell, was to tell Congress to actually get > *serious*, and if they wanted a *war* to *declare* a war, rather than some > mamby-pamby "authorization to use force". Congress proved not to have > the collective cojones to Do The Right Thing. _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
