The War At Home.

Hey folks.

Happy Wednesday to you. First a quick note. I KNOW the big news yesterday, and I’m sure for a little while is and will be "Global Warming." If I get time I’ll get to it. Simply put, the LWL and the MMD are simply attempting to legislate a THEORY. There is NO "Global Warming." For every ten Scientist that say they feel it is real, you have ten that say it’s not. But what they are attempting to do is SILENCE any opposition. It’s all about money, power, and more government in private lives.

Now to the war. Now I’m not talking totally about Iraq. Now it is seeming more and more like we may be talking about Iran also. FINALLY. But what I’m mostly talking about is the war at home. The war between the LWL and the President, their number one enemy.

The news is absolutely stunning. Let’s get right to it. From the AP,

The Bush administration has increased rhetorical, diplomatic, military and economic pressure on Iran over the past few months, in response to Iran's alleged deadly help for extremists fighting U.S. troops in Iraq and the long-running dispute over Iran's nuclear program.

That’s because they are aiding the enemy. They are HELPING them to kill our men and women in Iraq. They want us DEAD. They want Israel DEAD. They want anyone non-Muslim DEAD. President Bush said,

"It makes sense that if somebody's trying to harm our troops or stop us from achieving our goal or killing innocent citizens in Iraq, that we will stop them," Bush said. "It's an obligation we all have ... to protect our folks and achieve our goal."

Makes sense to me. But then again, I’m not a card caring LWL. I can actually THINK. But this article says,

Republican and Democratic senators warned Tuesday against a drift toward war with an emboldened Iran and suggested the Bush administration was missing a chance to engage its longtime adversary in potentially helpful talks over next-door Iraq.

STOP!!! Hold on. First folks, look at the wording here. "Republican" is first. They want you to believe that the President is this out of control leader, that even his own party, no longer has faith in. That's just simply a lie. They say "emboldened Iran?" Well, WHY do you think they are? They it says that Bush missed a chance of "potentially helpful talks over next-door Iraq?" This is just the FIRST paragraph. Are you REALLY buying this garbage?

Then they have the little god, Sen Barack Hussain Obama, saying, "What I think many of us are concerned about is that we stumble into active hostilities with Iran without having aggressively pursued diplomatic approaches, without the American people understanding exactly what's taking place."

Same old, same old. More talks. Nothing accomplished. But that’s OK with them.


OH, the Republican? You know, the first word of this story? I can only assume that they are talking about Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb who asked John Negroponte, who is going to be the Deputy Secretary of State, if we are heading to war with Iran. Why ask him? Ask Simon Tisdall who has an article in the Guardian. He said,

US officials in Baghdad and Washington are expected to unveil a secret intelligence "dossier" this week detailing evidence of Iran's alleged complicity in attacks on American troops in Iraq. The move, uncomfortably echoing Downing Street's dossier debacle in the run-up to the 2003 Iraq invasion, is one more sign that the Bush administration is building a case for war.

He goes on to talk about all the things HE feels are leading to this. Then he wraps it up with this.

Almost any one of these developments might produce a casus belli. And when taken together, despite official protestations, they seem to point in only one direction. The Bush administration, an American commentator suggested, is "once again spoiling for a fight".

GOOD!. Stop Little Hitler BEFORE he has nuclear bombs that he WANTS to use. But then you still have the fact that the LWL and the MMD HATE. The fact that President Bush IS the ONLY Commander and Chief. But WAIT. They are trying to circumvent that now. With a little help.

A Senate Republican on Tuesday directly challenged President Bush's declaration that "I am the decision-maker" on issues of war.

"I would suggest respectfully to the president that he is not the sole decider," Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., said during a hearing on Congress' war powers amid an increasingly harsh debate over Iraq war policy. "The decider is a shared and joint responsibility," Specter said.

The Commander and Chief is not. Never will be.

But there are other legislative options to force the war's end, say majority Democrats and some of Bush's traditional Republican allies.

The alternatives range from capping the number of troops permitted in Iraq to cutting off funding for troop deployments beyond a certain date or setting an end date for the war.

"The Constitution makes Congress a coequal branch of government. It's time we start acting like it," said Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., who presided over a hearing Tuesday on Congress' war powers. He also is pushing legislation to end the war by eventually prohibiting funding for the deployment of troops to Iraq.

Then get this from Reuters,

"I think the constitutional scheme does give Congress broad authority to terminate a war," said Bradford Berenson, a Washington lawyer who was a White House associate counsel under Bush from 2001 to 2003.

"It is ultimately Congress that decides the size, scope and duration of the use of military force," said Walter Dellinger, former acting solicitor general -- the government's chief advocate before the Supreme Court -- in 1996-97, and an assistant attorney general three years before that.

{Laughing}To all you anti-war kooks out there, don’t get to excited. You may hear these things reporting HARD in the next few days, but they are simply NOT true. Even if Congress could find a way to squirm, no, make that slither, their way into the "office" of Commander and Chief and end the war, they just will not do it. They KNOW that the majority of the American people are AGAINST this type of action. I love this statement by Robert Turner of the University of Virginia School of Law,

"In the conduct of war, in the conduct of foreign affairs, the president is in fact the decider," Turner said. He suggested lawmakers might need to "run for president" if they wanted to manage war policy.


Run for President? {Laughing, banging hand on desk} There are like 26 of them that ARE running. Again, as I have said, over and over again,

But the White House said that while Congress controlled the money, Bush controlled the military forces. "The president is not the only decision-maker, but he is the only commander-in-chief," spokeswoman Dana Perino said, adding: "if they (in Congress) have a better plan for securing Baghdad and turning a corner in Iraq, he wants to hear it."

Stop bitching and give us DETAILS about your plan. Oh yeah, sorry, forgot who I was talking to. Out of time, got to go. It is absolutely mind numbing to watch these people continue to use our brave men and women fighting this war as political pawns to conduct a war against their only true enemy, President George W. Bush.
Peter

Sources:
AP-Specter: Bush not sole 'decision-maker'
AP-Senators warn against war with Iran
The Guardian-Bush 'spoiling for a fight' with Iran
Reuters-Congress can halt Iraq war, experts tell lawmakers