After Congress declares war, as they did with the AUMF against al Qaeda, the President is vested with absolute authority to prosecute the war and protect the citizens.

Well I can only rely on that great legal scholar and all around expert on Bush policy Alberto Gonzalez when he said

"GONZALES: There was not a war declaration, either in connection with Al Qaida or in Iraq. It was an authorization to use military force. I only want to clarify that, because there are implications. Obviously, when you talk about a war declaration, you're possibly talking about affecting treaties, diplomatic relations. And so there is a distinction in law and in practice. And we're not talking about a war declaration. This is an authorization only to use military force."

So was Alberto lying again or did he actually have half a clue as to what a declaration of war meant?

As to the the entire "right to bear arms" I will challenge you once again to give me an example of a single gun that you can't own. After an entire lifetime of listening to this argument about how the goon squads are coming for your guns, show me one example of a gun you can't own. Hell the police will sell you a gun that isn't available on the market any more if your looking.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative." John Stuart Mill

by Hubble on 05/11/2008 08:52:26 PM EST

[ Parent ]