[1rudeboy]

The notion of Agreements bypassing the Treaty-making requirement of Senate concurrence was never imagined.

I have a Federal District Court ruling sitting on my desk (that I haven't read yet, because it is long) that rejected your argument. And the U.S. Supreme Court rejected even hearing it.

[hedgetrimmer]

Was it the ninth circuit?

[Paul Ross]

I have a Federal District Court ruling sitting on my desk (that I haven't read yet, because it is long) that rejected your argument. And the U.S. Supreme Court rejected even hearing it.

The same court which just today trumped the President's Constitutional War powers with their lame liberal interpretation of the Geneva Convention?

Big Whoop. Then these courts have dishonored their offices and betrayed the Constitution and country. A ruling doesn't make it so. And they are not the final arbiter of the Constitution, much as they pretend so. And the plain meaning is not contravened by foreign opinion, or the length of time of leftwing bilge leftover from the FDR/Truman administration.

Hopefully W finally gets it that pushing for conservatives on the bench, not merely those disinclined to liberal activism, is vital.

[Paul Ross]

I have a Federal District Court ruling sitting on my desk

Let's see the cite to that.