Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

RED DIAPER DOPER BABY RHETORIC-Santa Cruz, CA
Santa Cruz Sentinel ^ | 02/14/03 | Letters to the Editor

Posted on 02/15/2003 3:51:16 PM PST by GrandMoM

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-35 last
To: FourPeas
Liberals certainly are a lot more entertaining when they're out of power, not any smarter, but certainly more desperate.

....very entertaining and very desperate!

21 posted on 02/15/2003 6:41:48 PM PST by GrandMoM (Spare the rod, spoil the child!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: GrandMoM
Regarding the powers invested in Congress, the Constitution says, "To declare War, grant Letters of Marque. ..." This gives Congress the exclusive right to declare war; no other branch of our government has that right. If the president wants a war with Iraq, he must request it from Congress and Congress must vote. This is the only constitutional way our country can go to war.

The last time Congress formally declared war was in December 1941, following the attack on Pearl Harbor more than a half-century ago.

How, then, did Congress avoid its constitutional power - or duty - to declare war over Korea, Vietnam, and the Persian Gulf?

The answer is that Congress played it safe. It gave the three presidents - Truman, Johnson, Bush I - something, without having to go on record as formally declaring war.

Reason why Presidents no longer need Congressional Declarations of War - Legal Precedence-Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co. v. Sawyer.

In short, part of that decision states that if Congress sees a President preparing for war and does nothing to stop him that they(Congress) are actively agreeing to it.

If the president starts a war, he’ll be in violation of his oath of office and should be impeached. It’s the duty of all citizens to demand that our Constitution be followed.

Highly unlikely, should it ever get to the USSC Article II would trump Article I and Congress would be unwilling to answer why they didn't stop the buildup of force.

The above referenced link lays it all out in great detail.

Someone should also clue Saddam in on the fact that, the bombs will be real this time, not filled with cement like the ones his Marxist buddy bill clinton dropped on him in 1998.

22 posted on 02/15/2003 7:24:20 PM PST by PeaceBeWithYou (De Oppresso Liber!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PeaceBeWithYou
....Thanks for this info!
23 posted on 02/15/2003 7:47:39 PM PST by GrandMoM (Spare the rod, spoil the child!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: GrandMoM
Very well put.
24 posted on 02/15/2003 9:29:06 PM PST by Be active
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Be active
Thanks!
25 posted on 02/15/2003 10:13:47 PM PST by GrandMoM (Spare the rod, spoil the child!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: PeaceBeWithYou
when Jefferson attacked the Barbary coast in 1804 did he have a formal declaration of war?

I agree we should have Congressional authorization for such an act; IMHO the vote in October *was* that authorization.
26 posted on 02/15/2003 10:54:42 PM PST by WOSG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
The war is, in part, about oil. This is because stable oil prices lead to a stable world and national economy. Yes, there are other reasons to take on Iraq, but oil is an important one. If not, then why do our military plans purportedly include dropped special ops, rangers, and other airborne into the oil fields on Day 1?

Here's the kicker. I am a petroleum geologist. About 10 years ago I worked on a team that did an exhaustive study of the petroleum potential of the offshore Santa Cruz Basin(also known as the offshore La Honda Basin, or the offshore Ano Nuevo Basin). There are several small oil fields onshore. Offshore, where the basin is much larger, thicker, and less eroded, there are dozens of large "prospects." There were even two wells drilled offshore in the mid-1960's. Both of those wells discovered heavy crude. The problem was, at that time, the oil was worth about $2.00 per barrels. It wasn't economic to produce it. That same oil today would be worth about $25 per barrel (given the time-value of money). One recent Federal Government estimate put the potential in the Ano Nuevo basin at about one BILLION barrels. Right off of Santa Cruz.

So if the lefties up in the Monterey Bay area really want to stop the impending war, they can petition the Government to open up drilling off of Santa Cruz!!

27 posted on 02/15/2003 11:31:14 PM PST by capitan_refugio (How about a little offshore drilling?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: WOSG
When Jefferson attacked the Barbary coast in 1804 did he have a formal declaration of war?

As President, Jefferson drew upon precedents of Washington and Adams to argue that offensive military operations required a declaration of war from Congress, while defensive operations did not. But that general understanding did not provide justification alone for Jefferson's decision to send the Navy to the Mediterranean.

He relied on statutes passed on 3 March 1801 and 6 February 1802 that clearly gave him the authority to repel any attack on American ships and to "subdue, seize, and make prize of all vessels, goods and effects, belonging to the Bey of Tripoli...."

Between 1801 and 1813, Congress passed more than a half-dozen statutes that defined how presidents Jefferson and Madison could act to end the conflict.

Jefferson had the support of the Congress and of the people. Nuff said.

28 posted on 02/16/2003 12:19:12 AM PST by PeaceBeWithYou (De Oppresso Liber!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: PeaceBeWithYou
Okay, sounds like jefferson had about what Bush has today, given both the 2001 congressional support for actions against terrorism and the October 2002 resolution supporting action against Iraq. Not to mention plenty of Congressional oversight (ie grilling Powell, armitage and Rumsfeld).


29 posted on 02/16/2003 12:26:31 AM PST by WOSG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: GrandMoM
Congress has already voted for this...they, and this writer, just have short memories.
30 posted on 02/16/2003 12:27:11 AM PST by LiteKeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Emeraldgold
Didn't Congress declare war on Iraq in 1990?

Actually, no. Congress authorized "the use of force" to defend an ally, Kuwait. The last time America declared war on any nation was in 1942. We employ "the use of force" to protect our international interests and to defend our allies.

The mechanism that Congress uses for employing military force or preventing military force is through funding. For an example, Congress provided funds for the Vietnam war for nearly 15 years; we got out of that war not through military defeat, but simply because Congress refused to fund any further efforts.

31 posted on 02/16/2003 1:07:51 AM PST by powderhorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: WOSG
I agree we should have Congressional authorization for such an act; IMHO the vote in October *was* that authorization.

There may be a time when a formal declaration of war becomes necessary, but under most circumstances it is, at best, impractical. Congress authorizes the President to use military force when necessary so that he (or she) can act decisively in the defense of American interests and in defense of our allies. In most cases, for the President to be hamstrung by weeks or months of debate in Congress would give stratigic advantage to any force that threatens the US.

32 posted on 02/16/2003 1:31:20 AM PST by powderhorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: LiteKeeper
see post #22
33 posted on 02/16/2003 7:08:49 AM PST by GrandMoM (Spare the rod, spoil the child!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: powderhorn
Thanks. I was under the inpression we did.
34 posted on 02/16/2003 9:02:13 AM PST by Emeraldgold
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: PeaceBeWithYou
Someone should also clue Saddam in on the fact that, the bombs will be real this time, not filled with cement like the ones his Marxist buddy bill clinton dropped on him in 1998.....I didn't know those bombs were full of cement!
35 posted on 02/16/2003 10:00:32 AM PST by GrandMoM (Spare the rod, spoil the child!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-35 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson