The REAL significance of the IWR - It's the constitution, stupid!

[cui bono]

We've heard the arguments, but what do they have to do with the real significance of a yes vote on the IWR?

They voted or the IWR because they were lied to. This has been debunked as it has been well illustrated that there was plenty of documentation to show that the evidence didn't hold up and that it was manipulated.

They voted not for the war itself, but to give the president more leverage in negotiating. To give him the power, power which was to be used as a last resort, if at all, to wage war if and when all other diplomatic options were exhausted. Well I'm sure they knew that W was the president, so if they voted to give him this kind of power how can we trust their judgment if they are president? Surely if we all knew W is ignorant, arrogant, do as I please kind of guy they did too. And if we all knew that Cheney and PNAC were behind this and that this war had been desired and planned for a long time they had to have known it too. So why would they vote yes?

With all this knowledge out there, I would bet that the real reason they voted yes is that they voted out of fear. Fear that their political futures depended on a yes vote. They allowed the Republics to force their hand and they acquiesced and folded. And now they want to rationalize it all with the above excuses. But that's not the worst of it.

What I believe to be the most critical and damning significance of a yes vote on the IWR is that by voting for the IWR members of congress abdicated their constitutional responsibility to be the branch of government that has the power to declare war. In essence, they failed to do their job of protecting and upholding he constitution and outsourced that responsibility to George W. Bush. They can come up with all sorts of reasons and excuses as to why they did it, but it doesn't change the fact that they willingly gave up their power as a coequal branch of government to the administration. Not just any power, but the power to declare war. Not just any administration, but an administration that everyone knew was, and still is, full of hubris, has no respect for the constitution and which does not listen to reason nor reason with listeners.

There was no need to do this. We were not in immediate danger. Iraq did not pose an imminent threat. They had no means to attack us on our soil. Had a true attempt at inspections and diplomacy failed and a grave threat actually emerged there would have been time to bring up war for a vote. So why then, why would anyone vote to hand over this awesome power to those whom they knew were planning on using it, and for less than altruistic purposes? How can any of them possibly justify this? How can any one of them justify a vote to abdicate their constitutional responsibility? Whether it was out of fear, out of laziness or just for being out of their minds, the fact remains that by voting yes on the IWR they failed. They failed in their courage. They failed in their judgment. They failed the American people and they failed the constitution by handing over the car keys to a man drunk with power. And by doing this they failed to show me that they are presidential material.

[ngant17]

1. Besides that, North Korea was/is a greater threat

than Iraq under Saddam. It would have been more logical (less insane) to invade Korea (again).

You are right on all points. Congress gave away its power and willfully created a semi-dictatorship.

Only those who voted against the IWR should be allowed to remain in office. The others have betrayed the principles of the US Constitution and do not deserve to represent the people anymore.

[ixion]

2. and NK was only a 'threat' AFTER * breached a Clinton negotiated treaty

Any one of them who voted 'Yes' on the IWR voted out of (misplaced) fear for their career(s), rather than the Truth.

[cui bono]

3. Yep. And how do you apologize your way out of that?

I mean it's not just about where they stand on the war and would they lead us into another war.

They gave W a constitutional power that was theirs for a good reason! They gave it to W!!! How much more irresponsible than that can you get?

[truedelphi]

10. Exactly! I would have tons of sympathy for these Senatorial "leaders"

If the election process meant that school teachers, nurses, therapists, yard maintenance people, etc were sitting as Senators on The Hill.

But almost every Senator is a lawyer! A lawyer! They know how to draw up iron-clad, meaningful contracts.

If it WAS EVER their intention to not give away the Farm, then they must have ALL been smoking crack to draw up a document like the IWR!

[The Count]

4. hear, hear! Either craven or stupid - either way, unfit. K&R

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

5. Nicely said and reflects my opinion on possible candidates exactly.

[cui bono]

6. ty. It just seemed that no one was really talking about them giving away

their power so much as just if they voted for or against the war. The fact that they voted to give away their power to Chimpy resonates so much more with me.

[In Truth We Trust]

7. Impeach to preserve and protect the Constitution!

[Tom Joad]

8. Constitution? Congress don't need no stinkin' paper... they need campaign money.

That was the major thinking i'm sure when they voted for the insane resolution offered by Bush. the big boys said yes, that's all that mattered.

[cui bono]

11. Exactly. Pathetic. nt

[manic expression]

9. It's not like anyone follows the Constitution

the executive put us into Korea without Congress and all but one Congressman stood and applauded.

[Pachamama]

12. I completely agree with you - Well said!

That is why I was so proud of my Senator Boxer and my Congresswoman Woolsey....as well as the other 22 Senators Boxer joined in opposing the IWR and all the other 133 Congresspeople who voted against it too....but I was so disappointed and upset with Senator Feinstein...still am.

As far as I am concerned, the vote on the IWR was a failure to uphold their oath to uphold the Constitution. This for me means that whoever did that, cannot and should not be our President. Sadly, this includes John Edwards, who I like very much and it includes Hillary Clinton.

Many may suggest that had Obama been in the Senate at the time, he would have voted for the IWR - I don't believe that. I believe that he, like some of the few brave Congresspeople and Senators who voted against the IWR, would not have voted to support it. Obama was outspoken from the get-go. So was Wesley Clark and Al Gore. Maybe Vilsack or Richardson would have if they had been in the Senate, its hard to say, my guess is they would have voted yes, but who knows, we will never know. Their records and personalities suggest that they would have also gone with the political "fear" vote.

It is why I do not support Hillary. It is why I am a supporter of Obama. It's why I would support Clark if he ran and its why I would support Gore too, who spoke out in the run up to the war.

[cui bono]

13. Every time I call or write Feinstein I let her know she's skating on thin ice

and that she better get vocal about things or I'm voting for someone else next time.

Last time I called I told them she voted to get us into this war so she better get vocal about getting us out and stopping an attack on Iran. :)

[Pachamama]

14. I do the same...and you know, during the primary, I did not vote for her. I voted for a woman named

Colleen who was challenging her. I knew there was no chance that we would defeat Feinstein in the democratic primary, but I refused to give her my vote and wanted her to see that there were those of us that weren't happy with her. I refused to give her any more donations and I told her fundraisers so much.

The fact that her husband's company is profiteering on this war is also disgusting....My hope, is that come the next time she is up for re-election, someone really good and who can beat her will throw their hat in the ring.

[cui bono]

15. I'm independent right now, I have to reregister Dem so I can do the same.

She needs to know people are growing more and more unhappy with her.

That and I want to vote for Kucinich in the primary. :)

[Pachamama]

17. Actually, I'm now officially registered as "Decline to State" - When election time comes, I get a

letter that asks whether I want to vote Republican or Democrat. I choose, then vote. It's great (on top of being registered as a permananent absentee voter) that I don't have to re-register as anything.

I thought about being an Independent, but then I actually read what the "Independent Party" stands for...Check it out if you haven't - such as, do you believe that there should be prayer in school? That and opposing Gay Marriage is among many of their stated beliefs/platform. I didn't know that until I read their platform.

So, now I'm just "Decline to State"....I actually like that status...its fun too, because you get in the mail promos and political flyers for both Dems and Repubs...because they don't know "which way you swing".

[cui bono]

18. I like that! Maybe I'll decline to state too. You know... I'm not in the Independent Party

maybe I'm "no party" then, I think that's it. I've seen I just know I got sick of the Dems years ago and decided to leave the party.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

16. The IWR was CYA.

If Bush launched the war and it failed, then they could weasel out of responsibility by saying they weren't really for it.

If Bush launched the war and it were a miraculous success, then they could take credit for it.

I have no doubt that if the war were going well Clinton et. al. would be going on about how they supported the war from day one.