[Congressman Billybob]

This is the typical ignorant and slanted bullsh*t from the Washington Post.

The article is referring to actions and Resolutions by the UN. These only concern the First Iraq War, in which George Bush, pere, did NOT advance to Baghdad because the operative UN Resolutions did not permit that. The current Iraq War is covered by the Congressional Joint Resolution which was included in the Patriot Act, passed on 18 September, 2001, and reaffirmed a year later.

In that Joint Resolution, Congress authorized the President to "use military force" including "across international boundaries" to pursue the terrorists and defeat "them and the nations that harbor them." Congress used, in 2001, almost identical language to what Congress used in 1805 to authorize President Jefferson to pursue and defeat the Barbary Pirates.

There is no possible excuse for a supposedly literate staff of a supposedly competent newspaper to be unaware of the differences between the legal authority for Gulf War I and Gulf War II. I conclude that the staff of the Post are either incredibly dumb or incredibly dishonest. Which do you think it is?

Congressman Billybob

Latest article, "Incredible Vision at Wal-Mart"

Help a Freeper into Congress.

[Enchante]

"the staff of the Post are either incredibly dumb or incredibly dishonest"

Considering that the authors are on the faculty of Yale Law School, and Ackerman at least is supposed to be considered a leading figure in liberal-left jurisprudence, what does that say about the quality of legal education nowadays?

[Enchante]

"the staff of the Post are either incredibly dumb or incredibly dishonest"

Considering that the authors are on the faculty of Yale Law School, and Ackerman at least is supposed to be considered a leading figure in liberal-left jurisprudence, what does that say about the quality of legal education nowadays?