Quote:
Originally Posted by cnredd
Ummmm...
There's an old parchment that gives the authority to the president...With the consent of Congress...which WAS given through House Resolution 114 in October, 2002.... |
You're missing the point.
That "old parchment" was created under a SPECIFIC discussion of REASONS WHY the war should be initiated.
And for people to NOW come forward and IGNORE those previous reasons, and insist that there are
SECRET reasons for the war instead???
That would be like me asking to investigate somebody's property for one reason, but having ULTERIOR motives for doing so.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cnredd
Now if you want to say "the people" indirectly decide because they elected the president and the congress that provided consent, than "sure"...But to say the decision BELONGS to the people?...Nope...  |
I didn't realize I was going to have to quibble over such nuances.
Yes. It's congress who provided that consent.
But to ignore the PEOPLE's correlation to that power takes an incredible sense of "elitism".
After all, Congress answers to the people, and if "the President" had an ulterior motive for going to war that was not relayed to the people, isn't that quite a bit worse than simply lying about a blow-job?