Ex-Officials Offer Plan to Revamp War Powers Act »
Posted By Beau7890 1 year, 4 months ago in NewsTwo former secretaries of state have declared the War Powers Act of 1973 obsolete and proposed a new system of closer consultation between the White House and Congress before American forces go into battle.
Read Full Story at nytimes.com »
252 Views Share Story 14 Comments Report
Submitted By:
Beau7890
Truth rests on the mathematical reeds of the infinite and everything moves forward by order of the eagle riding pillion, while the genius of vegetable ...
Who Also Submitted:
Other Related Articles:
Why not submit a story?
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 34 (view all)
-
Neutral
Beau78901 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here is the op-ed written by James Baker and Warren Christopher, who served as Secretaries of State in the administrations of George H.W. Bush and Jimmy Carter, respectively.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/08/opinion/08bak...
They make a good case, and though there's still room for reactionary moves in their proposal (in case of "emergencies"), there's no doubt that more careful bipartisan consideration should be given before we enter into armed conflicts around the globe.
Reply -
-
JohnQPublicComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
Neutral
Lurch1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Now that a Democrat is more than 50% likely to take the WH, expect a lot of flip-flopping by neocon wingnuts like James Baker on presidential powers.
Just don`t expect to ever hold guys like Baker and his ilk accountable for the damage they did to the Constitution and our laws while their boy was in power.
Baker is slick like nobody`s business. Destroy the law, then blame it on the law. He makes Bill Clinton look like sandpaper.
Reply
-
-
-
Neutral
Beau78901 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Pragmatism can be a virtue (even in these post-Cold War days), especially when one considers the destruction wrought by basing policy decisions on ideology while excluding consideration of their consequences.
But the plan Baker and Christopher outline (see the link in my first comment) is not all that radical. It's based on the fact that the War Powers Resolution is considered by almost everyone to be unconstitutional and needs reworking.
The main effect of implementing Baker's and Christopher's ideas is to give more careful bipartisan consideration to any thought of sending Americans into battle. Surely you don't have a problem with that?
Reply
-
-
Neutral
berkeley1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
i'm skeptical of anything that comes out of the mouth of either of these guys.
both participated in getting us into this mess. both are career insiders who would speak in favor of the unitary executive. their whole pitch is a cover-story for presidential power.
congress has already given up the ghost. their proposal does not change that at all.
Reply-
Neutral
Beau78901 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well, their proposal is a suggestion that Congress get its act together and fix the War Powers Resolution. I think their solution is only a start, and wouldn't go far enough to restoring the balance of power. But it's better than the unconstitutional abandonment of their responsibilities we have now.
I could be wrong, but I don't recall either Baker or Christopher speaking in favor of the unitary executive. Baker, possibly at George H.W. Bush's request (like Brent Scowcroft), even warned W. against effecting regime change in Iraq before the war.
Reply -
Neutral
AnteUp1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
berkeley ~
Thank you! I saw them on the news yesterday.I felt
their dedication to strengthening our country by
adding increased accountability between the Executive
and Legislative Branches regarding committing us to war
- REEKED.
"skeptical" ? Big time - I do not trust them.
Funny how what it says on paper can work out in practice.
Reply
-
-
-
Neutral
quackpot1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
As long as the Executive Branch controls the flow of information, the Congress is powerless. In nearly every war that the U.S. has entered, the Executive Branch has manipulated the information provided to Congress so as to obtain Congressional support for the war.
Bush's manipulation of "intelligence" information provided to justify the Iraq invasion is just the latest chapter a long history of such deceit.
Reply-
Neutral
antibrainwasher1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Good point. This democracy is dead when neocon corporate secrecy facists control the american media, and the amereican media becomes a propanda mouthpiece for the military industrial complex.
The american media is 100% zionist owned and 100% zionist operated. For profit only. Disney/Abc/Isreal and General Electric/NBC and Westinghouse/CBS and Murdock/fox/ Newscorp/ wallstreet journal/ weekly standard / 108 austrialian tabloids/ english tabloids/ myspace/ worlds largest media empire are 100% for profit. No Israeli critizism allowed in american movies, music, tv news, tv newspapers, cable news or programming, NOTHING. 100% zionist owned and operated.
Take the consititution, and wipe your arses with it. When these corporate moguls control the media in conjunction with a right wing big oil regime, democracy is a f*ing joke. American media is a for profit infotainment joke. These media empires are controlled by Israeli money. One nation, under the star of david, neoconusa
Reply
-
-
Neutral
Lurch1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Of course James Baker would claim the War Powers Act is obsolete, his boy is the one who broke the damn law and he is his lawyer.
Instead of pleading guilty and taking responsibility, claim the law is bad.
This is the same James Baker who launched the original law suit over the 2000 election to try to STOP the legal recount demanded by FLA state law at the time.
For guys like Baker, laws are only good for one thing: holding the other guy down while you take his money.
Reply -
-
Neutral
Spadecaller1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The root to the problem with the war powers act stems from collusion with the lobbyists that represent the military industrial corporations that can make and break the political careers of many politicians on both sides of the aisle. The sell-outs on the Democratic side of the aisle, Pelosi, Hoyer, and Reid are weak in confronting warmongering because of their own selfish interests.
The good news about Obama is that he has built a grass roots organization that gives him the leverage financially to confront the special interests and those lobbyists, who have too much influence in encourageing military aggression for strictly mercenary reasons.
How does one pass legislation when we have hired the foxes to watch the hen house? It won't happen. We must replace these corporate sell-outs with leaders who build their support from outside the confines of K Street.
Reply
More News
LA Times
A story of shock, chaos and bravery unfolds in Ft. Hood shooting
Healthcare bill clears parliamentary hurdle in House
Afghanistan government accuses foreign officials of interfering
Unemployment rate rises above 10% ; Obama signs jobless benefit extension
Jason Rodriguez : Shooting at downtown Orlando office building leaves 5 hurt, 1 dead
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.