Needed, Unfolding Lawful Confrontation With President

We the People desire there to be a Confrontation with this President over his reckless management of combat operations and his defiance of Our Will in the Constitution.

The confrontation is one this President started, and springs from the unresolved issues of the 1870s. We cannot fear what may happen; but only be concerned if, what is needed, does not happen.

* * *

Ref Discuss One of the things I find about the American government, especially when it gets backed into a corner and is on the losing side of an argument, is how it will ask others to take the high road. Get real.

America’s problem right now -- in Feb 2007 -- is related to having not sustained the high road after Sept 2001. For Lieberman to ask anyone to "rise to the occasion" is too late. The world, not just America and the Congress, needed to see the GOP -- which I include Lieberman -- take action that sustains the high road.

We can go around all day long about the abuse of power, the rendition, illegal activity, and other abuses this President has, with the GOP support, perpetuated.

* * *

It's absurd for the GOP with Lieberman to start talking about people taking a breath or taking the high road. The GOP has, since 2001 substantially chosen to assent to the low road. Lieberman's call is too late. We needed to see actions not words.

* * *

Lieberman is also incorrect to say the troops are taking Baghdad "back". The best information I have is that the goals aren't being met despite substantially lowering expectations.

It's also incorrect for the GOP to assert that opposing what will not work is somehow the same as giving up on American values. America’s cause was not just when it was linked with illegal warfare, deception, and manipulated data.

A cause can be unjust, but still workable; America's problem is that despite an unworkable cause, the GOP would have us naively start with a flawed premise: That the cause was just; or that changing course is anything but needed.

* * *

Rather than accept the November 2006 mandate -- that change is needed; the GOP is arguing over whether the change is one step, or multiple step. That's irrelevant.

It is false for Lieberman or anyone in the GOP to assert that something connected with a flawed premise is "reality."

The GOP could as America Blog suggests openly debate the President’s resolution. The GOP has refused and not considered this option.

* * *

What is interesting is that if this resolution is really "no big deal" or it is "non-binding" why is the GOP so opposed to the resolution? There is one answer: They are opposing something that they either knows is needed; or they are putting alot of energy into something that is irrelevant.

Either way. the action the Congress is taking on the resolution -- on both sides of the aisle -- says alot about what was not done 2002-2006: Not enough

The Voters opened the bottle in November 2006. The GOP cannot pt the genie back in the bottle.

* * *

The GOP would have us believe that something that is "non binding" is a first step. How can that be? They have no answer.

But, not stopping there, they would ask that something that is not required and will get ignored, as leading to a "constitutional crisis." Why is that bad? This President, not the Congress, took the first steps to a Constitutional Crisis. It is incorrect for the GOP to pretend that open debate is a crisis; or that a needed confrontation with a tyrant is a bad thing.

The way forward is for the GOP to explain why they believe asserting power is bad; or why the Framer's intention of having a clash of faction should be ignored. Nobody in the GOP can credibly ask for anyone to take the "high road" when the GOP is ignoring the highest law of the land and high principles of the Founders: That of a needed clash of factions to check power.

* * *

When the GOP talks about something that "may" or may not happen, the GOP is pretending that things that have already started -- the President’s illegal activity -- is something that is speculative, uncertain, in the future, and the responsibility of someone else.

My fellow bloggers: We know the logic of the GOP is delusional. My party is not fit to be respected. If we were to simply diagram the mental logic -- or lack thereof -- of the GOP arguments, we'd have a hard time inspiring in anyone in schools that the American leadership in the GOP is what they want to aspire to be associated with.

I encourage you to remind your friends that just because the GOP is illogical, obstructionist, and complicit with war crimes, it does not mean that America is destined to forever subscribe to the book of folly or absurd thinking.

* * *

America cannot be persuaded to avoid what this President started: His illegal activity, and his violations of the Constitution.

For the GOP to talk about the "benefits' of avoiding what is already here asks that we believe that reality can be avoided by pretending something else.

The GOP cannot credibly explain or state what they view as a Constitutional crisis. They define a crisis in terms of something which is not reality: That the crisis has not arrived. By their implicit definition of a crisis, the GOP is defining all events the GOP has created as not being a crisis. This is absurd.

The GOP is the source of this crisis which the GOP has been complicit with before Sept 2001. This President before Sept 2001 started illegal activity: That is a crisis.

There error is for the GOP to believe that it can redefine what we have as something that is not relevant, then compel everyone to look elsewhere with problems.

No. The correct approach to this debate is to look the GOP in the eye, examine their complicity with war crimes, and examine what has failed since 2001. Anything else asks that we take reality off the table.

* * *

It is correct to say that the US government has responsibilities. This GOP, despite taking oaths, has not fulfilled its obligations

Contrary to mythology, the President has the obligation to manage a war legally, and use the resources than only Congress has the power to support.

This President was given wide latitude to do what he thought fit. The US Congress in 2001 gave him an AUMF, which he abused and violated, relying on it illegally to invade our homes, upset our Peace, and undermine our Constitution. There is much more.

But this President then took the step of building on his abuses to mislead Congress, lie about evidence, and expand illegal warfare.

It does not take many more examples and situations for We the People to realize: This President, when given the deference he has been given, abuses his power. The way forward is to accept that wide delegations of authority -- not new power -- has been abused.

Rather than keep delegating broad discretion, the appropriate approach for a board of directions is to find a new leader. Until that, the Board has the responsibility to tightly constrain, control, and define the means by which that leader will work.

Unlike a corporation which can go on for many years burning cash and hiding problems, this President has openly bragged that he enjoys ignoring the court, and has admitted that he's usurped non-delegated powers. IT would be more recklessness for the US Congress, especially We the People, to, in the wake of that brazen abuse of power, not to tightly control the President.

* * *

The GOP likes to talk about history, values, and our Constitution. Put aside that they ignore it and destroy it. The issue is if the GOP is going to talk about the legacy and history of the rule of law, then they need to review the Federalist Papers which talk about legislative control of the President.

Long ago, the President was not directly elected, but he was essentially a creature of the legislatures of the States. The appropriate remedy is to discuss, not what there is a direct election, what direct means shall be used to punish the President.

Congress has been delegated power to impeach; but this power is not balanced by the reality of 2007: The voters, not the Congress or legislature, are responsible for the President. When the President chooses to ignore the law, the President has communicated that he's not doing his job; and has ignored We the People.

Our job is to send a clear signal: We the People are going to lawfully ignore this President and the GOP. You don't get more money; and you don't get new power. You get the opposite: Less money, and tighter control.

* * *

The burden is not on Congress as a theoretical construct, or an idea of something -- the burden is on the reality of the individual Member of Congress: Have they, or have they not fully asserted their oath.

The record of the GOP does not suggest that individual Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle have fully asserted their oath. Some have, many have not.

Contrary to the times of the Civil war where the nation hoped to move on and reconcile, there is still yet to be a confrontation.

it is premature for the GOP to talk about reconciliation when the needed confrontation -- that of Congress pushing back and prosecuting the President -- has not occurred.

* * *

The error of Ford's Pardon was that it did not compel a full review of what happened, or what needed to be solved.

The problem of 2007 is linked with what was not solved in 1974. In 2007, the confrontation which this nation avoided in 1974, is needed.

* * *

It is incorrect for the GOP to suggest that Congress is asserting power or doing things the Framers did not intend. The Framers intended that when a President broadly abused power, the Legislature -- Congress -- would tightly control that President.

No President has carte blanche to point to warfare as a theoretical construct to justify all abuses past and present.

Congress has the power to support or not support anything. When this President, despite privately expressing doubts about this plan, has nothing other to offer but ore excuses and problems, Congress needs to end what is not working.

Congress may legally require the President to meet minimal performance requirements, mandating that troops be minimally prepared with sufficient equipment before they can be deployed. That is not micro-management: That is doing what the President refuses to do -- ensure the troops are properly sustained and supported with the available resources.

The GOP cannot point to a credible mobilization plan that has fully supported the troops. They have no modernization plan that will help the troops today; nor a plan to solve the problem the GOP did not solve 2001-2006. The error of the GOP is to pretend that what the GOP did or didn't do 2001-2006 somehow was sufficient to support the troops. It was not. The error was for the GOP, despite being in control and aware of the problems in Iraq, to not provide the troops and equipment needed to sustain lawful combat. This is not something the Congress has fully accounted: How did the President, despite inadequate resources, expect to compel Congress to continue supporting what was not working tactically, but did not have the resources to do the job. There is no answer other than what the GOP did: Nothing, no plan, and no solution. That is a crisis that not new, but more of what this President and the GOP started in 2001.

* * *

I find it amazing that anyone would say the Constitution has "served now" without stating the reality: The GOP has not served the Constitution well.

The President is authorized to lead; and Congress has the power to compel the President to lead when the President refuses to be a leader. Real leaders do not recklessly lie about combat status, then pretend that things are fine; but pretend that the solution is for someone else to solve.

This President isn't leading, he's pretending to be a leader while he looks for excuses. This is the mess this President and the GOP have created, supported, and not managed.

The President may have authority to be a leader, but that authority does not give him the legal basis to recklessly conduct a war, nor pretend to be a leader when he is not leader.

* * *

War is not something that is a mystical entity, nor does it float out there in the ether like a moving cloud. War is a decision of leaders and combatants to use lethal forces to impose power.

Our views on power are irrelevant. Power is power. Either it is prevailing, or it is not. This President and the GOP would have us believe that regardless their incompetence, the nation must rally to "the war". No, we rally to leaders.

War is a means by which leaders impose power. Where there is no leader, and the power is recklessly used, the war is folly. Americans and We the People do not support or oppose war; we support or oppose illegal abuse of power, recklessness, and the absurd destruction of life.

War in itself is not the issue. The question is what level of non-sense will the GOP use to pretend that the debate should be something other than the President’s reckless leadership. The war in Iraq is a symptom of this GOP's recklessness; and the incompetence this President has in asserting power lawfully. It matter less why; it matters more than the GOP be confronted: The problem is them, their recklessness, and their refusal to assent to the rule of law.

* * *

The issue of this confrontation -- which the President started -- has nothing to do between a balancing act between one, tow, or three branches. The issue is much simpler: Which side of the line does the President and GOP stand -- that of prudence, or that of recklessness.

Legislative debate is designed, in theory, to force a clash, and challenge arguments. The aim of debate is to produce the best reasoning. This GOP and President, in shutting down debate, hope to stifle the needed discussion, and not share the best ideas with the world. This more recklessness.

We the People are fully capable of observing, and independently discussing the issues. We are not required to stick with a Congress and US government that refuses to confront abuse of power; or where one party will not assent to the rule of law.

* * *

There is no prospect or potential for a crisis -- this President is a crisis, he has arrived, has overstayed his welcome, and he has a mess which the GOP has refused to manage as it has had the responsibility to do, but refuses.

Contrary to some in the GOP who view the smokescreen of US government debate, legal action, and court motions as a sideshow, the real decisions are being made in the State legislatures: Power is shifting; and We the People are moving to transform America into a new way of interacting.

The movement has started. Leaders around the blogosphere, at the state and local levels know there is a problem which this Congress and President are not able or willing to resolve. The error is for the GOP in Congress to believe that the decision or outcome is up to whether the Congress will or will not cooperate with the President. That is a fatal perception problem.

The more subtle issue is whether the US government will or will not assent to the rule of law -- the will of We the People. This GOP has shown disdain for We the People, as evidenced by their reckless abuse, disregard, and contempt for Our Will expressed through Our Laws. We the People are not amused, more so that the GOP in overstaying its welcome, continues to pretend that Our Will can be ignored; or that the problem is something other than the President and the GOP.

This war and Iraq are symptoms of the failure of the US government to assent to Our Will. Where the GOP compels others to compromise or agree, that compromise is conditional upon acceptance of some level of absurdity which defies Our Will.

Our Will shall not be compromised. It is the law, the standard, and the requirement to which all Members of Congress and the Executive Branch personnel shall assent without question, or debate. The oath is a promise, not discretion; it is a fixed standard of intent, not a flexible notion of desire. The time for debate is before the bill is passed, not after the crime has been detected or the violation self-evidence.

* * *

The GOP is best reminded that it should step back fro its illegal rebellion; and comprehend what has happened: We the People have imposed our will in November 2006, and We the People have lawfully delegated the power to foreign fighters to wage lawful combat against the US government, as protected under the Geneva Conventions under the principle of reciprocity.

The GOP is beyond the brink, into the netherworld of war crimes, and pretending that the issue is something else. No, this is combat: Raw power being directly thrust at the US government by the proxies We the People have lawfully delegated power to impose at the US government, GOP, and the reckless buffoons wandering in and out of the Oval Office.

* * *

The GOP's calls -- for delays, taking a walk, or discussing issues -- need to end: They have exhausted their utility. The debate is irrelevant. The way forward is to remind the GOP that these are issues of criminal law and international war crimes.

Reasoning is not the playground for continued GOP manipulation, but for the legal community to reason through the law, and adjudicate how the GOP leadership shall individually be punished for their alleged reckless violation of Geneva.

* * *

We the People do not have to debate or question or reason: The way forward was crated in 1789. That was the only thing we the People needed to do or say.

GOP discussions on "reason" and what we should be "guided" to do has nothing to do with the bible, scriptures, but with one thing: The rule of law.

How We the People proceed is enshrined in Our Will through written law: Where there have been violations, the defendants have no chance to debate. They may present evidence if they choose. However, the way forward is not a discussion, but a trial.

Either the trial shall be under the US laws, or it shall be under international laws through The Hague; or at the tip of a legal spear foreign fighters lawfully wield should they choose to expand their lawful activities and wage lawful warfare, legally removing and overthrowing the US government in retaliation for what the US government, this President, and this Congress illegally assented to in Iraq. The way forward is for Members of Congress to realize that the Confrontation is not a debatable point, but the fruit of combat to which the Members of Congress are not competent, as evidenced by their recklessness in mismanaging this clear in the oval office, and their collective refusal to end what was not legal.

* * *

This war is not a debatable issue: It is a symptom of a legal problem which the US Congress refuses to face.

The GOP is not making a decision when it avoids confronting their failed policies, reckless leadership, and abuse of power. The GOP is not part of the leadership or decision making process when they claim they are reverently doing something, while they arrogantly refuse to do what they have agreed to be bond to do: Assert their oath.

This problem is not an urgent, immediate, or an imminent problem, but one that has been brewing since 1974 and is ripe for resolution. The GOP illusion is to pretend that the confrontation -- now that it is openly discussed -- has only started. No, We the People have the power to compel the GOP to face the reality that they have denied since 1974.

The GOP and DNC leadership are not making decisions. They are avoiding the needed assertion of power. Power, when asserted, is not an issue of being nice or not nice -- it is one thing: Power.

* * *

The President may not rely on any precedent which illegally usurped power. And the prospect that something may happen should not shirk Americans to believe that the precedents may be good or bad. As then-Supreme Court Nominees Alito and Roberts stated in their confirmation hearings, precedents are not binding; that there may be a precedent which his in error, it is not cast in stone.

No one should be worried about the prospect that the precedents of today will be good or bad. Do not let that worry you. The only precedent, which the GOP ignores, is the US Constitution. That there might be lesser precedents which are bad hardly seems to be relevant when the original precedent -- Our Constitution -- is regularly ignored, explained away, and treated as if it were debatable. It is not. It is the law, and Our Will.

* * *

Indeed, just as what started in 1974 has lingered, so too will the further be connected with the past. This is non-sense: The future will always come after the past: The future is not destined to be built on what is bad or good; only that the future will be what it will be, and the future, like today, may or may not adjust. We leave that to future generations to decide.

There is no basis to point to speculative future consequences or outcomes. The issue is today, what is to be done, and whether the GOP and President's illegal rebellion shall or shall not be ended.

* * *

IT doesn't matter how much time this President has in office. He was elected in 2004 to provide leadership 2005-2009. He has two years to either get it right; or more reminders that he is getting it wrong.

There is no basis for the GOP to pretend that the American public, We the People, or anyone will or will not act thoughtfully. The GOP cannot compel "thought" to be a basis or new standard to apply to other when the GOP refused to assent to that standard. Indeed, prudence is the standards to which the GOP refuses to assent, as evidenced by their piles of evidence of problems, but their refusal to do anything about it.

Nobody in future generations need to regret We the People facing reality. The decision of We the People is not a precedent, it is Our Will. That is different. The error is for the GOP leadership to pretend that the future will regret something; that is irrelevant. Our Will compels We the People -- today -- to assert Our Will. We need not consider or worry ourselves with what may happen; we only need to look at what is happening, and what has impermissibly permitted this Congress to assent to illegal rebellion.

* * *

Baghdad is a distraction and smokescreen. The issue of whether the US leadership is or is not united on the rule of law is irrelevant. They have no choice to be in opposition to their oath, the Constitution, or Our Will. Whether there is or is not a war or battle overseas; or whether Congress does or does not agree is meaningless.

Divisions are desired. They are the tools of factions. The way forward is to remind the Congress and GOP leadership that the division didn't stop them from waking up to other views; they could have used the opposition to refine their thinking. This President and GOP leadership, despite the option to use debate and solicit feedback and others views, refused.

Division is what ensures the legal process and Constitution are protected -- for when Americans are united on the wrong cause, or in harmony on the wrong song, a change is needed.

Whether there is or is not division is not a problem; the Framers wanted the factions to clash, and it is desirable to allow our divisions to lead us to the needed confrontation this President has started.

Our Nation is stronger when we clash, when power checks power, and when divisions force all to examine their thinking. The error is to believe that confrontation at home will make us weaker; no, it will strengthen our rule of law. There is no damage when the Rule of Law is more powerful.

* * *

The error is for the GOP to pretend that American leadership to silently agree with folly, in the name of fighting folly. The US government, when it refuses to exercise prudence, and does not assent to Our Will, is on the wrong path: That of extremism. The error is for the GOP to pretend that illegal warfare is one thing; while lawful opposition to illegal warfare is something else. It is not: It is the clash of factions on the battlefield.

For America to talk about Democratic values, those values must be asserted, not hidden out of fear of having them exposed. If there was a time when the clash of factions is needed, it is when the GOP leadership and this President have recklessly done something that is not sustainable, not working, and needs to change.

The error is for the GOP to point to values not practiced; then pretend we have a purpose, which is, at best, illegal, and at worst inspiring lawful opposition and efforts to legally overthrow the US government in retaliation for what the US government illegally did in Iraq.

We the People do not have a "purpose" to fulfill; nor are we tools or pawns for the US Government to move about is if we were required to defend or protect something. We've done our job: In 1789 we told this Government want to do. This Government has refused to do it.

Our Will is in the Constitution; that is our national purpose. This GOP and reckless President would have us believe that the enemy abroad is doing something that only the GOP and President are doing -- ignore the Rule of law, undermining the Construction, and betraying the purpose of We the People in the Constitution. The error of the GOP is to pretend that it is defending something which it is really destroying; and that it is fighting something, which is really a smokscreen and a symptom.

America's problem is in the White House. The error is for the Congress to focus on the division-- that is needed -- and forget that the GOP have undermined the values they supposedly point. The GOP is talking about freedom and democracy, but it does not use free minds to openly debate illegal warfare; and its idea of democracy is to impose one with force, while it ignores We the People and the Republic at home.

* * *

Debating has its place in the courtroom and the legislature. The way forward is to set aside the goal of debate, and ask a simple question: Which side of the line are Members of Congress going to stand; will they assert their oath; and will they end debate on something that they have no power to debate: Our Will as expressed through the Supreme Law -- the Constitution.

The responsibility of We the People is to compel the Congress to choose; then remind them we have the full support of the international community to, with lawful use of combat forces, legally compel Members of Congress to end illegal warfare, assent to Our Will, and assert their oath to the Constitution before a magistrate. The time for talking is ending; the time for action, assertion of the Rule of Law never left us.

Congress has no right or responsibly to debate what is not debatable. The difficulty of this juncture is measured only by what this President has avoided; and what the GOP has refused to confront.

The real battle is not in Baghdad, but within the GOP: Will they or will they not break ranks with the leadership. The enemy American faces has less to do with foreign risks, but with the inclination of free people to give up their mind, assent to lawlessness, and refuses to return to the umbrella of Our Will: The Constitution.

* * *

We the People have well shouted on November 2006: End this war, change, and lets return to the Constitution. If the Members of Congress, despite that loud outcry, reuse to change, then The Congress needs to prepare itself for sustained combat operations which We the People have legally delegated through Geneva for foreign fighter s to wage.

We the People need not reach out to the GOP or defiant Congress that chooses to defy Our Will. This Leadership in Congress and the Executive Branch has shouted down the rule of law, told We the People to assent to this barbarity, and then had the audacity to pretend they were on Our Side. No, they are on the wrong side.

Our Unity is Our Constitution. If the GOP is still seeking that Unity, then they deserve to be micromanaged; this says nothing of the President who pretends there is a debatable point, but he ignores the thing he ignores in the Mirror: He is a creature of the Constitution, not an independent person.

Today's disagreements are healthy: There is no reason to look beyond them, but confront them. we need not be concerned with an uncertain future, we need only look at the Constitution and force Each Member to decide -- up or down -- whether thy are for or against the rule of law, oversight, and holding the President to account.

After the vote is cast, Americans will be in a position to make an informed decision: Who do we want to lead America; and who will be the leader t protect the Constitution. There is one answer: We the People are the leader. It is time Members of Congress, especially those in the GOP awaken to what has happened in November 2006.

Our nations future is secured when We the People's will, as expressed through the Supreme law, is the standard by which we unite. Once Members of Congress choose to support or oppose the Constitution, then it will be easy to see who we can or cannot trust to Unite Americans to fully assert the rule of law and Our Will.