(James) Baker, (Warren) Christopher to head war powers commission

http://www.kare11.com/news/national/national_article.aspx?storyid=245498

Baker, Christopher to head war powers commission

Former Secretaries of State James A. Baker III and Warren Christopher will head a private, bipartisan panel to study a lingering and gnawing national question: Who does the Constitution say has the power to begin, conduct and end wars.

The dispute over the authority to wage war has historically divided presidents, members of Congress and scholars. Through the years, the White House gradually has assumed increased control of U.S. war-making, and it has arisen anew amid the shrill debate in the new Democratic-controlled Congress over President Bush's war buildup in Iraq.

...

The war powers study is sponsored by the private Miller Center of Public Affairs at the University of Virginia.

Among its 12 members are Baker, who served under the first President Bush; Christopher, who was in the Clinton administration; Hamilton; former Attorney General Edwin Meese, who was also on the Iraq Study Group; and Brent Scowcroft, a former national security adviser.

http://january6th.org/reject-fascist-fantasy.html">How to Resist the Fascist Take-Over
Banishing Fascist Fantasies from the "Marketplace of Ideas"
. . .

Unitary Executive: American principle v. Fascist principle

The notion that the 1973 war powers act (which was passed by Congress and can be revoked or radically altered by them) empowers the President of the United States to ignore our laws must be rejected on principle -- American principle v. Fascist principle. It is lunacy to think the Constitution for the United States of America gives (or even might give) the Presidency the power to flagrantly violate the collective will of the people codified in the acts and resolutions passed by our Congress.

You do not need an expert to weigh in. You don't need a law degree, or even a high school degree, to know that absolute power like that is NEVER freely given to a leader; it is only taken by deception or force.

This is not the first time that fascists have appealed to legalistic technicality and "complexity" to thwart the will of the people, and it will not be the last.

The law is intended to serve our will, not thwart it, Too many Americans have been deceived into believing that they are helpless in the face of legal authority. Even when we are in complete agreement that the INTENT of our law is being overruled by legalisms and cynical misuse of the courts, we have submitted to authorities who tell us, "the law is the law." The spread of this fascist view of the law has had devastating consequences.

No matter how long and complex, or how "scholarly and sophisticated" in form, when an opinion yields results that violate the intent of our laws and the principles embodied in our Constitution, the opinion is a sham.

Like the story of the Emporer's New Clothes, sometimes the "authorities" and "sophisticated" are taken in far more easily than the naive. If we are to preserve our constitutional democracy, ordinary Americans must trust their own judgment and reject the sham.

http://january6th.org/reject-fascist-fantasy.html">More. . .

Thus, if the 110th Congress, controlled by the Democrats, fails to get the information it needs -- and the public wants -- about the workings of the Bush/Cheney presidency, it will not be because it does not have the tools with which to obtain that information. Rather, it will be because it lacks the will to use those tools. ----John Dean, December 29, 2006