johnc

And you missed the point of my post. I never said HR114 declared war. Congress has repeatedly (since 1789!) authorized the President and the military to legally conduct war without resorting to a formal declaration of war. There was even an attempt to codify this concept into law as Public Law 93-148 War Powers Resolution. Congress has given the President the power to wage war against the terrorists (in 2001) and against Iraq (in 2003). Both authorizations were through Congressional Resolutions and both did not include a declaration of war. Again, its recognized within the US and the UN that war can legally be conducted without a formal declaration of war.

Semantics. Many times, the United States has engaged in extended military engagements that, while not formally declared wars, were explicitly authorized by Congress, short of a formal declaration of war. These military engagements and process by which Congress authorized them are prefectly legal under our Constitution and have been tested via Supreme Court challenges every time - and passed. Some examples: Quasi-War against France in 1798 First Barbary War against the Barbary States in 1801 Second Barbary War against the Barbary States in 1815 Paraguayian Raid against Paraguay in 1859 Russian Civil War Intervention against Russia in 1918 Protection of Lbanon against Muslim rebels in 1959 Vietnam War against the National Liberation front in 1964 Restoration of Lebanon against Muslin extremists in 1982 Operation Just Casue agains the Panama Defense Force in 1989 Persian Gulf War against Iraq in 1991 War on Terrorism against the Taliban in 2001 Second Iraq War agaisnt Irag in 2003 The current Iraq war was authorized by Congress (H.J.Resolution 114) and passed with a vote of 296-133 in the House and 77-23 in the Senate. We are LEGALLY at war even if you don't want to believe it.

Now CBS's "expert" is claiming he didn't authenticate the forged documents: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A18982-2004Sep13.html And here's a perspective on why CBS is still stonewalling that never occurred to me, but it makes sense and is really scary at the same time: http://www.nationalreview.com/kurtz/kurtz.asp

Its just you...

BTW... our current deficit at the most recent projection ($417B) is only the 17th largest in the history of the US as a percentage of GDP. The absolute number is the largest but our overall economy is has grown considerably. Deficit spending is not a "bad" thing by itself. Its an effective fiscal tool that has been used in the US's past during every war. It was expected and approved by Congress repeatedly. Hopefully we haven't forgotten that "war" thing again...

Actually, I don't drive a Z car anymore (although I do drive a 1977 Datsun 810). The Rusty Old Datsun is just a shell of its former self. And I've got too many skeltons in my closet (and adding new ones every day) to get into the political arena. FYI... a good analysis of what's happening to the "Old Media": http://hnn.us/blogs/entries/7303.html

I was wrong, its getting much worse for CBS and Kerry: http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=7099 http://www.time.com/time/election2004/columnist/klein/article/0,18471,695809,00.html

Why don't we look at the facts as they relate to Patriot Act abuses: 1. The Patriot Act includes a provision requiring the Inspector General of the Justice Department to review any and all complaints about civil liberties and civil-rights abuses involving Justice Department personnel. 2. The inspector general has to make a twice-a-year report to Congress on potential civil rights and civil liberties abuses by Justice Department officials. 3. The Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility is the actual investigative department tasked with investigating any complaint of abuse regarding the Patriot Act. 4. The latest report expected to be released tomorrow covers the period between Dec. 16, 2003, and June 21, 2004. 5. During that time, the inspector general received 1,613 such complaints, the vast majority of which did not require investigation. Nearly 1,000 of the complaints did not involve a Justice Department employee or included farfetched claims, such as that the government was interfering with a person's thoughts or pumping poisonous gas into someone's home. Another 410 complaints were outside the inspector general's jurisdiction, including claims of improper prison medical care and inadequate library facilities. Of the remaining 208 complaints, only 13 were determined to warrant further review, the most prominent of which Brandon Mayfield case. Mr. Mayfield's arrest and detention were the result of a bad fingerprint analysis, not improper implementation of the Patriot Act. You and I (pre-Patriot Act) have always faced the risk of a bad fingerprint analysis, incorrect witness identification, erroneous license plate identification, etc. That's a basic risk we all face.

Hah! I've still got parts left from the Rusty Old Datsun that I'm trying to sell!

You know its bad when USA Today piles on: http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-09-12-bush-documents_x.htm And this whole thing now has a name: http://rathergate.com/ Here's the final nail in the coffin, the Boston Globe even says the docs are probably fake: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/09/12/new_doubt_cast_on_guard_documents/

Unfortunately you're going to see a lot of old SCCA GT cars for sale real cheap. Rule changes are going to make them expensive to update. I've seen this car up close and the workmanship is fantastic. If you bought the car for the asking price, you could part it out and maybe make a profit.

This rumor is being spread to promote a book by a crazy Frenchman.

All I can say is, Wow: http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=12551_One_More_CBS_Document_Example And even more evidence that CBS is lying: http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040912-125608-4609r.htm http://www.nationalreview.com/kerry/kerry200409111432.asp And someone else pointing out the 60 minutes has a history of using faked documents (who can forget the Audi Unintended Acceleration debacle):

My attitude hasn't changed one bit from what GWB said to the nation on 9/20/2001: And GWB has stuck to this pledge for 3 years. Unfortunately I can't trust John Kerry to do the same or stick to his word.

For those that forget: http://www.sacred-texts.com/ame/911/wtc.htm http://www.sacred-texts.com/ame/911/pentagon.htm http://www.sacred-texts.com/ame/911/aa11.htm http://www.sacred-texts.com/ame/911/aa77.htm http://www.sacred-texts.com/ame/911/ua175.htm http://www.sacred-texts.com/ame/911/ua93.htm BTW... If you look through these lists you will most likely find someone with your last name. I know I found two "Coffeys." They were a father and son.

CBS has not produced the original document and hasn't even admitted to possessing it. All they've shown to date is a copy of a fax. What's funny is that their supposed "expert" (really only a handwriting analyst named Marcel Matley) verified the signature after looking at a copy of a fax. He did not (and cannot because he's not a document expert) verify the authenticity of the document despite what Dan Rather has claimed. Some of Matley's bibliographical information: Matley, Marcel B. "Studies in Questioned Documents, Number Seven: Reliability Testing of Expert Handwriting Opinions." San Francisco, CA. Handwriting Services of California, 1992. Matley, Marcel B. "The Physiology and Forensic Identification of Handwriting, 1993 NADE Pre-Conference Class." San Francisco, CA. 1993

CBS trying to escape the "Kill Zone": http://belmontclub.blogspot.com/2004/09/escaping-kill-zone-dan-rathers-defense.html

I wish people would actually READ the Constitution before making assertions such as the above. The issue is the 12th amendment as printed below. This constitutionality issue MIGHT apply to the Electors of the state of Texas but not to the Electors in the other 49 staes and the District of Columbia. This aspect of the 12th amendment has never been challenged in court and most aspects of the 12th amendment have been superceeded by the 20th. And its a moot point anyway because Dick Cheney LEGALLY changed his place of residence to Wyoming before the 2000 election.

It just keeps getting worse for CBS and Dan Rather: http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/NotedNow/Noted_Now.html http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/news/special_packages/election2004/9633814.htm http://www.wbap.com/listingsentryheadline.asp?ID=239369&PT=wbaptopstories I predict that a few people will be fired at CBS and Dan Rather might retire early after the election as a result of this screw up.

Toyota 4AG 1.6L engine. Lots around, fairly cheap to buy and 160hp is fairly easy to come by. They are also very light and can zing to whatever rpm you want.

Oh Geez! I guess I have to do some reseach for you: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/apeurope_story.asp?category=1103&slug=Russia%20Rebel%20Goals Amazing how easily this came up in Google.

And in fairness, a link to a blog that attempts to debunk some of the pro-forgery assertions: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/9/10/34914/1603 Along with links to some of the original document formatting questions: http://www.donaldsensing.com/2004/09/ibm-introduced-proportional-spacing.html http://www.donaldsensing.com/2004/09/more-format-and-content-analysis-of.html For some reason I got really interested in this issue... But, these new documents, even if authentic, don't assert anything new. All of this, was hashed over in the 2000 campaign with Gore's staff doing a much better job with the issue.

Back to the original point of this thread... Its getting worse: . Now the DNC is blaming the Republicans for forging and then leaking these documents?

So far, in all of these posts, no one has asserted a fact. All have asserted "truths" which have nothing to do with facts. This thread is a classic example of how people focus on their own "truths" without regard to facts. Again, do your own basic research. Read and understand facts. Then (and only then) develop your own "truths."

Bush "bullied" Congress? C'mon guys, Congress was all for the passage of this act. Many Democrats voted for these measures and claiming Bush and Ashcroft "bullied" Congress is a purely political statement. Your representatives voted for these measures. You elected your representatives. Like I've said before, read history to learn about what's happening today and what's going to happen tomorrow. Passage of these kinds of laws (and event more draconian measures) is common during wartime (or have you all forgotten we are at war? Didn't the Muslim murder of school children in Russia remind you of that) and has been allowed via the Supreme Court. Do your own research. A good place to start is the Annotated Constitution (includes all changes as a result of Supreme Court decisions) at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/constitution/browse.html