This isn't assassination.

I believe that according the US constitution assassination is illegal - so does that make this murder? Any lawyers handy?

Assuming this is even true (and I don't think it's likely this sort of action is actually illegal), I'd be astonished if anyone here is a strict constitutionalist.

I'd be astonished if anyone here is a strict constitutionalist.

So what's the constitution for?

We elected a Democratic Congress in 2006 and a Democratic President in 2008 in order to lead and get things done. You can't blame the minority party when Democrats had control of the House, Senate, and White House. We were promised change if only they were given power. Instead, they ended up suffering a historical election defeat, losing control of the House. What are you going to say next, that they somehow need more power?

I think it's an obvious case of them lying and taking advantage of partisan fools, which is precisely what leftists have exposed themselves to be.

Politicians of all stripes are lying, to be sure. But the 110th and 111th congresses did get a lot of things done. The bailout and stimulus bills were pretty massive pieces of legislation. Health care reform, whatever you think of it or the political capital/ time requried to get it, is a pretty monumental achievement. The stimulus, same thing. Dodd-Frank, while not great, is a big legislative achievement. SCHIP too. Any of these is big enough to be the signature achievement of a Congress, and between two sessions all of them happened. They got a lot done, despite obstinate foot-dragging from the minority in some cases.

That they didn't get everything they said they wanted done (and you're a fool if you ever thought that that would happen), and were schmoozed out of control of one chamber doesn't make them ineffective, opportunist losers. Oh and also, Democrats didn't actually control the Senate outright in the 110th. They held 48 seats, and caucased with two independents. Small point perhaps, but I figured I'd mention it.

In my opinion, the propaganda machine on both sides of the Atlantic has done as much to incite hatred of decent, everyday Muslims as AQ or OBL ever did to incite hatred of the West, just in a more subtle way. Here in the UK we've had Mosques getting smashed up and vandalised, decent hard-working Muslims spat at and abused on the streets and worse.

These are all wars over control of resources, just like the Crusades, with religion and morality being bandied about as an excuse. Afganistan, according to my 22 years serving, ex-Marine friend, is about controlling the poppy production, not for moral or ethical reasons but because it is funnelling too much money at people who control other resources that the West want/need.

Wars happen, sadly. People have always fought over resources. But this whole "We are the moral side, they are evil" nonsense is really getting tiring after all these years.

So what's the constitution for?

Something to do with arming bears, isn't it?

Politicians of all stripes are lying, to be sure. But the 110th and 111th congresses did get a lot of things done. The bailout and stimulus bills were pretty massive pieces of legislation.

Yes, they were massive. Yes they were...

They were a massive haul for special interests and self-serving bureaucrats.

Health care reform, whatever you think of it or the political capital/ time requried to get it, is a pretty monumental achievement.[/quote]

A monumental achievement in the sense that they managed to do so little good with so many words. Health care reform was a joke and the Dodd-Frank bill, TARP, etc. have done nothing to cleanse the rot out of our financial system, reduce the ties that bind Washington and Wall Street, and will be an irrelevant footnote once the next financial crisis hits (funny how these reforms can never actually prevent a crisis).

[quote name='SimonH' timestamp='1304380413' post='4805701']
So what's the constitution for?

Something to do with arming bears, isn't it?
[/quote]

[quote name='Khaiy' timestamp='1304380776' post='4805704']
Politicians of all stripes are lying, to be sure. But the 110th and 111th congresses did get a lot of things done. The bailout and stimulus bills were pretty massive pieces of legislation.

Yes, they were massive. Yes they were...

They were a massive haul for special interests and self-serving bureaucrats.

Health care reform, whatever you think of it or the political capital/ time requried to get it, is a pretty monumental achievement.[/quote]

A monumental achievement in the sense that they managed to do so little good with so many words. Health care reform was a joke and the Dodd-Frank bill, TARP, etc. have done nothing to cleanse the rot out of our financial system, reduce the ties that bind Washington and Wall Street, and will be an irrelevant footnote once the next financial crisis hits (funny how these reforms can never actually prevent a crisis).
[/quote]


I quite agree. But, it's incongruous to claim that the Congresses were do-nothings when by the admittedly low standards of the legislature they accomplished a lot, in short order, and with significant obstacles. They delivered as much as any person with even mild political awareness could have rationally expected. Especially with a public disinterested enough to let them pass such feeble legislation compared to what the public claims to want so badly.

If the public were stepping up and demanding that what they claim to want actually happen, rather than the garbage that generally happens on the Hill, we might get a different result. Instead, the public expresses general outrage and fear, poorly and sporadically aimed, and the most coherent demands are economic policies that make as much sense as declaring leprechaun hunts to solve our problems.

They had no nukes, chemical and biological stockpiles were considered harmless. And Iraq said they would let inspectors. The US thought it was a trick and went in anyway. So yeah, that Resolution is not really a justification for the war. Sorry.

The had been saying they would let inspectors in for a decade, and the times they did let them in they weren't allowed to inspect everything.

I think the significantly larger problem than whether or not we should have invaded Iraq was the post invasion plan, which is what really cost the most civilian and US soldier's lives.

Health care reform, whatever you think of it or the political capital/ time requried to get it, is a pretty monumental achievement.

I'd come to the UK and take a look at the NHS before you guys get too excited about health care reform.

After over 50 years of paying national insurance every month, which is about £60-£70 in todays money on a normal wage, my mother still had to pay privately for her hip replacements unless she was willing to wait in agonising pain for about two years.