The Loophole America Has Been Waiting For?

A Senate resolution to revoke the president’s ability to wage war in Iraq is currently in the works. Senators Carl Levin (D-Michigan) and Joseph Biden (D-Delaware) are working towards drafting a revised version of the 2002 resolution that gave President Bush the authorization to wage war in Iraq. The draft resolution will call for the removal of all US troops from Iraq by March 2008, with a select few being left behind to assist Iraqi forces in counterterrorism measures. Whether or not the resolution will have the number of votes to pass the Senate and House remains to be seen. But this is by far the most aggressive piece of legislation that has been discussed in Congress to date.

Last week the House failed in passing a non-binding resolution that condemned the surge of 21,500 more troops to Iraq, which is a strong signal that Democrats do not have the necessary votes to pass the new potential restrictions on the president. The revised resolution will be presented to the Democratic caucus and some Republicans on Tuesday and then the “politicking” for votes will begin. Even if enough votes are garnered to enact the resolution, there still remains the question of whether the resolution will interfere with the president’s constitutional commander-in-chief powers. Like many presidents before him, Bush has always been protective of his war making power.

Constitutional scholars will be debating the issue for weeks to come, but I believe that the issue is cut and dry. The president will contend that Congress never declared war on Iraq in March 2003, which they did not. Instead the original resolution granted the president the authority to dispatch troops to Iraq in order to halt Saddam Hussein’s production of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and other assorted issues that deal with terror. The original pretext of the resolution was debunked when no WMDs were located, which in theory deflates our whole reason for being there. Yes, the president can command the troops, but if his basis for commanding the troops is revoked, he should in theory not be able to continue to run his personal war.

Does the News Still Exist?

It has become apparent over the past few weeks that the media has overstepped the bounds of what one would consider news. The news has been a firm part of the American psyche since the advent of radio and more recently, television. The modern news media is a questionable institution based on the fact that news conglomerates do not give us the whole story of the events that pervade our lives. Never the less, at least they were giving us the scoop on matters that we concerned ourselves with, that is before CNN became the E! Channel.

There are three things that sell news: sex, scandal, and controversy. Besides Bill Clinton, the media market has a severe lack of attention gathering stories, besides the lives of celebrities. The most recent binge that the media has been on has been in concern to the death of Anna Nicole Smith and the less than reputable behavior of Britney Spears. Even reliable news networks like CNN and MSNBC ( I enjoy their point of view) cannot get enough of these people. Personally, I would love to hear about real news, no matter how disturbing or "honest" it may be.

But instead, the news directors of these conglomerates subject us to live feeds of the trial for custody of Anna Nicole Smith’s body; her body. Who wants to hear a blubbering judge decide who gets the decomposing remains of a blonde bimbo who fancied herself a modern day Marilyn Monroe (she was far from it). Sadly, that is not all that the news can get enough of. Who can forget Britney Spears? I enjoy turning on CNN at 9AM to hear that she has no business being around kids, much less her own, shaved her head, and checked herself into rehab, again and left, again. Honestly, who in the hell cares?

I am firmly aware that the American infatuation with the lives of celebrities is a multi-billion dollar (my net worth) a year industry, but how much can we really take? I would like to assume that celebrities are human and enjoy the right to privacy like the rest of the civilized world. Yet we have to place these people on a pedestal to boost our own egos with the fantasy that famous people are human just like us. If I want to stalk these people, I will buy the National Enquirer or turn on the E! Channel. If I want to enlighten myself about the events of the world, I will turn on a reputable news network; get the "scoop" straight.