Okay.  I am going to try again.  I am absolutely dumbfounded how anyone can argue that concern over those "16 words" in the State of the Union address represents mere "petty politics" or, simply isn't that important given that we are already in Iraq and the real challenge facing us is to finish the job. [I could source these two claims, but they represent viewpoints that are so popular at present that I have no doubt readers have encountered them on their own.]

As I started to write about this, I realized that it could turn into the longest post I have yet written.  So I have divided it up, and we will take this step by step.  

The first thing I did to prepare was reread the Constitution of the United States. [Something I probably haven't done since high school.]   

While I am no Constitutional authority, even a layperson cannot mistake the division of powers between the Executive and Legislative Branch in regards to use of the military  Congress clearly has the sole power to declare a war and the President serves as Commander-in-Chief.

The relevant passages:

Article I, Section 8

The Congress shall have Power:

[...]

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.

and

Article II

Section 2. The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

Now I know that there has been 200 plus years of intervening history in which that division of power has been interpreted.  And yet the language is very clear.   The President serves as Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy, but it is the Congress that declares war.   Some readers may find it silly that I am starting at such a basic level here.  Certainly I am not asserting that anyone who is steadfastly standing by our President in this present controversy, is overtly arguing that the President had the right to use the military however he and his administration wanted without regard to what Congress or the American citizenry desired. 

However... 

I am asserting that a disregard – whether cavalier or Machiavellian – for the quality of the evidence and the soundness of the arguments in favor of war presented to the US Congress and the US citizenry, treads perilously close to subverting the spirit behind the Constitutional division of powers.  To put it bluntly:  it is a very big deal if the administration believed it was okay to “spin” us into a war. 

I do mean something very specific by that political cliche.  According to Merriam Webster

Main Entry: spin

Function: noun

4 : a special point of view, emphasis, or interpretation <put the most favorable spin on the findings

and

Main Entry: spin doctor

Function: noun

Date: 1984

: a person (as a political aide) responsible for ensuring that others interpret an event from a particular point of view

The reason that this is so important is because in the case of national security issues, only the Executive branch of the government and, sometimes, select subgroups of the Legislative branch get to see the actual facts and raw data.  The Legislative branch of our government and the US citizenry depend on the Executive branch to interpret classified information and make recommendations on the basis of those interpretations.  So yes, the Executive can only go to war if the Legislature votes to, but the Executive has an awesome power and responsibility in outlining the case for or against it.  "Spinning" the evidence subverts the Congress' constitutionally directed power to commit our nation to a course of war. 

Whether there are individuals in the Bush administration who knowingly and consciously lied about the exact level and type of threat Sadaam's regime posed to the US, or individuals in the administration "merely" spun the evidence to ensure "that others interpret an event from a particular point of view" it is a grave misappropriation of authority and an abuse of power.

And that is why it is a BIG DEAL! Kapish?

Later: Part II,  the Joint Resolution to Authorize the use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq.

Update: My previous posts on this are here and here

5:19:23 PM