Is this biased reporting?

[Occhidiangela]

You mean, for instance, like the tyranny of the majority of Republicans in both Houses? What about the tyranny of the minority? Took one man to send us into Vietnam, and one man to send us into Iraq. No Congressional, and therefore, no legal authority for those wars.
[right][snapback]93453[/snapback][/right]

The majority in the House and Senate were Republican, AND, the President was Republican. With majorities in House and Senate being Democrat and a Republican president, Reagan, there was better balance. One can argue that with a Majority in the House, and then the Senate, favoring Republicans and a Democrat (WJ Clinton) in the house, the checks and balances were more functional, and of course the bickering was as energetic as ever.

It took one man to send us to Viet Nam? Yeah, John F. Kennedy. It took the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution (passed by what legislative body???) to give Johnson the political security he needed to escalate Viet Nam. That's more than one man.

Check your facts:

No Congressional, and therefore, no legal authority for those wars.

It took both houses of Congress giving Pres Bush very cursory, or no, deliberation to give him authorization to "use force" (note, not "declare war") in Iraq. It thus has the sanction of Congress, regardless of whether or not the Congress declared war. They ducked their responsibility, as I see it. The whole process took a months long PR campaign aimed at harnessing the emotional energy of 9-11.

That took a lot more than one man.

It always takes more than one man. Or maybe, it takes "more than one man" asleep at the wheel . . . :P

Occhi

PS: Check out Wilkerson's comments in the LA Times a few days ago regarding who hijacked American Foreign Policy. It's a good read.

Occhi