Check out this interesting CNN report, published in 1999 during the Kosovo conflict in the former Yugoslavia -- fascinating how much FUN one can have by switching the names of the president, the particular conflict, and the political party of those quoted. To refresh your memory, they were "debating a resolution that would give President Bill Clinton congressional authorization to use all means necessary to win the current battle in Yugoslavia..." as CNN put it then.

One consistent fact, though, is the concern of Sen. Robert Byrd over ceding excessive control to the executive branch by abdicating any real role for the legislative branch. Byrd is the canary in this coal mine, warning repeatedly of the dangers of an Imperial presidency -- something that never really threatened us during the Clinton years, but NOW most definitely DOES. Here's the link to the full archived report:

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/05/03/kosovo.congress/

- - - - -

I wonder if Republican Sen. Hutchinson (who failed to be re-elected) feels this way about Iraq? From CNN, in 1999:

"It has yet to be adequately demonstrated to Congress or the American people that it is our vital national interests that has drawn us into this conflict. In fact, I would say, we have stumbled into this conflict, we have slipped into this war," said Sen. Tim Hutchinson (R-Arkansas).

- - - - -

I also wonder if Sen. Voinovich would allow anyone to entertain any similar thoughts about Iraq now? From the same CNN report:

The only senator of Serb descent, George Voinovich (R-Ohio), was even more critical of the mission. "The time has come, Mr. President, where NATO needs to get off its high horse, restrain its ego and instead of trying to save face over a major foreign policy blunder, start thinking about saving lives," Voinovich said. "It is time to stop the bombing and put everyone's effort into finding a diplomatic solution that will quickly result in removal of ... Serbian troops in Kosovo."

- - - - -

Sen. Byrd, CNN, 1999:

Sen. Robert Byrd (D-West Virginia) warned: "With this language the Senate is effectively bowing out of the Kosovo debate and ceding all authority to the executive branch."

- - - - -

Finally, here is a delicious quote from Sen. McCain -- I wonder if he would take back these words, since STANDING BY OUR PRESIDENT is SO important to him NOW? From CNN:

"Some of us in Congress are so distrustful of the president that we feel obliged to damage the office in order to restrain the current occupant," McCain said. "Both sides have lost the ability to tell the office from the man. Publicly and repeatedly ruling out ground troops may be smart politics according to the President's pollster. But it is inexcusably irresponsible leadership."

- - - - -

I personally believe that the office of the Presidency IS far more important than the occupant, but also believe the Constitution and the country itself are distinctly separate from, AND MORE IMPORTANT THAN, the office of the Presidency, as well its current occupant. Our "leaders" in Congress today fail to acknowledge that fact -- I doubt many of them (save for Sen. Byrd) could pass a high school-level civics or government class, given their misunderstanding of separation of powers and the checks-and-balances built into our Republic.

Here's the oath of office taken by each U.S. Representative and Senator when being sworn into office, as reported on the official website of the House:

"I, (name of Member), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."

NOWHERE in that oath is there a pledge of allegiance to the President -- thank God for THAT -- so it's completely disgusting how the Republican majority currently controlling Congress has ceded the Constitutional role of Congress as a co-equal branch of government to the current occupant of the White House (at least as far as the war in Iraq is concerned).

Not ONE of these people now in office who shirks his or her SWORN DUTY to perform the Constitutional role of legislator deserves to occupy such an office for one more day. In a real sense, such dereliction of duty deserves nothing less than impeachment and removal from office.

Oh, good Lord, what's wrong with me? I've forgotten that the G.O.P. has redefined an impeachable "high crime and misdemeanor" as lying about extramarital relations -- it apparently doesn't now include actual misfeasance while in office, refusal to discharge constitutional duties, or illegal/unconstitutional acts.

To quote Emily Litella, "Never mind!"

...I DO know that impeachment and removal from office is generally thought not to include U.S. Representatives and Senators. According to the histories I've read, only one legislator (Sen. Blount of Tennessee) was ever threatened with impeachment, but he was expelled in a separate action by the Senate.

Guess that leaves it up to the voters to do the necessary House cleaning (Senate cleaning too)!

Rep. King (born May 28, 1949, according to Wikipedia) has taken a page from the Ann Coulter book of charm -- go after someone's personal characteristics, rather than dealing with what a person SAYS or DOES. That's lots easier, doesn't really require thought -- and feels so GOOD after you've made such vile comments about an 86 year old woman! How low can you get?

Take a peek at Rep. King's personal web site (which, fortunately, offers a beautiful, high-definition photograph of the congressman, suitable for framing), and imagine how GOOD his comb-over will look in a few years. I rather doubt he'll look quite as youthful as he does NOW -- let's hope people who encounter him at age 86 are kinder than HE is. Hmmm -- he's 57, so almost 30 years from now, if he's lucky enough to STILL BE ALIVE, just imagine his baldness, wrinkles, and general decrepitude? Ugh -- revolting!!!