Friday, September 27, 2013

Cop Kicks down 2nd amend sign.

Cop caught on video kicking down Second Amendment sign.  Although many politically  connected cops and chiefs are pro-control and anti-Second Amendment, most of the ones I talk to are not.  Many surveys of police officers confirm this. Many chiefs owe their jobs to Democratic politicians (who are frequently anti-gun) and have to say the right thing. 

Friday, September 20, 2013

Ethical Decisoin-Making Tools

I complained about a lack of ethics a few posts ago.  Now I'm trying to do something about the problem.  See this excellent list of ethical decision making tools from Ethics Alarms.

H.S. textbooks misstate Second Amendment rights

High School textbooks in at least two states (S.C. and TX), misstate the Supreme Court- approved Second Amendment rule. The  books state that the Amendment only protects the rights of those who are members of the militia.  This is contrary to what the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in D.C. v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago.  Is this incompetence or is it ideologically motivated?  I still see lots of posts and letters from people who have probably never read either decision, limiting the right to militia members.  Ignorance is bliss for some. Our Bill of Rights is arguable the most important legal document in the land.  It's easy to defeat rights if people don't know they exist.  If you don't like the current interpretation of the Second Amendment, don't lie about it, propose an amendment.

Government Missed Red Flags re Naval Yard Shooter

How did the Navy Yard gunman pass at least two background checks? Why wasn't he prosecuted for prior criminal acts? Why wasn't his clearance pulled.?  Why wasn't security seriously beefed up at every military facility after the Fort Hood mass murders?  Why weren't there armed guards all-over the Navy Yard?  Why didn't some of the staff there carry sidearms? (I know the Obama administration doesn't like guns and self-defense, but this is inexcusable)The ball was dropped by governments and innocent people paid the price.  Anyone who thinks government has enough care, smarts or resources to protect them 24/7 everywhere, and thus people don't need guns for defensive purposes, is living in a dream world.

Great Webiste: Ethics Alarms; Lying politicians

There seems to belittle discussion and concern with ethics these days. Lying is commonplace with politicians and no one seems to care.  Of course, it has been going on for decades.  However, contrary to Obama supporters, this fact does not excuse current derelictions.  The Ethics Alarms website (at link) is a great step in the right direction.  Please check it out.  Also be sure to checkout the generally non-partisan website for lots of additional examples. It seems like a lack of ethics is a required qualification for being a public official (no matter what the stripes).  When is the public going to get fed up and throw these folks out?

Bipartisan deception in the Syria debate, Obama floundering.

According to,  both sides have used deception in the Syria debate. The highest profile ones are all Dems:  Obama, Pelosi and Kerry.
I could be wrong, but perhaps the biggest deception is the belief that you can trust the Soviets and Assad.  They will stall the chemical disarmament as long as possible while they work in getting around it. (e.g. ship weapons to Iran)  Obama has been conned.  When he has a slam dunk (Dem. control of both Houses of Congress) he wins, without it, he flounders (e.g. gun control, immigration reform).  He just doesn't know how to deal with tough cookies like Putin and Assad.

Nancy Pelosi and the Obamessiah

In spite of completely botching the Syria problem, many continue to see Obama as faultless and a victim of the Right.  For them, the Obamessiah  can do no wrong. Nancy Pelosi is a high profile example.  This is a disturbing trend.  Does it lead to a very dangerous cult of personality among many on the Left? Although I independently came up with the term, a google search a second ago suggests it was probably first use by author Mark Edward Taylor. 

Gallup Poll shows deline in support for gun control, public links mental illness and gun violence

Interesting results from Gallup.  Perhaps the public is increasingly rising above the constant anti-gun, anti-Second Amendment and pro-control propaganda of the Obama administration and left-dominated media.

Thursday, September 19, 2013

California College Forbids Passing Out Constitutions...On Constitution Day

"In a stunning illustration of the attitude taken towards free speech by too many colleges across the United States, Modesto Junior College in California told a student that he could not pass out copies of the United States Constitution outside the student center on September 17, 2013—Constitution Day. Captured on video, college police and administrators demanded that Robert Van Tuinen stop passing out Constitution pamphlets and told him that he would only be allowed to pass them out in the college’s tiny free speech zone, and only after scheduling it several days or weeks ahead of time. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) has written to Modesto, demanding that the college rescind this policy immediately."    “Worse, FIRE’s research shows that Modesto Junior College is hardly alone in its fear of free speech. In fact, one in six of America’s 400 largest and most prestigious colleges have ‘free speech zones’ limiting where speech can take place. This video brings to life the deeply depressing reality of the climate for free speech on campus.”Source FIRE  Welcome to left-wing higher ed in the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Cops Convictions in Danziger Bridge (Katrina, New Orleans) murders overturned

Months ago this blog covered the Danziger Bridge murders (shortly after hurricane Katrina in New Orleans.  5 officers were convicted but their convictions were overturned because of prosecutorial misconduct. (The link also has good background on the cases.) Looks like the cops aren't the only ones who aren't playing by the rules.  Both police and prosecutorial misconduct are rampant in this country.  However , the problems never seem to get fixed.  Why do you think this is?

3 Important Upcoming Supreme Court

The U.S. Supreme Court has already decided on some of the cases it will tentatively hear when its term starts early next month. Three important ones, involving the First and Fourth Amendments are discussed here.

Wednesday, September 18, 2013

Small arms: Good or bad? Obama can't make up his mind

At the same time he supports domestic gun control and the proposed UN treaty of small arms, the Obama administration provides small arms to Syrian rebels.  One of the purposes of the UN treaty is to keep small arms out of the hands of dangerous groups.  The administration is doing precisely what the treaty purports to outlaw.  Of course, in the final analysis, treaties and statutes notwithstanding, the only important thing is whose ox is being gored.  Secondly, how many of these small arms will end up in the hands of U.S. opponents and "terrorists"?  If Assad falls, how will these arms be used?  These folks are not going to turn in these arms if and when Assad is defeated.  Not only is the administration hypocritical, it is foolish to let these additional arms loose in a nation drowning in violent chaos.  As many on both the Left and Right have noted, Obama's moves re the Syrian crisis have been one disaster, or potential disaster after another. 

Monday, September 16, 2013

More on the "Obama problem" (aka the Syria problem)

Things appear to be changing fast on the Obama administration’s approach to Syria.  Around 2 years ago, Obama said Assad must go, and we  began shipping small arms to the opposition. After the chemical attack,  first it was a missile attack and then manned bombers were mentioned.   What will happen if Syria doesn’t comply with the prospective new chemical weapons disarmament?

New reports strongly suggest that there is fighting between various opposition factions in Syria.  Somehow the administration is going to control whoever takes over if Assad goes?  Somehow the administration will control the brutal violence involved in what has now also become a sectarian conflict in addition to a political one?  How will they do this. “Boots on the ground?”  Of course, the objective now seems to be chemical disarmament.  Have the objectives changed?

Even the folks at Time magazine, in their latest issue, note that the President has been botching this whole thing from the beginning.  First, we attack.  Then we’ll wait for Congressional approval.  Then we’ll use diplomacy.  Why wasn’t diplomacy the first option?  Go the  U.N. or NATO, get approval and then force Assad to negotiate?  It should have been a wake-up call when our closest ally, and most frequent military partner, Britain, refused to buy in.

 Progress has apparently been made in the negotiations.  The U.S and Russia will somehow oversee Syria’s chemical weapon disarmament.  Can we really trust the Soviets and Syrians? Will the Soviets sell out one of their most important Middle East Allies?  Will the delay just give the Syrians more time to hide a good portion of the chemical weapons?   How long will this be drawn out?  What will be the next option adopted by the Administration if this falls through?

Let’s look briefly at the President’s recently televised speech on the situation.   He finally identified the national interest that supposedly justifies military force.   We must punish Assad for the use of chemical weapons in order to deter him and others from using chemical weapons against American forces in the future.  This is very speculative, and hardly justifies military force against a sovereign nation.  Saddam Hussein didn’t use his chemical weapons (if he had them) against American troops.  I doubt most opponents would risk using chemical weapons against U.S. military forces.   I know of no instance of their use against American forces in either Afghanistan or Iraq.   This alleged “national interest” justifying military intervention doesn’t fly.  If this interest is so obvious, why haven’t the British, the U.N. and perhaps NATO jumped on the bandwagon. Their troops are also vulnerable to chemical weapons.  Perhaps they have no interest, because they have no “boots on the ground” contingencies?

The President’s speech wreaked of propaganda.  Propagandists play on emotion to overcome the lack of rationality. He repeatedly used emotion-arousing arguments.  He made repeated  reference to the innocent people and children who were killed.  Our emotions tell us that Assad must pay retribution for this.  When reason provides a weak justification, try emotion.  But revenge this is not a national interest justifying military intervention.   Emotion is not a good basis for a very serious action.  Further, Assad needs to be punished. Will any of the plans inflict personal harm on Assad?  How many innocent people who took no part in the chemical attack, and might actually have opposed it if asked, will be killed by missile or bomb attacks?   Assad is an international criminal.  We will have to topple his regime to get him and then we should send him before and international or Syrian court.  How much American involvement will be necessary to topple Assad?  Given the split in the Syrian opposition, they will need a lot of help to topple Assad.

American credibility is only temporarily at issue.  We will have a new President in 2016 who will hopefully provide rational policies, leadership and credibility.  However, Obama’s credibility is the real issue,  Thus far, he has totally blown it.  He  lurches from option to option desperately seeking some way out.

Finally, for many liberals, protecting Obama and providing spin and damage control are priorities. Will that foolishness lead us into military invovlement?  Will we use military force to save Obama's reputation?  For many misguided military  people and conservatives (and some liberals), the primary source/expression of patriotism is the military and supporting military action.  Unfortunately, too many people get their egos salved when their nation whips some two-bit dictator or “kicks ass.”  This misguided approach costs too much American blood and treasure.  Too many innocent people become collateral damage.  The source/expression of our patriotism should be our "exceptionalism:"  we are the freest people on the face of the earth, we trust our law-abiding citizens with defensive weapons, we have the oldest, most successful democracy in human history.  We saved the world from German and Japanese oppression in the 40's.  Being a bully for no good reason is not something to be proud of.


Sec'y of State Lying re his prior stand on Iraqi intervention?

According to the usually reliable" "Secretary of State John Kerry says both he and Chuck Hagel, now the secretary of defense, “opposed the president’s decision to go into Iraq” as senators. But both voted to give President Bush the authority to use military force in Iraq."  Just the kind of guy we need in charge at State. And you might be thinking Putin and Assad can't be trusted. 

Saturday, September 14, 2013

Colo Voters oust 2 anti-gun legislators

"Colorado voters ousted two state lawmakers Tuesday in first-ever recall elections that came in reaction to the Democrats' support for tougher gun laws in the aftermath of last year's mass shootings in Aurora and Newtown, Conn.
Senate President John Morse of Colorado Springs and Sen. Angela Giron of Pueblo lost their jobs as lawmakers in an election seen as a national measure of popular support for gun legislation. They were replaced by two gun-rights Republicans."

It's so heartening to see people taking action and standing up for their Second Amendment  rights. Eternal vigilance and voting are the price of liberty.  All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. (Attributed to Edmund Burke)

Friday, September 13, 2013

George Zimmerman demonization continues, Reality Show needed?

As suggested in a prior posts, most of the recent news about George Zimmerman is not really newsworthy and represents the Left's demonization of him.  I suspect that soon some network will come up with a George Zimmerman reality show.  Who knows, perhaps he will become the dumbed-down media's next phenom. 

Book Review: Jeffrey Toobin's "The Oath."

I am a long-time Supreme Court watcher and analyst and have taught courses on the Court and constitutional issues (e.g. Fourth Amendment, Second Amendment).  I eagerly took up this book.
The book “The Oath,” by Jeffery Toobin, is subtitled “the Obama White House and the  Supreme Court.” 

As the subtitle suggests, this book is primarily about the struggle between  our most liberal President ever, and the conservative faction on the Court, and the struggle between the liberal and conservative factions on the Court.  One faction is the four conservatives on the Court (Scalia, Alito, Thomas and Roberts) who are sometimes joined by Justice Kennedy, who is the Court’s most frequent swing vote.  The liberal faction is Ginsburg, Kagan, Sotomayor and Breyer.  Toobin provides an inside look at both the White House and the Court.  This review will cover only selected points.

Obama has appointed two Justices, both female (Sotomayor and Kagan), and, for the first time the Court has three females, all of whom vote in a liberal direction.  Like all recent  Presidents, Obama sought appointees who share his ideology.  His appointees have not disappointed him.

In terms of qualifications and background, Kagan’s is a very questionable choice.  Kagan had not practiced law  in two decades before being appointed Obama’s Solicitor General.  She had never had a case before the Court.   She had never been a judge anywhere.  She, unlike most recent Justices, had never clerked for a U.S. Supreme Court Justice. Prior to becoming Solicitor General, she had never argued a case in any courtroom.  Her main claim to fame was that she was the first female Dean of Harvard Law School.  Obama wanted her on the Court and his only option was to name her Solicitor General so that she would have at least some minimal qualifications.  Even this appointment was a reach.  Solicitor General frequently had long records of litigation and were active in constitutional litigation (e.g.  Johnson’s appointee Thurgood Marshall).  As has become the case recently with most nominees, Kagan danced around the questions, dodged frequently and was a vague as possible in her confirmation hearing.  In spite of her minimalist qualifications, the Democratic majority in the Senate assured her confirmation.

The book discusses the most controversial cases that came before it, including D.C. v Heller (Second Amendment gives right to individuals), McDonald v. Chicago (Second Amendment applies against the states) Citizens United (First Amendment invalidates portions of “campaign reform” legislation) NFIB v. Sebelius (upholding Obamacare).  Toobin takes the liberal position in all these cases.  Rather than celebrating the strengthening of Constitutional vales and the Bill of Rights in these decisions, Toobin bad-mouths them.   Liberal hypocrisy appears to be at work.    When the liberals lose we generally see accusations of ignoring precedent, ignoring the Constitution, blatant policy- making, etc.   When the liberals win, we generally get praise for the decision.

It is clear to Toobin who are the “bad guys,” on the Court, the four conservatives and Kennedy.  Additional bad guys are the NRA, powerful corporations and the Tea Party.  Obama ‘s policies and the Constitution are often portrayed as the victims of the conservatives on the Court.   Anyone looking for a balanced, sophisticated treatment of the decisions and the Justices will be sadly disappointed.  However, the book is informative about the Court, some of its history, Justices, important cases, etc.  It provides interesting insight into the members of the Court and their interactions.  With these caveats, I’d recommend this book for light reading.


Saturday, September 07, 2013

Mission Creep Already starting for Syria? Retaliation?

The New York Times and Time magazine (both Obama "supporters) and others are  claiming that the Pentagon is working on an expanded list of targets for Syria.  various reports mention Chemical weapons, and related troops and materiel,  and other crucial assets that have been moved are the apparent targets.  Targeting chemical weapons may result in their release into the Syrian environment.  Civilians may be the predominant victims. There is also talk of using aircraft in addition to missiles.  Mission creep setting in already.  Iran and Al Qaeda are already threatening retaliation. A U.S. attack will only heighten hate for America in the region.  This thing could quickly get out hand and turn into a regional crisis.  The Russians are sending naval units to the area. These developments should send up additional red flags to Congress and the American people.

Friday, September 06, 2013

Big First Amendment Victory for University Professors (and taxpayers and students)

“In a victory for free speech on campus, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a ruling  (Demers v. Austin)  yesterday addressing a question raised but not answered by the Supreme Court of the United States in Garcetti v. Ceballos (2006): whether the First Amendment protects public college faculty members’ speech “related to scholarship or teaching,” despite the Court’s holding in Garcetti that public employees may be disciplined for “speech made pursuant to the employee’s official duties.” Writing for a unanimous Ninth Circuit panel in yesterday’s opinion (PDF), Judge William Fletcher stated unequivocally that “Garcetti does not—indeed, consistent with the First Amendment, cannot—apply to teaching and academic writing that are performed ‘pursuant to the official duties’ of a teacher and professor.”
if you care about First Amendment rights, esp. on college campuses, please visit the FIRE  website at the link. They are an extremely valuable organization for those love liberty!

TIH: 9/6

Today in History: Friday, September  06, 2013
AP Highlight in History:
On Sept. 6, 1901, President William B. McKinley was shot and mortally wounded by anarchist Leon Czolgosz at the Pan-American Exposition in Buffalo, N.Y. (McKinley died eight days later; Czolgosz was executed the following month.)
Source:  Dallas Morning News
[For better or worse, too often for the worse, "justice" was dispensed a lot quicker back then.  On the other hand, I've never seen anyone allege that Czolgosz didn't murder the Prez]


Media Absurdity Continues: Reported that Zimmerman Gets Speeding Ticket!

The media inability to discern what is truly newsworthy  is even worse than I previously suggested on this blog.  George Zimmerman gets a speeding ticket.  OMG! (Will we start getting updates on his "bad hair" days?) This is nationally newsworthy?  This is totally absurd!  Don't the national media have anything better to report on?  The left-leaning, inane fight against the demons goes on.  This is even less newsworthy than his wife's seeking a divorce.  Where do the media find these people making such incredibly incompetent and ideologically-driven decisions?  When is the public going to stand up and demand real news and balanced coverage from both the left- and right-leaning media?

Lessons from Afghanistan?

What started out as a justifiable intervention in Afghanistan has now become America's longest war (going on 12 years).  It has also become the most unpopular.  In Afghanistan, there was never even a humpty-dumpty to put back together again.  All the idealistic talk about nurturing democracy there was a delusion. Although we are out of Iraq, are the Iraqi people better off for our involvement?  Is democracy flourishing in our long-term ally Egypt?    The bad taste created by the Afghani and other debacles has made the public skeptical about intervention in Syria?  One suspects that give the horrendous brutality, threats of Iranian retaliation if the U.S. strikes, growing regional involvement (e.g. Lebanon's Hezbollah), transformation into a Sunni-Shiite war, etc., etc., etc,, that Syria can never be put back together again, by anyone, no matter what.  Recently increasing sectarian violence in Iraq, also sends disturbing messages.  In addition, recent news suggests more brutality by the Syrian rebels than previously revealed.  The rebels and their backers have tried to keep a lid on this news, but it is more than just Assad's propaganda. Syria is becoming a basket case that cannot be fixed by outside intervention.  Obama has thus far failed to get additional support at the G-20 meetings. Our closest ally, Britain has already opted out. It is far too late for missile strikes or even no-fly zones.  Congress and Obama should just suck it up.  Obama should admit he has blown it, and the politicians need to listen to the American public--except for humanitarian aid, no direct American involvement in Syria.

NSA cracks encyrption (digital scrambling) codes

Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse, it had been revealed that the British and American governments have cracked encryption codes that were thought to prevent government snooping. Supercomputers have enabled the NSA and British GCHQ to pull this off.  Documents leaked by former analysis Edward Snowden revealed this breakthrough.  It's becoming easy to become paranoid. Are our televisions watching us?

Wednesday, September 04, 2013

New Sentencing in Montana Rape case (30 days for rape of 14 year old)

Looks like this wacko judge is having second thoughts.

TIH: 9/04

Today in History: Wednesday, September  04, 2013

On Sept. 4, 1957, Arkansas Gov. Orval Faubus called out the National Guard to prevent nine black students from entering Central High School in Little Rock.
Sen. John McCain accepted the Republican presidential nomination at the party's convention in St. Paul, Minn.
Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice in a sex scandal, forcing the Democrat out of office.  [Is there a connecton between a city having  liberal democratic mayors and an eventual financial collapse?]
Source Dallas Morning News [by Blogger]


Feds give states breathing room on legal marijuana

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder announced a new policy that will allow states to adopt permissive marijuana policies if they do so "in a responsible manner."  Under these new guidelines, "the Justice Department will not challenge state laws and prosecutors may not bring cases against individual users unless they violate eight federal priorities, including marijuana distribution to minors or as a cover for drug trafficking operations."

 This is a great boost for the marijuana legalization movement and there will be pushes in many other states to legalize medical and/or recreational use of marijuana.  Ballot initiatives are already planned in a number of states.   From federalism and libertarian perspectives, this is a good move. Stay tuned.

Left leaning Media Distort Gun Debate

I've been saying all along that the left-dominated or left-leaning media have distorted the debate about guns, crime control and the Second Amendment.  Here's a concurring opinion.

Obama continues to flounder, delay will only help Assad

Obama compounded his litany of errors by delaying attack and attempting to secure Congressional approval. Looks like a good domestic political move, but otherwise it is a disaster.  It appears that  the Dems and conservative repubs might just give him the go-ahead.  The attack will be largely symbolic in effect.  Assad and his military leadership may be vicious and bloodthirsty, but they are not stupid.  As this article, and many others suggest, given the extra time to prepare for a potential attack, the Syrian government is hiding and shifting hardware, equipment and troops.  Much of it is being moved to inhabited civilian areas.  Further, Syria has oodles of chemical weapons storage sites.  How many of these may be hit with the release of deadly gas?  In the end, the attacks may kill more civilians and destroy more civilian property than important military assets.  Not everything can be moved, but the leadership will have time to hide themselves and their key communication assets.  If the attack comes, it will do little to damage the government's military capacity and may inflict tremendous civilian casualties.  It may provide a symbolic lift for the rebels, but, as suggested in a prior post, this attack will, on balance, only make things worse for civilians, regional stability and international relations.  It will provide new propaganda fodder for Muslim extremists and make it clear that the administration doesn't have a clue.  Given our national debt problems, further involvement and the slipper slope is  the last thing we need.  Thee major bills from Afghanistan have yet to be paid.

 I think we can expect the libertarians and tea party to vote against  Obama's request.  Most of the recent polls I have seen show that most of the public is against the attack.  Obama painted himself and us into the corner with his remarks about red lines and how Assad must go.  I hope Congress is not foolish enough to bail him out with a vote for the attack.

Sunday, September 01, 2013

More crime lab problems; labs paid per conviction

Scandals galore at state crime labs.  Recent study finds that some labs are paid per conviction.  How stupid can you get? 

Mayor Bloomberg great for NRA and gun sales

NYC Mayor Bloomberg's obsessive hate of guns and the Second Amendment has largely backfired. This is consistent with his general approach of making government a super-Nanny.  With his $ and connections, he is one of the most dangerous politicians in the nation when it comes to freedom.  Fortunately, many of his Nanny government schemes have not made it (e.g. ban on large sweet drinks) 

Congress Should say NO to Obama re Syria. Time to find a new approach.

There seems to be widespread consensus that, overall, Obama has handled the Syrian “problem” badly.  (I would argue that Syria is not the problem, Obama’s handling of the situation and the American obsession with trying to be the world’s policeman, problem solver and implanter of democracy is the problem.)  Even Time agreees.  Isn't it  ironic how the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize (what a joke) and a candidate who was touted as the "Peace President" is rattling the sabers.  Dindn't welearn anything from Vietnam, Iraq or Mogadishu?  Congress should soundly refuse to approve to Obama's request American military intervention, and strongly state its opposition to any direct American military involvement there without Congressional approval. Syria is a chaotic, unstable, disaster.  This humpty-dumpty will not be put back together again for decades, if ever.  In part it has developed into a Sunni v. Shiite war that we cannot fix.

Humanitarian motives are good, but often things backfire and in the volatile and religiously polarized Middle East we cannot control the outcome.  I hate to sound cruel, but massive casualties in a civil war in a country thousands of miles away, is not a justifiable national interest for  intervention in Syria.  Have we made things better in Iraq?  Have we built a stable democracy in Afghanistan.  Since we got out of Vietnam, the country united and peace prevailed.  The humanitarian thing to do is to stay out.

This is not going to be a relative cake-walk like Libya.  Syria has powerful allies (e.g. Russia and Iran).  How will Russia and Iran respond.    Lebanon, via Hezbollah, has already been drawn into the conflict.  This could easily spiral into a major multi-national conflict.  There was lots of open ground in Libya.  Syria is much more heavily urbanized.  The Syrias have a first class Soviet-made air defense system.  Syria has huge stockpiles of chemical weapons that need to be factored in. 

Some argue that our failure to act could result in the Russians gaining control or undue influence.  They can’t control it any better than we could.  Didn’t they learn anything from their Afghani debacle?  If action must be taken, let it be the U.N. or other nations in the region.   

 The British Parliament has spoken out agianst British intervention.  There is no enthusiasm by the French or any of our European allies for intervention.  The UN has shown no interest in involvement. Have these folks finally figured it out?

In this context the problem of Presidential powers v. Congressional powers is a difficult and complex one.  The War Powers Act is now working. Let's use this Congressional veto as the start of trying to build a new Executive-Legislative working arrangement.  One that will keep Presidents with itchy trigger fingers from dragging us into problems that we cannot solve, involvement that will probably market things worse, and that involve no true central national interests and only squander American lives and treasure. The status quo is not working.  Let's use this situation as a starter for a new approach.