a. Get the "bill" necessary.

b. Get it past the Senate fillibuster?

c. Get it repassed with two thirds vote?

War is an issue of short and long term safety. It is an issue of culture and history and future history, You have made no case for the war not being pursued based on any of these.

You have not addressed the question of will the country be better off 10 years from now.

You have not addressed the issue of the terrorists declaring they intend to make Islam and Shari law the controlling force through out the world.

You have not addressed the issue of how we can avoid future terrorist attacks on the country.

You have not addressed any of these.

You have not defined what your negotiating position will be these various groups.

You have not said what your position will be when Iran explodes their nuclear weapon.

All in all you act as if your position is unquestionably correct and that by merely saying something you make it true.

If you can make a case besides, evidently, that this war us wrong because you hate Bush, then please do so.

If you can make a case besides, perhaps, all wars are immoral and should not be pursued, then please do so.

In other words, what is your basis for just assuming that people will blindly follow the Left's attempt to take control of the country?

Do you have a plan besides anti-war? Do you think the country will accept Sorros as a "leader?"

Surest way, short of impeachment, to pry him out of Iraq is to strip him of the National Guard, by defederalizing.

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;

...but we are dealing with an administration that has shown repeatedly (and that's a huge understatement) that they will not conform their actions to law, be it from Congress or court decisions.  There have been extensive reports of billions of dollars missing from Iraq that were supposed to be spent on various projects, too.

Given this past conduct, what reason does anyone have to believe that the administration will obey any Congressional declaration, even if it's passed into law by an overriden veto?  From FISA to Josh Wolf, the current administration insists that the law is whatever it says it is, and Congress and the courts can be damned.

What evidence is there to believe that the administration will obey any law or ruling that goes against their plans?

(I'm not the author of the original comment this post references, btw, and what I write above scares the poo out of me, but people don't throw around words like "constitutional crisis" lightly.  It means something.)