Comments...

They need to understand WHY I tell them that if they shove a kid on the playground it means that, regardless of what happened before or what happens afterwords, everyone is going to lose.

So any use of force is wrong, correct? So the police should never use force to stop that law-breaker, and everyone in general should never fight back against any oppression?

Ah, good thing no one has ever broken into your house and kicked you out because you'd have no means to fight back since you abhor the use of force in any and all situations.

I would say we (protesters=we) are providing a valuable check against the (debatably) unconstitutional use of power by the President to fight un-declared wars. Even if I thought this war was a good idea, I would STILL be protesting this abuse of power. I, at least, DO support the troops (individuals) fighting. It must really suck to be torn away from your family and life and be transported half way around the world to kill people who are just trying to defend their homes. I hope they get through it with as little psychological damage as possible.

So, ah, where exactly in the Constitution does it say the president MUST have a declaration of war to have our troops engage in hostilities? Oh, and the unconstitional "war powers act" where-in Congress tried to usurp the powers of the Executive Brance, doesn't count in answer to this question.

The President, as Commander in chief, does not need ANY declaration of war to comit troops, period. If COngress doesn't like it then they can with-hold ALL funding for the military the next budget cycle and things grind to a halt. I believe this is one of the checks-&-balances framed in the COnstitution and it was meant that way.

Regarding those "torn away from their families", well they KNOW what they are in for when they sign on the dotted line to join the military; you give up part of your personal freedom to be sent virtually anywhere for the ability to get a pension after 20 years, health & medical coverage, college tuition, etc. Sorry, your "torn away" comment might reverberate with the folks who have never been in the military, but rings hollow with those who were.

Meanwhile, the same US media outlets that provide constant war updates and trumpet the cause of "liberating" the Iraqi people are blacklisting artists that speak up against the war. Oh yeah, THAT is freedom for you...

Heh, I think this comment is funny. I assume you mean artists like the "Dixie Chicks"? Well, see, the media get's their money from their advertiser's, and the advertiser's get their money from consumers. So what happens when some "artist" forget's that they depend on the average consumer for their money and makes some comments that the majority of the average consumer doesn't like? You have average consumers calling and writing TV and radio stations demanding that these media outlets stop playing anything and everything the "offending" "artist" does or else these consumers will boycott the advertiser's of the station and without advertising the station goes under.

See, that's the great thing about America, you can say what you want (well some things you might want, better watch for the PC police), but you should be ready for the consequences of what you said. Speak out against the majority of the population, and you depend on the population to make money, and your might have a severe hit to your wallet. Is this mean? No, this is just people supporting those they like, and shunning those they don't like. Being able to say what you like does not mean people have to sit idly by and agree with everything that is said, a lot of "artists" forget that.