War Powers?

Again I find myself at odds with the neocons and foreign policy hawks at the WSJ's editorial staff. I was not aware that we (by that I mean the Congress) had declared war. If so, could someone please tell against what foreign power we're at war? I know we f*cked up big time with the vote to grant Bush considerable powers in the wake of 9/11, but still, the assault on civil liberties this administration is perpetrating is staggering.

Contrary to what the WSJ editors may think, I believe the congress occupies the political high ground here, and I further believe their skepticism is fully warranted. I doubt that they'll be able to organize enough support to override a probably veto, but the Journal is right about one thing; let's make it a front and center argument of the '08 presidential campaigns!

clipped from online.wsj.com Mr. Bush would do better by future Presidents if he opposed the Wyden amendment, and any further concessions would amount to an abdication as Commander in Chief. He has the political high ground on this issue. If Congress does more harm, he should declare that to protect the country he'll use his Constitutional war powers to wiretap al Qaeda anyway and toss the issue squarely in the middle of the Presidential campaign. Congress's overriding goal here is to further hamstring our intelligence war-fighters with legal rigidity and complexity, but to do so in a way that dodges its own oversight duties by passing the buck to FISA judges. White House lawyers know this is unconstitutional, but intelligence officials say it's more important to have Congress's blessing for these wiretaps. And because the telecom companies won't cooperate without immunity, Mr. Bush is being bullied into trading away some of his own power to get that immunity.