Who are the Libyans McCain and Schumer want to support with US military assets?

Does McCain or Schumer know who these rebels are? Why are they a US problem? Have we learned nothing? The drums of war are beeing beaten by all the usual suspects:

Sen. Charles Schumer (D., N.Y.)

said the chances the United Nations Security Council will declare a no-fly zone over Libya have risen following a recommendation by a coalition of other Arab countries to ground military aircraft there.

“I certainly think the Arab League’s decision makes a no-fly zone more likely,” Mr. Schumer said during an interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday.

_____________________________

Paris: G-8 powers will seek a united front on the conflict in Libya amid calls to enforce a no-fly zone there, at a meeting of the eight major powers’ foreign ministers in Paris on Monday and Tuesday.

Amid divisions over calls for foreign military intervention, diplomats said the group of eight will take stock of efforts by host France and Britain for a UN Security Council resolution on a no-fly zone, backed by the Arab League.

US secretary of state Hillary Clinton and Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov will join counterparts from Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy and Japan. All the Council’s permanent members except China will be represented.

Britain and France have a draft resolution in hand for the Security Council to enforce a no-fly zone over Libya which received backing on Saturday from the 22-nation Arab League, considered crucial for dealing with the region.

Russia and China have appeared reluctant to back the no-fly zone while the United States, Germany and Italy have taken a cautious line on intervention, which Washington and the European Union say can only happen with a UN mandate.

Schumer Doesn't Like The US Constitution Much

"a tremendous disrespect for the Constitution"- Dana Perino

...He ( The President) shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court...


Schumer to fight new Bush high court picks
By: Carrie Budoff Politico
Jul 27, 2007 05:33 PM EST

Schumer said his “greatest regret” in the last Congress was not doing more to scuttle Alito.

New York Sen. Charles E. Schumer, a powerful member of the Democratic leadership, said Friday the Senate should not confirm another U.S. Supreme Court nominee under President Bush “except in extraordinary circumstances.”

“We should reverse the presumption of confirmation,” Schumer told the American Constitution Society convention in Washington. “The Supreme Court is dangerously out of balance. We cannot afford to see Justice Stevens replaced by another Roberts, or Justice Ginsburg by another Alito.”

Schumer’s assertion comes as Democrats and liberal advocacy groups are increasingly complaining that the Supreme Court with Bush’s nominees – Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samuel A. Alito – has moved quicker than expected to overturn legal precedents.

Senators were too quick to accept the nominees’ word that they would respect legal precedents, and “too easily impressed with the charm of Roberts and the erudition of Alito,” Schumer said.

“There is no doubt that we were hoodwinked,” said Schumer, who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee and heads the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

A White House spokeswoman, Dana Perino, said Schumer's comments show "a tremendous disrespect for the Constitution" by suggesting that the Senate not confirm nominees.

"This is the kind of blind obstruction that people have come to expect from Sen. Schumer," Perino said. "He has an alarming habit of attacking people whose character and position make them unwilling or unable to respond. That is the sign of a bully. If the past is any indication, I would bet that we would see a Democratic senatorial fundraising appeal in the next few days."

Schumer voted against confirming Roberts and Alito. In Friday’s speech, he said his “greatest regret” in the last Congress was not doing more to scuttle Alito.

“Alito shouldn’t have been confirmed,” Schumer said. “I should have done a better job. My colleagues said we didn’t have the votes, but I think we should have twisted more arms and done more.”

While no retirements appear imminent, Bush still could have the opportunity to fill another vacancy on the court. Yet the two oldest members – Justice John Paul Stevens, 87, and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 74 – are part of the court's liberal bloc and could hold off retirement until Bush leaves office in January, 2009.

Earlier this week, Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter, the Judiciary Committee’s ranking Republican, said he was persuaded by a conversation with Justice Stephen G. Breyer, who spoke with Specter at the Aspen Institute gathering in Colorado this month, to study the decisions of the Roberts Court. The term that ended in June was notable for several rulings that reversed or chipped away at several long-standing decisions, delighting conservatives but enraging liberals.

Breyer has publicly raised concerns that conservative justices were violating stare decisis, the legal doctrine that, for the sake of stability, courts should generally leave precedents undisturbed.

“It is not often in the law that so few have so quickly changed so much,” Breyer said, reading his dissent from the bench in June to a 5-4 ruling that overturned school desegregation policies in two cities.

Schumer said there were four lessons to be learned from Alito and Roberts: Confirmation hearings are meaningless, a nominee’s record should be weighed more heavily than rhetoric, “ideology matters” and “take the president at his word.”

“When a president says he wants to nominate justices in the mold of [Antonin] Scalia and [Clarence] Thomas,” Schumer said, “believe him.”