So on Friday, Sept. 14th, the Senate voted 98-0 to pass a resolution authorizing President Bush to ``use all necessary and appropriate force’’ against the perpetrators of this week’s deadly hijack attacks, including any nations that may have helped them.
So what happened to the other two senators? Who didn’t vote? And why?
This may also be out of respect for a Senator (a woman, I believe) who when the vote for a declaration of war against the Axis powers during World War Two arose voted no. Not because he/she was against the war, but simply because she/he thought that the US should never enter a war unanimously. There’s been a couple of other times when people have repeated this action for that same reason. (If I’m not mistaken.)
That’s incorrect. As was mentioned in another thread, that Representaitve (she was not a Senator), Jeannette Rankin, R-Montana, DID believe the U.S. should not go to war. She was personally convinced the U.S. had enticed the Japanese to attack. She was a dedicated pacifist, and had been elected on a pacifist platform.
The person you are thinking of is Jeannette Rankin, a representative (not senator) from Montana. She was the first woman elected to the House. She served two terms in Congress, 1917-19 and 1941-43. Note that those two terms were at the start of the two World Wars. She was the sole no vote for a decleration of war against Japan on December 8, 1941.
You’ll notice as well that Ms. Rankin did not stay in office long after voting against entry into WWI or WWII.
In the House, the resolution was voted against by Barbara Lee (D-CA), who seemed to have objected more to the amount of latitude it gave the President than to the use of force per se.