Playing with Fire

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Adam's Apple, Apr 5, 2007.

  1. Adam's Apple
    Offline

    Adam's Apple Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,092
    Thanks Received:
    445
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +447
    Do we now have two presidencies--one elected and one not--setting foreign policy for the U.S.?

    Playing with Fire
    by Thomas Sowell, Human Events
    04/03/2007

    Congressman Tom Lantos, who is a member of the delegation that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is leading to Syria, put the mission clearly when he said: "We have an alternative Democratic foreign policy."

    Democrats can have any foreign policy they want -- if and when they are elected to the White House.

    Until Nancy Pelosi came along, it was understood by all that we had only one president at a time and -- like him or not -- he alone had the Constitutional authority to speak for this country to foreign nations, especially in wartime.

    for full article:
    http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=20097
     
  2. GeeWhiz
    Offline

    GeeWhiz Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2006
    Messages:
    166
    Thanks Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +24
    Adam's Apple,

    The opinion article you posted is incorrect. Nowhere in the Constitution does is say that the President alone as the authority to speak for this country to foreign nations. In fact it says quite the opposite.

    The Consitution says this:
    That's it. The Consitution makes no mention of granting the President sole power to speak for this country. But if you look at the Consitution it does state that treaties can be made with the advice and consent of the Senate. It would make sense then for members of the Senate to speak with foreign nations because the President must seek Advice and Consent from the Senate in order to make treaties and who do we make treaties with? The answer is with foreign nations.

    Learn about your country it wouldn't hurt.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. Adam's Apple
    Offline

    Adam's Apple Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,092
    Thanks Received:
    445
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +447
    You've given your interpretation of what the Constitution says; now I will give mine.

    The Constitution gives the President the duty of receiving ambassadors and other public ministers, which implies that he is the correct person in the government to meet with foreign officials/dignitaries. There is no commensurate responsibility listed for members of Congress. The Founding Fathers probably felt that this was just good common sense, and there was no need to spell out this responsibility further with details. The “advice and consent” function of members of Congress implies giving a response--a subordinate position to that of President. If they want to override the President's initiatives, it takes a two-thirds vote of both houses to do so. That should tell you something.

    BTW, even the liberal Washington Post criticized Pelosi’s latest venture as getting a bit too big for her britches.
     
  4. GeeWhiz
    Offline

    GeeWhiz Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2006
    Messages:
    166
    Thanks Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +24
    http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion/index.php?ntid=128197&ntpid=0

    I did go the National Security Archives website and sure enough the documents are there. Don't you find it interesting the stark contrast between Pelosi's trip to encourage dialogue and Hastert's secret trip to encourage a country to blow off humans rights.
     
  5. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572
    LOL - San Fran Nan's "Coddle a Dictator Tour" had its moments. First, the terrorists must have laughed their asses off at her picture wearing the Atrab grab.

    Next, watching her say how the US wants to "talk" - yes talking is what the terrorists want. Kill time before they kill us

    Being a lib - you know you are in trouble when the Washington Post is against you

    Much like with their 400 billion tax increase - libs are showing their arrogrance and contempt for what the voters really wanted when the handed the car keys over to the Dems
     

Share This Page