LeakGate Resolution:Bush's genius.

[jillian]

Hasn't anyone explained what happens when you assume?

Yup... Thanks Felix Unger.

Well....maybe not the Justice Department.

 

[Dr Grump]

You know, it never ceases to amaze me how many people seem to think President Bush is an idiot. His opponents keep "misunderstestimating" his intelligence and then are utterly confused when they keep losing.

I am not confused at all why he wins. He has a good team around him. He also wins because the Dem's platform is found wanting. They need to find an agenda, stick to it, and take it to the American people instead of running around like chickens with their heads cut off. That being said, I stand by my original contention. Articulation or not, Bush is stupid (IMO).

 

[Bullypulpit]

Bush can decide on his own and see if the court backs him. I support that approach. Your endless occupation with details now that your main hyposthesis is shattered is amusing.

Your are advocating a unitary executive branch...i.e. unlimited presidential power.

 

[Bullypulpit]

I am not confused at all why he wins. He has a good team around him. He also wins because the Dem's platform is found wanting. They need to find an agenda, stick to it, and take it to the American people instead of running around like chickens with their heads cut off. That being said, I stand by my original contention. Articulation or not, Bush is stupid (IMO).

All one needs to do is observe his dog and pony shows of the last few days to confirm his stupidity. Dubbyuh has been sitting at the kids table for the last 5.5 years.

 

[Bullypulpit]

I have no doubt that they would like to exercise the executive power as the Constitutional grants it to them rather than be limited by the other branches in ways the Constitution does not authorize them.

Im still waiting to hear where Congress has authority to censure the President. Or to have any oversight of the executive branch preiod. These arent really the points in the thread. But these are things Congress has claimed to have power to do despite no grant of power to do so.

Congressional oversight was not explicitly enumerated in the Constitution as the document's framers held that the power to make laws also implied the power to see that those laws faithfully executed.

For more on the subject, goto:

<center><a href=http://www.rules.house.gov/rules%20-%20upto0401/pop106_17.htm>THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT</a></center>

<center><a href=http://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/case/238/>McGrain v. Daugherty</a></center>

<center><a href=http://www.tourolaw.edu/PATCH/Watkins/>Watkins v. United States</a></center>

So, the matter of Congressional oversight authority is settled law, you see.

 

[dilloduck]

Congressional oversight was not explicitly enumerated in the Constitution as the document's framers held that the power to make laws also implied the power to see that those laws faithfully executed.

For more on the subject, goto:

<center><a href=http://www.rules.house.gov/rules%20-%20upto0401/pop106_17.htm>THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT</a></center>

<center><a href=http://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/case/238/>McGrain v. Daugherty</a></center>

<center><a href=http://www.tourolaw.edu/PATCH/Watkins/>Watkins v. United States</a></center>

So, the matter of Congressional oversight authority is settled law, you see.

And it works real well too !! :rotflmao:

 

[Bullypulpit]

And it works real well too !! :rotflmao:

Especially when rubber-stamp Republicans control both house of Congress.

 

[dilloduck]

Especially when rubber-stamp Republicans control both house of Congress.

Ain't it great? I hope the 2006 elections don't mess it all up. :happy2:

 

[Avatar4321]

I am not confused at all why he wins. He has a good team around him. He also wins because the Dem's platform is found wanting. They need to find an agenda, stick to it, and take it to the American people instead of running around like chickens with their heads cut off. That being said, I stand by my original contention. Articulation or not, Bush is stupid (IMO).

They do stick with an agenda. However, its an agenda the american people dont want. People dont want socialism. So some of them try to pretend they are something they arent and wonder why Americans dont buy it.

President Bush isnt stupid. Neither are the American people. And until the left stops condecending to the people and their oponents and figures out that they themselves are the problem and not anyone else, they will continue to get rejected by the people.

 

[Avatar4321]

Congressional oversight was not explicitly enumerated in the Constitution as the document's framers held that the power to make laws also implied the power to see that those laws faithfully executed.

For more on the subject, goto:

<center><a href=http://www.rules.house.gov/rules%20-%20upto0401/pop106_17.htm>THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT</a></center>

<center><a href=http://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/case/238/>McGrain v. Daugherty</a></center>

<center><a href=http://www.tourolaw.edu/PATCH/Watkins/>Watkins v. United States</a></center>

So, the matter of Congressional oversight authority is settled law, you see.

Simply because its "settled" law doesnt mean its Constitutional.

 

[Avatar4321]

Ain't it great? I hope the 2006 elections don't mess it all up. :happy2:

I guess that depends what happens with this immigration stuff.

Regardless, unless something major happens i dont foresee Democrats retaking anything.

 

[Dr Grump]

They do stick with an agenda. However, its an agenda the american people dont want.

Is that why more people voted for Gore than Bush in 2000? Is that why more people voted for Kerry than any other president in history in 2004. I know more voted for Bush than Kerry, but to say the "American people" like it is all encompassing is disingenuous and just not true. And I personally have never met any American who wants a socialist system. Not one.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Simply because its "settled" law doesnt mean its Constitutional.

:baby:

 

[Bullypulpit]

Ain't it great? I hope the 2006 elections don't mess it all up. :happy2:

Be careful what you wish for. That rubber-stamp may become a bootheel in your face.

 

[dilloduck]

Be careful what you wish for. That rubber-stamp may become a bootheel in your face.

Ya ya---being told what MIGHT happen to me is getting old. Give me a candidate and a party who you think deserves my support and why.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Ya ya---being told what MIGHT happen to me is getting old. Give me a candidate and a party who you think deserves my support and why.

I would like that too. I have yet to see one, whether Republican, Democrat, Independent or Silly Party. It's time to start with a clean slate and hold a new national convention.

 

[dilloduck]

I would like that too. I have yet to see one, whether Republican, Democrat, Independent or Silly Party. It's time to start with a clean slate and hold a new national convention.

Agreed--what do you think the best way to accomplish that would be ? Do you think it's even a viable option?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Is that why more people voted for Gore than Bush in 2000? Is that why more people voted for Kerry than any other president in history in 2004. I know more voted for Bush than Kerry, but to say the "American people" like it is all encompassing is disingenuous and just not true. And I personally have never met any American who wants a socialist system. Not one.

Most liberals want socialism. What planet are you from Inspector Grump?

 

[CSM]

I would like that too. I have yet to see one, whether Republican, Democrat, Independent or Silly Party. It's time to start with a clean slate and hold a new national convention.

Somethng we can gree on. Doesn't happen too often, does it!

 

[jillian]

Most liberals want socialism. What planet are you from Inspector Grump?

That's certainly a characterization that the extremists like to make. Maybe they've even convinced some people of that. One shouldn't confuse a sense of fairness and a sense that we're all in this together to some extent as a desire for socialism.

Most of my favorite liberals are staunch capitalists. They just want to see the weakest and poorest get a hand. Not a terrible thing now, is it? I mean, don't you think civilizations are judged by how they treat their oldest, youngest, sickest and poorest?