Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 148
  1. #61
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Age
    36
    Posts
    12,856

    Re: GWB: "Your laws mean nothing to me."

    Quote Originally Posted by jimzinsocal
    ^^I understand 100%. Let me qualify my position so you get where Im coming from.

    A President at time of a war is a strange character. Any war any President.
    Part of the job they do isnt just President...but the boss of the military.
    Congress [any congress any war] has always wanted more control. They like to see themselves as the "answer"
    Well? Tough shit. The Constitution wasnt written that way.
    They have the checkbook essentially. But not permission to rin the war. Thats the Presidents job plain and simple.
    But egomaniacs as they are? Not satisfied.
    Any war any Ptesident. Its a familiar theme.

    So they pass law that attempts to limit a constitutional obligation[Commander in Chief]
    Does he say "Yes sir whatever you say" or "thank you very much...but the Founders wrote my job description and I'll tell you what I think of your law"

    Its all called constitutional conflict. The pressure on each branch that is expected as the sun rising.
    Signing statements.

    For me? Symbolic and a CYA deal. Something perhaps a court may peek at.
    But basically? Politics as usual.
    IMO
    And I would completely agree with you if these statements did not include acts that could possibly violate the rights of the American people and the ability for congress to act. I think this might be a situation where it has "gone too far." Even if it could help our position in the war, it is not going to make or break our ability to win.

    Maybe the reason why Clinton's signings weren't viewed with such disregard is because we did not have a major war going on. Granted, we had skirmishes but as you said a President in war is a different beast.

    It really makes you scratch your head I understand the purpose but then again it is just too much power.......
    Last edited by liquidsoul; 06-27-2006 at 04:07 PM.

  2. #62
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,266

    Re: GWB: "Your laws mean nothing to me."

    Quote Originally Posted by Trekari
    Very well Scooter, how about you answer my question then.



    So you feel the President is above any law he disagrees with? That he can sign himself a blank check to ignore them at will?
    You interpret this as him being "above" the law or as a blank check. I see it as the president legally exercising powers granted him by the office.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  3. #63
    Joined
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Not the end of the world, But they sell pictures of it
    Posts
    6,430

    Re: GWB: "Your laws mean nothing to me."

    These are the posters I'd like to see responses from:

    Orangutan: Loud cricket
    liquidsoul
    Trekari
    Soundforbjt
    No, and I didn't post in TLR when Clinton was President IIRC.
    The Heat 99-0-0

    Trading Post Rules

    Sound Familiar? "If we quit Vietnam," President Lyndon Johnson warned, "tomorrow we'll be fighting in Hawaii, and next week we'll have to fight in San Francisco."



  4. #64
    Joined
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    74,682

    Re: GWB: "Your laws mean nothing to me."

    ^^Well there is the balance and check on one another.
    What what we dont want is a Commander in Chief's hands tied at a time of war.
    And thats spelled out pretty clearly as a Constitutional Issue. The founders attempted to take that matter out of the hands of a "politician" and rely on the Presidents part time skills as the Boss of The Military.
    It was done with intention....by the writers of the Constitution.

    Just as some historical context.
    Did Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation piss off Congress? Bigtime.
    But here we are.
    Presidents gotta do what they feel is right. Its their job.

  5. #65
    Joined
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    74,682

    Re: GWB: "Your laws mean nothing to me."

    {My reply was at LS]

  6. #66
    Joined
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    74,682

    Re: GWB: "Your laws mean nothing to me."

    Speaking of Signing statements? How did you like Bush's comments about Kelo?
    That new law passed by judges?
    As we expand our discussion about separation of powers.

  7. #67
    Joined
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Fort Collins, CO
    Posts
    1,235

    Re: GWB: "Your laws mean nothing to me."

    Quote Originally Posted by AMDScooter
    You interpret this as him being "above" the law or as a blank check. I see it as the president legally exercising powers granted him by the office.
    Then feel free to show me where the Constitution says he decide what parts of laws apply to him.

    Of course, doing that would involve some fabrication on your part.

  8. #68
    Joined
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Fort Collins, CO
    Posts
    1,235

    Re: GWB: "Your laws mean nothing to me."

    Quote Originally Posted by jimzinsocal
    Part of the job they do isnt just President...but the boss of the military.
    Congress [any congress any war] has always wanted more control. They like to see themselves as the "answer"
    Well? Tough shit. The Constitution wasnt written that way.
    They have the checkbook essentially. But not permission to rin the war. Thats the Presidents job plain and simple.
    IMO
    " To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

    To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

    To provide and maintain a Navy;

    To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces; "

    Sounds to me like Congress is well within their authority to pass laws prohibiting our Military from using torture.

  9. #69
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,266

    Re: GWB: "Your laws mean nothing to me."

    Quote Originally Posted by Trekari
    Then feel free to show me where the Constitution says he decide what parts of laws apply to him.

    Of course, doing that would involve some fabrication on your part.

    Your right... I would have to do some fabrication to find a protion of the Constitution that says specifically WHAT YOU INTERPRIT it to be. Cannot disagree with that. But then again, why would I want to go through the trouble of trying to help you prop up YOUR argument that I disagree with? Seems like an odd request.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  10. #70
    Joined
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    74,682

    Re: GWB: "Your laws mean nothing to me."

    ^^And to redifine the meaning...the clear words of Geneva Conventions?
    Be careful if you want to go there. Study up.

  11. #71
    Joined
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    8,887

    Re: GWB: "Your laws mean nothing to me."

    Quote Originally Posted by jimzinsocal
    We wont agree. I understand your position and wont diminish its value.
    I expect the same. That the President has the right [almost as strong as the Press has] to say what he thinks about a particular push on executive power?
    But I think you overplay the value of signing statements from legal position.

    But its amazing that you know exactly what Bush is thinking and his motivations around a signing statement.
    No, jimz, that's not what he is saying. I said earlier that if the president wants to bitch about something in a signing statement then by all means do so. But he isn't bitching; he is saying that he will choose to use, misuse, abuse, or ignore the law as he sees fit. These "war powers" are equivalent to the powers granted by the Roman Senate to the Roman Dictator (literally: sayer, speaker, the one who tells). Cincinnatus Bush is not. I disagree with the idea that the Constitution and personal liberty is to be tossed by the wayside "during war"; you don't. But that's not excuse to allow a president to place himself, his cronies, and whomever else he pleases outside the boundaries of the law.

    Answer me this if nothing else: do we have the rule of law or the rule of power?
    Promote then, as an object of primary importance, institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.

  12. #72
    Joined
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    74,682

    Re: GWB: "Your laws mean nothing to me."

    What is law without power?

  13. #73
    Joined
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Fort Collins, CO
    Posts
    1,235

    Re: GWB: "Your laws mean nothing to me."

    Quote Originally Posted by AMDScooter
    Your right... I would have to do some fabrication to find a protion of the Constitution that says specifically WHAT YOU INTERPRIT it to be. Cannot disagree with that. But then again, why would I want to go through the trouble of trying to help you prop up YOUR argument that I disagree with? Seems like an odd request.
    So when faced with the facts of a situation, it seems all you are able to do is twist words around.

    Sounds like you haven't read the Constitution, don't care to read it, and instead provide no support whatsoever for your opinion other than blind, ignorant support.

    Civics class was painfully clear to most everyone who took it. Congress passes laws, the President either signs them into law, or vetos them. He has no middle-ground option. Show me your proof otherwise.

    Open up your eyes, put on your thinking cap, and provide some level of debate other than clasping your hands to your ears and screaming "lalalalala I can't hear you."

  14. #74
    Joined
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Fort Collins, CO
    Posts
    1,235

    Re: GWB: "Your laws mean nothing to me."

    Let me do your work for you Scooter, since I know you will dodge the question.

    Quote Originally Posted by United States Constitution
    Section 7 - Revenue Bills, Legislative Process, Presidential Veto

    All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

    Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.

    Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.
    Hrm, nowhere in there does it say he can pass the law but write down that he doesn't have to follow it.

  15. #75
    Joined
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    8,887

    Re: GWB: "Your laws mean nothing to me."

    Indeed, Trekari. The objections of many "conservatives", and the Bush White House itself, seem to boil down to finger pointing and blame shifting. "Well he may have signed the most, but look at all the other presidents who have done it!". Five year olds don't get away with blaming their friends for their own actions, but apparently 50 year old millionaires who control life and death of millions of people do.

    Quote Originally Posted by jimzinsocal
    What is law without power?
    Is that really your answer?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •