• commentary
  • SATURDAY MARCH 24 2007 2:00 PM

White House Decides One Branch Of Government Is Best

Submitted by FearTheReaper

Edited by FearTheReaper

Tags: Tony Snow, White House, Congress, Constitution, Oversight

George Bush is king. It happened yesterday, while we were all going about our business. Tony Snow broke the news to us on almost every news show and even during a White House press conference.


Snow to MSNBC: “There’s another principle, which is Congress doesn’t have the legislative — I mean oversight authority over the White House.”

Snow to MSNBC: “First, the White House is under no compulsion to do anything. The legislative branch doesn’t have oversight.”

Snow to Fox: “Congress doesn’t have any legitimate oversight and responsibilities to the White House.”

Snow to NBC: "Congress doesn't have any legitimate oversight and responsibilities to the White House."

Snow to NBC: "First, the White House is under no compulsion to do anything. The legislative branch doesn't have oversight."

Snow to ABC: "The executive branch is under no compulsion to testify to Congress, because Congress in fact doesn't have oversight ability."

MR. SNOW: Congress…does not have constitutional oversight responsibility over the White House, which is why by our reaching out, we're doing something that we're not compelled to do by the Constitution, but we think common sense suggests that we ought to get the whole story out, which is what we're doing.


Um. Okay. Now I’m not sure what to do. When someone tells you everything you learned as a child about your government is wrong – and that person is IN CHARGE, what do you do? This is quite simply freaky and disturbing.

The president has declared himself above the laws of our country and has said he will not be a part of our system of government. I don’t give a shit if you are conservative or liberal or moderate, you should understand we are walking into some very strange territory and anyone who supports this bullshit should be cast into the sea. (Do we do that?)

Oversight is real. The Supreme Court has ruled on it, on more than one occasion.


In affirming Congress' oversight powers, the Supreme Court in McGrain v. Daugherty stated that "the power of inquiry – with process to enforce it – is an essential and appropriate auxiliary to the legislative function." In Watkins v. United States the Court described Congress' oversight power by stating that the "power of the Congress to conduct investigations is inherent in the legislative process. That power is broad." The Supreme Court also observed that "a legislative body cannot legislate wisely or effectively in the absence of information respecting the conditions which the legislation is intended to affect or change."


Don’t sit back and think, wow, this is so out of character. We have been heading toward this for quite some time. Bush lied to get us into a disastrous war, he has been illegally tapping our phones, illegally looking at our internet exchanges, he broke campaign funding laws, he is writing his own little additions on laws passed by Congress, he has violated the anti-torture statute, as well as international torture laws, he has suspended habeas corpus and outed a CIA agent. Representative John Conyers believes Bush has broken 26 laws.

Put aside the fact that this makes the White House seem like it really has something to hide, that they are so guilty and have committed such crimes that they have to defy the Constitution.

Ask yourself this: What does happen when a sitting president decides he’s not going to play by the rules set forth by our Constitution? What happens when a President just says, “I’m not going to do that?” Not follow laws, just going to do what he wants to do. Welcome to scary territory.

  • PERMALINK
  • PRINT
  • Digg This
  • Email To A Friend
 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

 ... 9

Next

Comments
NickFaust

NickFaust

USA
April 2004

MAR 24, 2007 06:49 PM

DeadGuyPerez said:
It's good to know Bush can't run for office again but the scary thing is this may be setting a future status quo in the way the White House functions. The entire basis for the way our government was set up was a notion of freedom from tyranny and the ability for us to govern ourselves. If whoever is President throws all of that out the window, there may be a second American Revolution in years to come. I think it would take a lot of time and serious denial of liberty before the majority of the population get pissed off enough to get to that point but this is starting to sound like some serious 1984/Big Brother shit.



The fact is that Bush just built on a process that began with Eisenhower and has been advanced by each President who has take office since then - with the minor exceptions of Ford and Carter, who had to live with the backlash from Nixon's really pushing the envelope. But it picked up once again with Reagan and has been advancing geometrically since.

So, yeah, you are right to worry. I mean realistically, what President is going to walk away from the power that Bush - and those who preceded him - have accumulated? It will be up to Congress to re-establish Constitutional checks and balances. But we also need to be clear that Congress has been a willing player in all of this. They did not want to make the hard, unpopular decisions and so were more than happy to push them off to the executive. War Powers resolutions are just one of the ways in which they have done this.

It will be war fought, like all wars, in a series of battles. But we are well on our way to what Arthur Schlesinger refers to as a plebiscite presidency, wherein there is an every four year vote of confidence in the Executive and he or she pretty much does whatever the fuck he or she wants in the interim. With no checks by the other branches.

If you couple what is happening with Congress to this administration's all out attack on the Judiciary, what we have is an Executive who is checked only by impeachment or failure to re-elect.

Welcome to the Imperial Presidency.

Subrosa

Subrosa

San Francisco, CA
July 2004

MAR 24, 2007 06:59 PM

Metaverse said:
I'm a conservative...well..I was, not anymore after this administration.



Don't worry, dude. This administration isn't conservative either. Never has been.

otaku

otaku

USA
January 2004

MAR 24, 2007 07:19 PM

PatrickY said:

shadogya said:
I think your describing Clinton



"Your describing Clinton" as what?



He undoubtedly meant that Clinton was the equivalent of the aforementioned Captain Sheridan who saved us from Bush Sr. and helped keep back the forces of the Republician would-be tyrants in Congress. biggrin

klopnuts

klopnuts

Beaverdam, OH
January 2007

MAR 24, 2007 07:30 PM

Zarth

zarth

Seattle, WA
December 2004

MAR 24, 2007 07:42 PM

attn_ho said:

Zarth said:

shadogya said:
I think your describing Clinton


Ooh! Take that, liberals! You just got served!


that talking point doesnt EVEN MAKE SENSE!!!!!

either he means
its no big deal
or
its the least of our worries!

or the conservative talking points bot is misfiring!


You just want the terrorists to win.

attn_ho

attn_ho

Brooklyn, NY
February 2004

MAR 24, 2007 07:45 PM

Zarth said:

attn_ho said:

Zarth said:

shadogya said:
I think your describing Clinton


Ooh! Take that, liberals! You just got served!


that talking point doesnt EVEN MAKE SENSE!!!!!

either he means
its no big deal
or
its the least of our worries!

or the conservative talking points bot is misfiring!


You just want the terrorists to win.



oop, its back!

immigrants are stealing our jobs!

the market regulates itself, we dont need a government!

freshprncebelair

freshprncebelair

Ellicott City, MD
June 2004

MAR 24, 2007 07:50 PM

Zarth said:

shadogya said:
I think your describing Clinton


Ooh! Take that, liberals! You just got served!



lol, i c wut u did their

motorfirebox

motorfirebox

Pittsburgh, PA
March 2004

MAR 24, 2007 07:51 PM

Zarth said:
You just want the terrorists to win.


he knows!

Zarth

zarth

Seattle, WA
December 2004

MAR 24, 2007 07:55 PM

motorfirebox said:

Zarth said:
You just want the terrorists to win.


he knows!


Total Information Awareness, baby!

phirephli

phirephli

Chandler, AZ
May 2005

MAR 24, 2007 08:12 PM

i really liked the 3rd rocky the best.....

otaku

otaku

USA
January 2004

MAR 24, 2007 08:45 PM

phirephli said:
i really liked the 3rd rocky the best.....



Was that the one James Brown was in?
"Living in America..."

MschfMayhemSoap

MschfMayhemSoap

Phoenix, AZ
April 2006

MAR 24, 2007 09:12 PM

otaku said:

phirephli said:
i really liked the 3rd rocky the best.....



Was that the one James Brown was in?
"Living in America..."



that was Rocky 4. Apollo Creed dancing about before Dolph smacks him down like a little bitch.

Rocky 3 had Stallone in a little half shirt taking on Mr T

Dru_Id

Dru_Id

Florence, SC
October 2006

MAR 24, 2007 09:56 PM

Break out the gray shirts and confederate flags. The way things are shaping up CWII is only a matter of time.

MschfMayhemSoap

MschfMayhemSoap

Phoenix, AZ
April 2006

MAR 24, 2007 09:57 PM

Neitherspace said:
Break out the gray shirts and confederate flags. The way things are shaping up CWII is only a matter of time.



no no no... it's the Holnists vs the Postmen tongue

Christophoros

Christophoros

Los Angeles, CA
March 2007

MAR 24, 2007 10:16 PM

FearTheReaper said:
George Bush is king. It happened yesterday, while we were all going about our business. Tony Snow broke the news to us on almost every news show and even during a White House press conference.


Snow to MSNBC: "There's another principle, which is Congress doesn't have the legislative %u2014 I mean oversight authority over the White House."

Snow to MSNBC: "First, the White House is under no compulsion to do anything. The legislative branch doesn't have oversight."

Snow to Fox: "Congress doesn't have any legitimate oversight and responsibilities to the White House."

Snow to NBC: "Congress doesn't have any legitimate oversight and responsibilities to the White House."

Snow to NBC: "First, the White House is under no compulsion to do anything. The legislative branch doesn't have oversight."

Snow to ABC: "The executive branch is under no compulsion to testify to Congress, because Congress in fact doesn't have oversight ability."

MR. SNOW: Congress...does not have constitutional oversight responsibility over the White House, which is why by our reaching out, we're doing something that we're not compelled to do by the Constitution, but we think common sense suggests that we ought to get the whole story out, which is what we're doing.


Um. Okay. Now I'm not sure what to do. When someone tells you everything you learned as a child about your government is wrong %u2013 and that person is IN CHARGE, what do you do? This is quite simply freaky and disturbing.

The president has declared himself above the laws of our country and has said he will not be a part of our system of government. I don't give a shit if you are conservative or liberal or moderate, you should understand we are walking into some very strange territory and anyone who supports this bullshit should be cast into the sea. (Do we do that?)

Oversight is real. The Supreme Court has ruled on it, on more than one occasion.


In affirming Congress' oversight powers, the Supreme Court in McGrain v. Daugherty stated that "the power of inquiry %u2013 with process to enforce it %u2013 is an essential and appropriate auxiliary to the legislative function." In Watkins v. United States the Court described Congress' oversight power by stating that the "power of the Congress to conduct investigations is inherent in the legislative process. That power is broad." The Supreme Court also observed that "a legislative body cannot legislate wisely or effectively in the absence of information respecting the conditions which the legislation is intended to affect or change."


Don't sit back and think, wow, this is so out of character. We have been heading toward this for quite some time. Bush lied to get us into a disastrous war, he has been illegally tapping our phones, illegally looking at our internet exchanges, he broke campaign funding laws, he is writing his own little additions on laws passed by Congress, he has violated the anti-torture statute, as well as international torture laws, he has suspended habeas corpus and outed a CIA agent. Representative John Conyers believes Bush has broken 26 laws.

So what does happen when a sitting president decides he's not going to play by the rules set forth by our Constitution? What happens when a President just says, "I'm not going to do that?" Not follow laws, just going to do what he wants to do. Welcome to scary territory.



Alot of people have seen this coming for a long time. Bush has broken so many laws, and has got away with every single one. If the Democrats do not pursue impeachment within the next year, i will be at loss; how could you NOT impeach?

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

 ... 9

Next

featured interviews