• 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
punk

punk

Phoenix, AZ
January 2004

MAR 24, 2007 10:33 PM

oyaji said:
President Cheney.



Weh!

zoom image

Christophoros

Christophoros

Los Angeles, CA
March 2007

MAR 24, 2007 10:37 PM

oyaji said:
President Cheney.



Double impeachment. A Cheney administration would be worse, but at this point, how MUCH worse can it get? I shouldn't even ask questions like that, i know i will be answered in kind in about a month, when the next abuse of executive power rears it's head.

lawber

lawber

I'm lost
May 2006

MAR 24, 2007 10:59 PM

Hey Reaper, what is your take on the Iranians kidnapping the British military personnel?

Of course it is George Bush's fault

Subrosa

Subrosa

San Francisco, CA
July 2004

MAR 24, 2007 11:00 PM

lawber said:
Hey Reaper, what is your take on the Iranians kidnapping the British military personnel?

Of course it is George Bush's fault



Hey lawber, do you know what the word "irrelevant" means?

Trahern

Trahern

United Kingdom
March 2003

MAR 24, 2007 11:02 PM

Shit like this is why the terrorists want to kill us, I suspect. The western definition of 'conservative' doesn't match the definition in the east. They've been watching this kind of thing going on in America for generations and think the west is full of shit. I'm not a fan of their work, but I can relate to their point of view.

I almost miss the days when royalty was in charge. All you needed then was a king that wasn't a complete dick. But then, the fight was between royalty and the church, and if there's one thing I hate more than politics, it's organised religion.

I'd like to see Bush impeached, but the political system has become so convoluted I doubt it can happen before his time's up, even if enough people wanted to get it done. Can an ex-pres be impeached?

FellOnEarth

FellOnEarth

Temecula, CA
April 2006

MAR 24, 2007 11:43 PM

DyeWhiteGirls said:

attn_ho said:
great sobering article.
now lets wait for our conservative/ libertarian underdogs to make absolutely no points, but lots of bluster.
wait: i got some!

1. its not a big deal.
2. clinton did it too!
3. you guys wouldnt be complaining if a democrat did this.
4. you know, in a way, this is the right choice.
5. god, you liberals are such losers.



Don't forget everyone's favorite: 6. You're all a bunch of granola eating, sandal wearing, patchouli smelling hippies who live on communes and don't eat animals.


I think latte sipping, Volvo driving, and body piercing are supposed to be some where in there too...

Remember folks, if you're not with them you're with the terrorists. Behold, the face of terror:

eisenwyrm

eisenwyrm

Louisville, KY
December 2003

MAR 25, 2007 01:08 AM



Remember folks, if you're not with them you're with the terrorists. Behold, the face of terror:

[img src="http://thebridalblog.observer.com/hippies.jpg"]

*crap my html wont work in this chat :/ -see above pic*



OMG is he wearing any pants? O.O

scary!

FearTheReaper

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

MAR 25, 2007 01:56 AM

lawber said:
Hey Reaper, what is your take on the Iranians kidnapping the British military personnel?

Of course it is George Bush's fault



Really good and on topic point. I am incredibly drunk and I managed to understand that you are so defeated that you had to respond to a topic about president Bush breaking domestic laws with a post about two foreign countries having a border disagreement. Well done! You should send Rove your post, he may hire you down the line.

I think if the Iranians do not release the British they should be attacked with a small, but devastating attack against nearby oil refinaries or oil ports.

But that is just me, I am not a black and white retard like yourself. Sorry I could not meet the expectations Fox News has created for you, you stupid fuck.

So, what do you think about Bush blatently breaking the US law? Feel free to respond to any of his 26 criminal activities, I will respond to any or all, Mr. Conservative.

Kaziklu

Kaziklu

Canada
November 2004

MAR 25, 2007 06:34 AM

Well it was bound to happen... The US has ignored international law for decades, I can't really think of a single president that hasn't been involved some sort of law breaking internationally in 50 years, it was only a matter of time before the US president decided they were above your own nations laws..

1337b33f

1337b33f

Saint Paul, MN
December 2005

MAR 25, 2007 07:21 AM

attn_ho said:
great sobering article.
now lets wait for our conservative/ libertarian underdogs to make absolutely no points, but lots of bluster.
wait: i got some!

1. its not a big deal.
2. clinton did it too!
3. you guys wouldnt be complaining if a democrat did this.
4. you know, in a way, this is the right choice.
5. god, you liberals are such losers.



And because of #5 all the respect that you had in your post went right out the winow. You may as well have just said nothing.

cunninglinquist

cunninglinquist

Quakertown, PA
November 2003

MAR 25, 2007 07:52 AM

I guess the oath of office that Dubya took is different than the one I know, which says support and defend the Constitution, I guess he took one that said I will support and defend my office and not let the Constitution which is the basis of our country get in my way.

wildswan

wildswan

I'm lost
June 2006

MAR 25, 2007 07:58 AM

Subrosa said:

lawber said:
Hey Reaper, what is your take on the Iranians kidnapping the British military personnel?

Of course it is George Bush's fault



Hey lawber, do you know what the word "irrelevant" means?





Now, why would you ask that? You know he doesn't.

fountainofdreams

fountainofdreams

Batavia, IL
January 2005

MAR 25, 2007 08:11 AM

so, uh...where's congress for all this? at least in my feeble imaginings, congress would react to something like this. this would usually be grounds for immediate impeachment, at least it used to be. Andrew Jackson was impeached and censured for less, wasn't he?

FellOnEarth

FellOnEarth

Temecula, CA
April 2006

MAR 25, 2007 08:30 AM

GabrielWayne said:
[...]OMG is he wearing any pants? O.O
scary!

Judging by the flesh fiesta going on behind them, my guess is no. *Shudder*

Zarth

zarth

Seattle, WA
December 2004

MAR 25, 2007 08:38 AM

horatios_dreams said:
so, uh...where's congress for all this? at least in my feeble imaginings, congress would react to something like this. this would usually be grounds for immediate impeachment, at least it used to be. Andrew Jackson was impeached and censured for less, wasn't he?



Johnson. Andrew Johnson. Andrew Jackson would've bust a cap in Congress's ass if they stepped up to him like that. His pimp hand was strong.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

 ... 9

Next

featured interviews