• 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 ... 

4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

 ... 9

Next

Comments
d_day

d_day

San Bernardino, CA
July 2002

MAR 25, 2007 02:30 PM

attn_ho said:

d_day said:

Skism 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.



point 6, your a fucking idiot.
Regardless of which side of the fence you are on this is not good



attn_ho's "a fucking idiot" is what? Or did you mean, "You're a fucking idiot?" Name calling is bad enough. But when one is calling someone else an idiot, it would seem important to use the correct words. Failure to do so might make one seem like an idiot themselves.



um... there wouldnt be an apostraphe on my name unless i own a "A fucking idiot"



Umm, that's kind of the point. In the previous post, Skism states, "your a fucking idot." This of course is incorrect. Skism has either left out information about the "a fucking idiot" belonging to you, or he has failed to use the contraction of "you" and "are." But apparently I need to be a little less subtle when pointing out the mistakes of someone that has attacked someone instead of trying to make a point.

P.S. There should be an apostrophe in wouldn't.

P.P.S. Apostrophe is spelled with an o after the r.

fountainofdreams

fountainofdreams

Batavia, IL
January 2005

MAR 25, 2007 02:46 PM

Zarth said:

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.



>.>

your history-fu is stronger than mine.

Belllla

Belllla

Houston, TX
February 2004

MAR 25, 2007 03:10 PM

d_day said:
attn_ho's "a fucking idiot" is what? Or did you mean, "You're a fucking idiot?" Name calling is bad enough. But when one is calling someone else an idiot, it would seem important to use the correct words. Failure to do so might make one seem like an idiot themselves.



Being the queen of calling people out for their grammatical errors, especially mid-argument... There really is so much more we can base our differences on here. Is there not?

TheFox

TheFox

Durham, NC
February 2006

MAR 25, 2007 03:34 PM

I wish moving far away wasn't so damned expensive.

I've been saying Bush will at least try to stick around for over a year.

Less and less people are arguing with me.

I'm scared. Hold me.

scylis

scylis

USA
November 2004

MAR 25, 2007 03:36 PM

what is a Dirty Hippy, anyway? is that like a Dirty Sanchez, only making a full-out beard?

wait a minute.... Clinton has Whitestars?

d_day

d_day

San Bernardino, CA
July 2002

MAR 25, 2007 03:41 PM

Bella303 said:

d_day said:
attn_ho's "a fucking idiot" is what? Or did you mean, "You're a fucking idiot?" Name calling is bad enough. But when one is calling someone else an idiot, it would seem important to use the correct words. Failure to do so might make one seem like an idiot themselves.



Being the queen of calling people out for their grammatical errors, especially mid-argument... There really is so much more we can base our differences on here. Is there not?



Lack of capitalisation? Lack of punctuation? Absence of a clear and lucid point?

Quirky

Quirky

Birmingham, AL
October 2005

MAR 25, 2007 04:12 PM

scylis said:
what is a Dirty Hippy, anyway? is that like a Dirty Sanchez, only making a full-out beard?



a dirty hippie is a counterculture stereotype that actually lives. Flithy hippies don't bathe. Dirty hippies bathe in a vat of patchouli oil each morning. Difference!

soulcompromise

soulcompromise

I'm lost
November 2006

MAR 25, 2007 05:59 PM


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



lol

DyeWhiteGirls

DyeWhiteGirls

Madison, WI
December 2003

MAR 25, 2007 06:04 PM

JESUS FUCKING CHRIST.

YOU'RE- YOU ARE.

YOUR- NOT YOU ARE.

IT'S A CONTRACTION.

This ends the angry caps typing portion of this post. Had this been an actual rant, anyone that failed to recall their (NOT THEY'RE/THERE) 4th grade grammar lesson would be shot on site.

I really have nothing more insightful to add. I just can't believe that this occurs multiple times in a thread, even after other people bitch the first person out. It's like the vortex of stupid centers on internet message boards.

SuperCrunch

SuperCrunch

Birmingham, AL
January 2007

MAR 25, 2007 07:34 PM

freshprncebelair said:

DyeWhiteGirls said:
You know what's funny? If someone said this 5 years ago, they would have been called a conspiracy theorist. Today, they'll be called a liberal. In a year, we'll just be called inmates.

Welcome to the New World Order in which none of us ever has a say in anything. Go read "Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars" and wonder just how insane (because he was at least a little insane) Bill Cooper was.



Now is a great time to buy a gun, if you haven't already.



And thanks to bush we can all go buy fucking automatic rifles at any gunshop in town.

Subrosa

Subrosa

San Francisco, CA
July 2004

MAR 25, 2007 07:45 PM

TheJuanupsman said:

bedukay said:

attn_ho said:
conservative/ libertarian underdogs to make absolutely no points, but lots of bluster.
wait: i got some!



Well considering that strict adherence to the Constitution is the basis of Libertarian thought its completely ignorant to think that a Libertarian would defend this.



Actually I am pretty sure that incorrectly inrepreting the Constitution is the basis for most Libertarian thought.



Zing~!

TheFuckOffKid

TheFuckOffKid

NEWSWIRE

Australia

MAR 25, 2007 07:50 PM

oyaji said:

DyeWhiteGirls said:
JESUS FUCKING CHRIST.

YOU'RE- YOU ARE.

YOUR- NOT YOU ARE.

IT'S A CONTRACTION.

This ends the angry caps typing portion of this post. Had this been an actual rant, anyone that failed to recall their (NOT THEY'RE/THERE) 4th grade grammar lesson would be shot on site.

I really have nothing more insightful to add. I just can't believe that this occurs multiple times in a thread, even after other people bitch the first person out. It's like the vortex of stupid centers on internet message boards.



Shot on sight. As in, shot as soon as you see them. Not, shot at this location.



Case and point. (For all intensive purposes.)

attn_ho

attn_ho

Brooklyn, NY
February 2004

MAR 25, 2007 07:53 PM

TheFuckOffKid said:

oyaji said:

DyeWhiteGirls said:
JESUS FUCKING CHRIST.

YOU'RE- YOU ARE.

YOUR- NOT YOU ARE.

IT'S A CONTRACTION.

This ends the angry caps typing portion of this post. Had this been an actual rant, anyone that failed to recall their (NOT THEY'RE/THERE) 4th grade grammar lesson would be shot on site.

I really have nothing more insightful to add. I just can't believe that this occurs multiple times in a thread, even after other people bitch the first person out. It's like the vortex of stupid centers on internet message boards.



Shot on sight. As in, shot as soon as you see them. Not, shot at this location.



Case and point. (For all intensive purposes.)


ok now your doing it on porpoise

SuperCrunch

SuperCrunch

Birmingham, AL
January 2007

MAR 25, 2007 07:53 PM

Moving to Canada seems like an ever-increasingly good idea. And for all those assholes who would reply with: "Well why don't you go ahead and move if you don't like it here." Fuck you guys, I'm not getting off this slowly sinking ship until I'm sure that its about to make the plunge.

Quirky

Quirky

Birmingham, AL
October 2005

MAR 25, 2007 07:55 PM

TheFuckOffKid said:

oyaji said:

DyeWhiteGirls said:
JESUS FUCKING CHRIST.

YOU'RE- YOU ARE.

YOUR- NOT YOU ARE.

IT'S A CONTRACTION.

This ends the angry caps typing portion of this post. Had this been an actual rant, anyone that failed to recall their (NOT THEY'RE/THERE) 4th grade grammar lesson would be shot on site.

I really have nothing more insightful to add. I just can't believe that this occurs multiple times in a thread, even after other people bitch the first person out. It's like the vortex of stupid centers on internet message boards.



Shot on sight. As in, shot as soon as you see them. Not, shot at this location.



Case and point. (For all intensive purposes.)



For all intents and purposes.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

 ... 9

Next

featured interviews