Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003529196

Bush has issued 130+ signing statements, while the Republican party has been in control of Congress, so this isn't exactly a shocker.

a system of checks and balances aids and comforts the terr'sts

GO DUBYA!!!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v499/PVS/bush.gif

The real question here is it true? Does Bush really have the power to override Congress and get the money and means to actually move more troops in Iraq?

If so, then the US has one really idiotic system.

Yes, and he also said that human being and fish can coexist peacefully.

Originally posted by Evil_Ash
Yes, and he also said that human being and fish can coexist peacefully.

He was wrong... Kill those fush.

Originally posted by Fishy
The real question here is it true? Does Bush really have the power to override Congress and get the money and means to actually move more troops in Iraq?

If so, then the US has one really idiotic system.

He's commander in chief, so if he can figure out how to move the troops without his congressional "allowance" he can. I have no idea how he'd keep things going for very long without adequate funding however.

Originally posted by Evil_Ash
Yes, and he also said that human being and fish can coexist peacefully. #

I find the first more interesting.

Unless I'm incorrect congress is in control of the amount of money Bush gets to wage his war. This would mean that if congress says they'll stop funding his little war Bush could be in trouble. However if I'm not mistaken the democrats already said they will not stop the funding of the troops.

That's what Bush is depending on. We LOVE our troops. If he completely ignores what we are saying and sending our sons and daughters to war, we'll keep funding him so they are properly equipped. We don't want them to die because he's stubborn.

Originally posted by Fire
Unless I'm incorrect congress is in control of the amount of money Bush gets to wage his war. This would mean that if congress says they'll stop funding his little war Bush could be in trouble. However if I'm not mistaken the democrats already said they will not stop the funding of the troops. The Congress has more than just money powers over the President. The President cannot wage combat with Congressional authority. The President himself has few powers that he wields absolutely. Congress actually has more power over the President than he has over it.Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Bush has issued 130+ signing statements, while the Republican party has been in control of Congress, so this isn't exactly a shocker. all of which are unconstitutional. How this has gotten by the Supreme Court, I'll never know

Originally posted by Strangelove
all of which are unconstitutional. How this has gotten by the Supreme Court, I'll never know

Don't republicans have a lot of pull in the Supreme court?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Don't republicans have a lot of pull in the Supreme court? there are conservatives on the Supreme Court, one justice has even defended signing statements. But it's obviously unconstitutional. The Executive branch enforcing its interpretation of the legislation and picking which parts of the law to enforce is blatant disregard for the separation of powers.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Don't republicans have a lot of pull in the Supreme court? Yea, he's gotten away with it because he's appointed most of the Supreme Court Justices.

Originally posted by Marxman
Yea, he's gotten away with it because he's appointed most of the Supreme Court Justices. most? try 2

How exciting for Bush.

Originally posted by Strangelove
most? try 2 Really? I could have sworn he appointed at least four early on in his time as president.

Ok I was wrong. He's appointed 3. 2 ultra-conservatives and a moderate, who replaced one of the Supreme Court's most liberal members.

Originally posted by Marxman
Ok I was wrong. He's appointed 3. 2 ultra-conservatives and a moderate, who replaced one of the Supreme Court's most liberal members. no...he's appointed two. Samuel Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts. The confirmation of Harriet Miers failed, if that's what you're talking about

Originally posted by Strangelove
The Congress has more than just money powers over the President. The President cannot wage combat with Congressional authority. The President himself has few powers that he wields absolutely. Congress actually has more power over the President than he has over it.

Thx for the info, kinda knew it already but still nice to know!

Now is my idea that supreme court judges are appoint for life (until they feel they have to quit themselves) correct?

Originally posted by Strangelove
no...he's appointed two. Samuel Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts. The confirmation of Harriet Miers failed, if that's what you're talking about Yea, you're right. I read a news article the wrong way

Originally posted by Fire
Thx for the info, kinda knew it already but still nice to know!

Now is my idea that supreme court judges are appoint for life (until they feel they have to quit themselves) correct?

yes they serve for life (or at least until Pat Robertson gets god to kill them)

the only way they can loose the position is death, retirement or proven unfitness to serve by extreme mental defect (ie psychosis)

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
yes they serve for life (or at least until Pat Robertson gets god to kill them)

the only way they can loose the position is death, retirement or proven unfitness to serve by extreme mental defect (ie psychosis)

and I think most choose retirement rather than waiting until they croak.

I don't know what Rehnquist was thinking. I wouldn't want to be working until the end.

Originally posted by Fire
Thx for the info, kinda knew it already but still nice to know!

Now is my idea that supreme court judges are appoint for life (until they feel they have to quit themselves) correct? Yes, the position is for life unless they resign or are impeached (which hasn't happened yet)

weird, but never the less my idea was correct.

"Bush says he doesn't have to listen to Congress."

Well, it's true. It might not be a wise choice, but it's true.

P.S. Have we heard anything from the meeting he had with some of the politicians who are the most critical about what's going on in Iraq? There was a Time article about it.

Originally posted by PVS
a system of checks and balances aids and comforts the terr'sts

GO DUBYA!!!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v499/PVS/bush.gif

Originally posted by FeceMan
"Bush says he doesn't have to listen to Congress."

Well, it's true. It might not be a wise choice, but it's true.

P.S. Have we heard anything from the meeting he had with some of the politicians who are the most critical about what's going on in Iraq? There was a Time article about it. No. It's not true. It's dead wrong.

Originally posted by Strangelove
No. It's not true. It's dead wrong.
Actually, it is quite correct. I do not have to listen to anyone. It would be ill advised not to listen to anyone, but I do not have to listen to anyone.

The president does not have complete power of the military he can only deploy troops for a certain amount of time without declaring war... again.

Originally posted by FeceMan
Actually, it is quite correct. I do not have to listen to anyone. It would be ill advised not to listen to anyone, but I do not have to listen to anyone. well....unless you're President Bush, we're not talking about you. We're talking about the President, and by extension, the Executive Branch of the U.S. Government. And it can only enforce the laws that Congress puts forth, not make up its own policies

Originally posted by Strangelove
We're talking about the President, and by extension, the Executive Branch of the U.S. Government. And it can only enforce the laws that Congress puts forth, not make up its own policies

I do not think Bush got that memo.

-aP45bCCUHI

Originally posted by Strangelove
well....unless you're President Bush, we're not talking about you. We're talking about the President, and by extension, the Executive Branch of the U.S. Government. And it can only enforce the laws that Congress puts forth, not make up its own policies
Le sigh. The point is, he does not have to listen.

Wow I like that guy.

Originally posted by FeceMan
Le sigh. The point is, he does not have to listen. the point that you are making is wrong. The President does have to listen to Congress. Nothing you can say will change that