The Democratic "Commanders"
This morning, on "Fox News Sunday," Joe Biden inadvertantly reinforced the fact that the games Democrats are playing with defense appropriations amount to an unconstitutional ursurpation of the Commander in Chief's responsibilities. Responding to a question about a showdown over funding, Biden said:
You're gonna see a politicla dance coming up here that relates to a showdown, and the showdown relates not to the money for the troops, because everybody's there, but relates to whether or not the mission should be changed in Iraq in terms of how the troops are used. (emphasis added).
Of course, no one would expect "Slow Joe" to get this, but it's not Congress' prerogative to tell the President how to change the mission or to micromanage how he uses the troops. Those are core executive functions, central to the job responsibilities of the Commander-in-Chief.
Certainly Congress has funding authority, and if they disagree with the President's policies, they have absolute power to defund the war. What they don't have is the right to serve as Commanders-in-Chief by proxy -- by abusing their funding power.
You're gonna see a politicla dance coming up here that relates to a showdown, and the showdown relates not to the money for the troops, because everybody's there, but relates to whether or not the mission should be changed in Iraq in terms of how the troops are used. (emphasis added).
Of course, no one would expect "Slow Joe" to get this, but it's not Congress' prerogative to tell the President how to change the mission or to micromanage how he uses the troops. Those are core executive functions, central to the job responsibilities of the Commander-in-Chief.
Certainly Congress has funding authority, and if they disagree with the President's policies, they have absolute power to defund the war. What they don't have is the right to serve as Commanders-in-Chief by proxy -- by abusing their funding power.
posted by LadybugUSA at 8:52 AM
7 Comments:
Despite how nutty ring wing authoritarian types love the idea of a King or Dictator, the notion that (the president) can send troops wherever he wants for any reason is just a complete repudiation of what the framers provided.
I just wonder how a Joe Biden or a Barack Obama or a Hillary Clinton would feel after they are elected President and their authority gets usurped by a gang of partisan wolf hounds elected individually, banding together, in a pack mentality. I guess it's O.K. when it's your own party. Things have a way of changeing and yet the balance is centrifugally maintained. Our system is amazing in how no one party or individual can ever screw things up irreparably. The constitution works!
"[T]he notion that (the president) can send troops wherever he wants for any reason is just a complete repudiation of what the framers provided."
Congress absolutely has funding authority which it can deny or withhold. And Congress also can refuse to authorize military force. But -- especially here, after it specifically approved the use of force against Iraq -- Congress can't tell the President how to "change the mission" or manage the troops.
If they disagree with what's happening, at this point, all they can do consistent with the Constitution is to defund the war.
If you recall, as a little girl, when Daddy controls the purse strings, he has ultimate control over what can and cannot be done.
The war was over before it was started. Doug Fieth and Cheney cherry-picked the intelligence along with help from Curve Ball and Chalabi. Iraq was never a threat and all the neighboring nations including Israel agreed that Saddam was contained.
Earth to Carol, a father may have control of the finances but the "little girl" can still whine and cry, bang their head on the table and act defiantly.
And if you think Saddam was contained you had better go back and look at the oil for food program, created by liberals to deny Saddam revenue. The program had little deterrant and all the pieces were in place to resume his quest for WMD. If your world is a better place with psychotic mass murderers like Saddam Hussein gunning for you then you better get out of the way and let US who take the threat seriously do what inevitably has to be done.
When I was a kid I saw a rerun of an old science fiction movie. Aliens came to earth and presented a book to humans to explain their intentions. After great effort mankind translated the title of the book to "How to Serve Man".
In the mean time, the aliens began solving many of earth's worst problems (wars, hunger, polution, etc.) Everyone was very pleased. They were certain the aliens were the savior of mankind.
The aliens invited the people of the earth to visit their home planet. Many accepted the offer and left on alien spaceships on a journey to the alien planet. Only then did it become clear that the book "How to Serve Man" was actually a cook book!
Ugh!
It has finally become clear (there have been many, many indicators already) that "Earth" in the pseudo name "Earth to Carol" has been tragically mistranslated. Earth actually comes from planet Opposite!
Here's the unequivocal proof:
"...Iraq was never a threat and all the neighboring nations including Israel agreed that Saddam was contained."
Well that is an interesting story Greg. Obviously, Carol doesn't moderate the 29 percenter. What a sad site.
Post a Comment
<< Home