0
   

Cheney: VP's office not part of Executive branch.

 
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2007 03:45 pm
revel,
Since when does the VP have the ability to send troops to war?
He doesnt,according to the Constitution.

Now,if we go to war with Iran while a dem is President,will you still have objections?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2007 03:46 pm
mysteryman wrote:
revel,
Since when does the VP have the ability to send troops to war?
He doesnt,according to the Constitution.

Now,if we go to war with Iran while a dem is President,will you still have objections?


Ah, YES?!?!!?!!!!!

How can you even ask this? As if the only reason people don't want to go to war with Iran is that a Republican is running the show.

jeez

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2007 03:58 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
mysteryman wrote:
revel,
Since when does the VP have the ability to send troops to war?
He doesnt,according to the Constitution.

Now,if we go to war with Iran while a dem is President,will you still have objections?


Ah, YES?!?!!?!!!!!

How can you even ask this? As if the only reason people don't want to go to war with Iran is that a Republican is running the show.

jeez

Cycloptichorn


That is the impression that many of you are giving.
You only seem disturbed by the fact that Bush is the President,and making the decisions.

But,I will bet any of you the from now till the day Bush leaves the WH,the US will not go to war with Iran.

I am also willing to bet that if Hillary gets elected,the US will end up in a war with Iran.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2007 04:01 pm
mysteryman wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
mysteryman wrote:
revel,
Since when does the VP have the ability to send troops to war?
He doesnt,according to the Constitution.

Now,if we go to war with Iran while a dem is President,will you still have objections?


Ah, YES?!?!!?!!!!!

How can you even ask this? As if the only reason people don't want to go to war with Iran is that a Republican is running the show.

jeez

Cycloptichorn


That is the impression that many of you are giving.
You only seem disturbed by the fact that Bush is the President,and making the decisions.

But,I will bet any of you the from now till the day Bush leaves the WH,the US will not go to war with Iran.

I am also willing to bet that if Hillary gets elected,the US will end up in a war with Iran.


Actually, it's the quality of the decisions which are disturbing, and the logic upon which they are based. The person making the decisions - and let's be honest here, it's Cheney - is immaterial.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2007 04:13 pm
Let me ask you this, Mysteryman, and please try to anwer honestly...

When a Democrat becomes president do you want the Democratic Party spying on you or anyone else they want without a warrant? The Dem Vice President not anwering to Congress for anything? The Dem VP keeping all papers, e-mails, visitors to his / her home, etc. secret? Do you want the Dem VP to store all papers and work-a-day stuff in man sized safes and taken with him/her at the end of the term to remain secret forever and ever amen? Do you want a Dem VP not accounting for how government secrets are kept in his office? Disclosing the name of undercover agents without punishment of any kind? REfusing to submit to subpeonas?

Do you want a Dem President firing and appointing prosecutors based on whether or not they go after Republicans right before an election? Do you want prosecutors put in the DOJ that go around the law in any way possible to ensure Republican votes don't get cast or counted?

Do you want the perogatives claimed by this executive branch to carry over to the Dems when they take office?

Cause, it's not like when they get there they are going to go backwards and undo all of these claimed executive powers and priveleges.

Are you okay with that?
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2007 04:17 pm
He's got to be a member of some branch 'cause it always seems like he's got one stuck up his arse.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2007 05:21 pm
White House, Cheney's office subpoenaed
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2007 05:26 pm
mysteryman wrote:
revel,
Since when does the VP have the ability to send troops to war?
He doesnt,according to the Constitution.

Now,if we go to war with Iran while a dem is President,will you still have objections?


Ideally and traditionally you are right it is the President rather than the VP who sends the troops to war. We're not living in ideal times but luckily times change.

I doubt any other president goes to war on dime again, Hillary or whoever the frontrunner of the republicans is.

I supported the first Gulf war which was run under a republican/so did many other democrats.

(afterthought) Many democrats also supported the war with the Taliban in Afghanistan; which was/is run under a republican.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Jun, 2007 04:29 pm
While I agree that Cheneys remark was absolutely stupid,on reflection he might have a case.

The ONLY Constitutional duty the VP has is to preside over the Senate,which was the legislative branch the last time I looked.

So,he might have a valid point,albeit a very weak one.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Jun, 2007 04:32 pm
mysteryman wrote:
While I agree that Cheneys remark was absolutely stupid,on reflection he might have a case.

The ONLY Constitutional duty the VP has is to preside over the Senate,which was the legislative branch the last time I looked.

So,he might have a valid point,albeit a very weak one.


That's very interesting MM, my constitution says the Vice President of the United States is the first in the presidential line of succession, becoming the new President of the United States upon the death, resignation, or removal of the President. Could you post your version of the constitution for the rest of us?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Jun, 2007 04:33 pm
mysteryman wrote:
While I agree that Cheneys remark was absolutely stupid,on reflection he might have a case.

The ONLY Constitutional duty the VP has is to preside over the Senate,which was the legislative branch the last time I looked.

So,he might have a valid point,albeit a very weak one.


I'm thinking, not so much. He has asserted in the past that he is very much a part of the Exec. branch and enjoys the special 'executive privilege' that membership in that branch brings.

He can't have all the benefits and none of the downsides...

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Jun, 2007 04:48 pm
dyslexia wrote:
mysteryman wrote:
While I agree that Cheneys remark was absolutely stupid,on reflection he might have a case.

The ONLY Constitutional duty the VP has is to preside over the Senate,which was the legislative branch the last time I looked.

So,he might have a valid point,albeit a very weak one.


That's very interesting MM, my constitution says the Vice President of the United States is the first in the presidential line of succession, becoming the new President of the United States upon the death, resignation, or removal of the President. Could you post your version of the constitution for the rest of us?


You are talking about the 20th amendment,which was ratified on 1/23/1933.
Now,it could very well have ben written that the DC dogcatcher would succedd the President.

But again,the only Duty the VP has according to the Constitution is to Preside over the Senate.
The 20th amendment does NOT spell out any duties or repsonsibilities the VP has,except that he succeeds a dead President.

And for your education and interest,you can find the Constitution here...
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A2Sec1


Cyclo,
I agree with your statement...

Quote:
I'm thinking, not so much. He has asserted in the past that he is very much a part of the Exec. branch and enjoys the special 'executive privilege' that membership in that branch brings.

He can't have all the benefits and none of the downsides...


Thats why I said that he MIGHT have a point,albeit a VERY weak one.
0 Replies
 
username
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Jun, 2007 04:54 pm
In the Duh! category of news of the day, the Office of the President has said that, yes, the Office of the Vice President is part of the Executive Branch.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Jun, 2007 04:58 pm
username wrote:
In the Duh! category of news of the day, the Office of the President has said that, yes, the Office of the Vice President is part of the Executive Branch.


That would seem to hurt Cheney's contention then,wouldnt it.
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Jun, 2007 06:11 pm
Ex-Reagan Associate Deputy Attorney General: Impeach Cheney by Josh Catone
Published: Thursday June 28, 2007

Bruce Fein, who served as the Associate Deputy Attorney General under Ronald Reagan, in a scathing editorial today called for the impeachment of Vice President Dick Cheney.

"Cheney has dulled political accountability and concocted theories for evading the law and Constitution that would have embarrassed King George III," he writes.

This is not the first time that Fein has taken on the Bush administration. In March 2006, Fein appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee to testify on Senate Resolution 398, which called for the censure of George Bush over the warrantless wiretap program.

Fein said in his 2006 testimony that by authorizing the domestic spying program, President Bush sought to "cripple the Constitution's checks and balances and political accountability."

In October 2006, Fein ripped into Bush for his "alarming usurpations of legislative prerogatives," and into the then-Republican controlled Congress for sitting idly by and "placing party loyalty above institutional loyalty, contrary to the expectations of the Founding Fathers."

With the wiretap program back in the news following this week's congressional subpoenas of the White House and the office of the Vice President, and a subsequent refusal to cooperate, Fein unleashed his highly critical philippic.

Fein details "multiple crimes against the Constitution" committed by Cheney, including the creation of military commissions, the "kidnappings, secret detentions, and torture in Eastern European prisons of suspected international terrorists," the advocation of "signing statements" to ignore pieces of legislation, and the encouragement of the use of torture.

"The vice president has maintained that the entire world is a battlefield," writes Fein, saying the vice president has used the bugaboo of terrorism to justify a shoot first, ask questions later approach to dealing with suspected terrorists, even when that includes American citizens.

Fein also touches on the hot-button warrantless wiretapping program, over which he has butted heads with the administration in the past. He argues that Cheney engineered the program and has "orchestrated the invocation of executive privilege" to conceal information about it from Congress.

In the end, Fein makes the case that "Bush has ceded vast domains of his powers to Vice President Cheney," in violation of the US Constitution.

"President Bush regularly is unable to explain or defend the policies of his own administration, and that is because the heavy intellectual labor has been performed in the office of the vice president," he concludes. "Cheney is impeachable for his overweening power and his sneering contempt of the Constitution and the rule of law."
link
0 Replies
 
username
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Jun, 2007 06:35 pm
yes, mysteryman, it certainly would, wouldn't it?
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Jun, 2007 06:43 pm
username wrote:
yes, mysteryman, it certainly would, wouldn't it?


Let me make this perfectly clear...I do NOT agree with what Cheney said!!
I think he was a complete idiot for even thinking his office wasn't part of the executive branch.

But,looking at it dispassionately,he does have a weak,but possibly valid point,because according to the constitution,his only specified duty is to deal with the legislative branch as President of the Senate.

However,that claim is a very weak claim,and not one that I think is a valid one.
However,his attorney could feasibly use it as a defense.

Bush is correct however about Cheney's office.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Jun, 2007 06:49 pm
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Jun, 2007 09:36 pm
kickycan wrote:
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
kickycan wrote:
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
"We know that Cheney is a vile political shill and we hate him for it, so it is OK that another vile political shill use all of his base arsenal to attack the target of our contempt."


Actually, it's not okay. It's f*cking sweet!


Slash and burn partisan warfare.

Vicerally satisfying, perhaps, but to the good of our nation?


Probably not. But I believe I can understand and be turned off by that facet of it, yet still enjoy the part that spells bad political news for the vile political shill in question.


Fair enough
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Jun, 2007 09:42 pm
revel wrote:
So we just sit quietyly with out mouths shut tight for the good of the nation? Nothing is more unamerican than that.

Quote:
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent"
- Thomas Jefferson


I don't understand how you see the choices being so limited:

1) Rant about how our government is, without exception, working against our interests.

2) Keep our mouths shut.

Congress should engage in oversight that even includes investigations from time to time but to Waxman oversight is merely a weapon in his partisan war. There are Republicans of the same nature and much of the nonsense around the Clinton impeachment was a clearly an example of same.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 06/26/2024 at 10:04:44