English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2006-07-05 08:48:55 · 20 answers · asked by blueskiesofwyo 1 in Politics & Government Government

20 answers

Not sure what you are asking aboit. There are term limitations - have been there since FDR in the 1940s. As far as powers of a preseident, we have the other two branches of the government to provide checks and balances. What more would you or anyine else want?

2006-07-05 08:51:46 · answer #1 · answered by Coach D. 4 · 0 1

Politically charged answers aside, the debate over US Presidential powers is in part a matter of US Constitutional interpretation and what affect the US constitution has during certain times, most especially wars. To best know what the US President's limitations are, read over the US Constitution and The War Powers Act and any other documentation that can be seen as relevant. You will have to use your own reasoning or defer to another's to determine which powers not clearly given to another part of government are under the command of the Office of The President.

2006-07-05 16:04:41 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I think this administration has made it clear that they do not accept any limitations put on them, even by the constitution. When the attorney general was asked about the illegal wiretapping fiasco, and why they didn't just appproach congress about changing the law requiring them to obtain a warrant before such action is taken, he answered, "Well, we didn't think they'd change it." As if that is an acceptable answer! So I guess that means that if we don't agree with a law, but don't see it changing, we can just break it. Sounds like a dangerous prescendent to me. Also a very dangerous President. Bush is a very scary individual to have running this nation.

2006-07-05 15:59:44 · answer #3 · answered by taylor619 2 · 0 0

I agree with deezpumpkin. . . . . . . . . . NO one with the name BUSH should be able to run for office. The only thing that I have seen come from any of the Bushes being in office is destruction and war. George W is only finishing a job that he father could not do..... or could not get started while he was in office. We already know that Jeb is a liar and a cheat.... who else in the their family could actually be fit to run this country.

It takes more than a vision of war, power and destruction to run a country. It takes faith, promise, hard work, earnest efforts, truthfullness and common sense, (something that seems to be lacking). You also need the input and desires of the people that you were CHOSEN to represent.

The only representative that we have now is a tyrant, that has repeatedly lied to the American public and a president that needs to be impeached, for intentionally and knowing lying to the people in search of a justification for war

2006-07-05 16:02:50 · answer #4 · answered by Sunshine_Diva 4 · 0 0

waht about them?
the president doesn't really hold that much power. He's really more like a figurehead. The president can sometimes veto laws. Everybody blames bush for bad stuff happening but he had no real play in it. The senate (led by the vice president) makes all of the decisions (ex: going to war with Iraq, tax cuts, anything else bad you want to put in here) So don't go around blaming Bush. He's not that bad of a guy. He doesn't even write his own speeches. :D

2006-07-05 15:57:49 · answer #5 · answered by maxcreeed 2 · 0 0

Presidential? What about governmental? All branches of the government are going crazy on us. Judicial: Some of the decisions made by STATE courts appall me. And don't forget about our Legistrative Branch. Passing bogus laws that funnel tax dollars to certain people/areas? (I don't even need to get into the Executive side of it all) But as much as I complain, at least we're not in North Korea, right?

2006-07-05 16:04:35 · answer #6 · answered by Spike 2 · 0 0

The war powers Act should be repealed, no country should be attacked without provocation and against international; law.

He should be made to abide by treaties. If not, that is grounds for impeachment.

He should not be able to write over 700 slips on laws he doesn't like and isn't going to go by them. They should be submitted to the Supreme court to see if there are any legal basis. If there isn't the slip gets tossed!

Amy further actions should go before the UN Security council.

Presidents should be ambassadors of their countries, not little Napoleons!

All Person's who want to run for president should have an IQ of over 115.

2006-07-05 16:01:32 · answer #7 · answered by cantcu 7 · 0 0

Since the ascention of Emperor Bush, presidential powers are essentially limitless. All hail Emperor Bush.

2006-07-05 16:29:26 · answer #8 · answered by ratboy 7 · 0 0

George is VERY limited.

But if you mean term limits: A natural born citizen may be elected President twice. He/she can serve longer, though, if he becomes President without being elected, such as a Vice President becoming President if the President dies or resigns.

2006-07-05 15:52:41 · answer #9 · answered by Jason 1 · 0 0

Yes - we should Limit anyone with the last name of Bush in our administration.

2006-07-05 15:50:41 · answer #10 · answered by butterfliesRfree 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers