It bothers me to have a non accountable, secretive, imperial, unconstitutional, unchecked president. I don't trust president Cheney to respect any limits.
2006-10-29 01:53:51 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Fiesty: So we are in agreement that our representatives place their political ambitions above doing what is right? That is sorta what happened with Foley, isn't it ? And tell me......how is this working?
2006-10-29 01:59:56 · update #1
Chain s: I was being somewhat ironic - Cheney and Rumsfeld manage Bush, giving him the illusion he is actually making decisions. Since Cheney has control of appointments to the legal councils if the Dept of Justice and other federal agencies, basically he has most of the power in the administration - Rumsfeld and Cheney stove pipe intel and data to a very incurrious president and manage him as well...I see Cheney as the most powerful man in Washington - Both Rumsfeld and Cheney created this imperial presidency based on their experience of the Nixon years.
2006-10-29 01:05:39 · update #2
Preacher: I disagree. The Constitutional 5th and 6th amendments prohibit parts of his Patriot act as well as the MCA and its suspension of habeas corpus.
2006-10-29 01:07:39 · update #3
Repub Mom: Actually this is the most radical and secrative president in American history. This presidency is a construct of Cheney-Rumsfeld strategic intentions to create a presidency that is *unaccountable to the American people * Without checks and balances ( note the " signing statements that negate aspects of laws he does not like" * and secrative ( ever wonder why the National Archives records of both Bush presidencies are sealed as classified ? or why
we no longer have habeas corpus protections to people under US custody? Cheney is the great white shark behind the control of the presidency with his his opinion memos.
And for your edification the Constitution applies to ALL PERSONS under US jusrisidiction - not just citizens...otherwise why was the MCA even needed to get around US vs Hamdi that stated Bush's handling of the detainees was unconstitutional. I am thinking you are in an increasing minority and look forward to seeing the MCA reversed. Also I am a traitor ?
2006-10-29 03:13:26 · update #4
Repub Mom part II: Where the MCA applies to you and I is we can be wrongfully arrested and will have NO WAY to prove our innocence because we will be deemed an enemy combattant on the authority of the president and the Secretary of Defense...and have NO ACCESS TO THE COURTS. What part of habeas corpus do you NOT understand?
What is the justification for ever giving a president so much power?
2006-10-29 03:18:39 · update #5
Repub Mom : part III, you missed the point in my comment about Foley - I am stating many politicians put their careers above the interests of the nation. Enabling this Invasion and occupation of Iraq is just such an action - similar to Republicans covering up Mark Foley to protect their hold on congressional power.
2006-10-29 03:42:13 · update #6
President Bush asked for it and Congress agreed overwhelmingly to declare war in Iraq and authorize appropriations to fight the war. Every elected official IS held accountable - they are called elections! If you believe Iraq is a mess - vote against your Representative in Congress this November.
President Bush is not secretive, imperial, unconstitutional or unchecked. There are no secrets about the war - your beloved liberal media tells you the body count daily. You know what is going on - and have formed opinions (albeit ignorant ones) on the war. And your accusations of imperialism is more leftist and anti-globalization propaganda against capitalism.
In order for the Patriot Act or the MCA to be unconstitional, the "victims" must be protected by the United States Constitution. Only citizens are afforded those protections. Terrorists, enemy combatants or whatever "soft" label you liberals want to use today (is it freedom fighters?) ARE NOT CITIZENS!!! Furthermore - if an American breaks our laws, conspires with terrorists to harm Americans - your rights as an American should be stripped in my opinion. You have committed treason! The Patriot Act doesn't do this and nor does the MCA, I think it should.
Again, as for your claims of unconstitutionality on the Patriot Act and the MCA - what specific language is stripping these rights from American Citizens? Pull the legislation yourself and prove it! Or is this just what you get from the DNC talking points memos or do you have any real arguement to make. I compell you to back up your baseless assertions! Double dog dare you!
BTW - Foley has nothing to do with Iraq - that story has been over for weeks. You liberals need a new bumper sticker!
2006-10-29 02:08:18 · answer #1 · answered by Republican Mom 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Democrats are just as accountable for the mess in Iraq as the "president", its beyond party lines, both parties are corrupt with power because we the people have allowed it by voting them in to office again and again. What we need to do is boycott the vote on a large scale, then maybe the media agenda would collapse to the people. It doesnt matter what we vote the e machines are fixed one way or the other and even if they werent the losing party would just cry foul. Our system is in a mess, and its not just because of the administration now in power. Dig deep enough and you find corruption on all sides. Its just for political means that these are strategically leaked. Execute the leakers and maybe that will start a wake up call to the government that the people ore tired and more mistrusting everyday. for example how often do you see positive feedback from Iraq....its there but the media doesnt want you to know.....people like CNN would rather give the extremists free publicity. here is a positive video I found online...just give it a watch, it wont hurt your sensibilities....
http://www.glennbeck.com/realstory/iraq-video.shtml
2006-10-29 09:07:47 · answer #2 · answered by lost&confused 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
You guys haven't held others accountable in the past so why would you start with this one!
Adams and Wilson in the past in your U.S. history...hopefully the ultimate irony will be that with the new Acts he's signing that he's scared the U.S. people into approving, he will be tried under them in the not too distant future after he's retired from office...with no defence available..one that he's signed away.
You will be a great nation again when the power returns to the people and people in power are held accountable for their actions. In terms of holding him accountable now, forget it...see the previous answer...it would take a lot, and a lot of careers ended.
...One world that described the situation well was...imperial...
2006-10-29 09:05:47 · answer #3 · answered by 67ImpalaSS 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Cheney is VP. Get a clue before you ask uneducated questions.
BTW, we did in 2004 and President Bush was reelected with the most votes ever.
2006-10-29 08:57:25 · answer #4 · answered by Chainsaw 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Preacher. Have you read the articles of impeachment. they were filed in federal court and are public record. You should do some research.
2006-10-29 10:49:15 · answer #5 · answered by jl_jack09 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Because if the Congress were to impeach him, they would alienate half of the country (since roughly half of the country leans towards the conservative pov). They need those votes next election.
2006-10-29 08:56:42 · answer #6 · answered by feistycharley 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Exactly the same why the iraqi people could not hold Saddam accountable for his deeds in iraq ---- the political system is not perfect and it can be easily manipulated to suit one's needs.
2006-10-29 09:37:43 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Remember, they impeached Clinton (I will admit for stupid reasons, because he wasn't the first pres to get his jollies from a paige), and his popularity went up. Impeach GWB, and we may get stuck with Jeb Bush next term.
2006-10-29 08:59:28 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Republicans have different standards for themselves. Clinton smoked a few cigars, Bush is killing young americans (not to mention innocent Iraqi civilians)and he's free to cause discord and evil on this planet
2006-10-29 08:59:37 · answer #9 · answered by Robert D 3 · 0⤊ 4⤋
He has done nothing that is an impeachable offense.
2006-10-29 08:57:27 · answer #10 · answered by Preacher 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋