Two Senators, Kerry and Clinton in the last day have lectured our President on foreign policy. What in the world gives a senator from such small states gives them the idea they can have a public discussion with someone the entire country voted into office.
Are our senators out of control? Egomanics? What in the world is going on where they feel they can enter into these discussions?
My answers are Nothing, yes, yes,arrogance.
2006-11-01 07:33:29 · 16 answers · asked by Jean R 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
well, bush answered them, didn't he?
2006-11-01 07:36:35 · answer #1 · answered by renee 5 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Ok you win the most uneducated, ignorant question of the day award.
1. Each state has an equal amount of senators unlike the House of Rep where their number of congressmen is based on their population; therefore, all senator's opinions are equal no matter the size of their state.
2. The 3 branches of government are equal in power; therefore, the Senate has equal power to the Executive branch.
3. The entire country did NOT vote Bush into office. It was a majority by a very very small percent. And this point has no relevance anyways due to #1 and #2.
4. In this country, EVERYBODY has the right to freedom of speech and EVERYBODY has the right to question leadership.
5. YOU are the arrogant one!
2006-11-01 15:40:37 · answer #2 · answered by BeachBum 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
first of all, senators have always done so. it's normal course of action. It's aslo called free speech, and it doesn't just belong to Conservatives, contrary to their beliefs.
second, Kerry's Massachusetts still ranks among the top 10 or 12 most populated states. Clinton's NY is third or fourth most populous.
next, the entire country did not vote for Bush - somewhere between 40 and 49 percent did, depending on how much voter fraud there actually was. Even if one assumes none at all, 49 percent is the best number Bush can claim.
No, these senators are not "out of control," or any more egomaniacs than any other elected officials.
they're just doing their jobs.
2006-11-01 15:38:49 · answer #3 · answered by kent_shakespear 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
One of those "small states" is the place where the World Trade Center used to stand.
The whole country didn't vote Bush into office. Half of the people who voted did so for Kerry.
What gave the Republican congress the nerve to call for Clinton to remove our troops from Somolia the day after Black Hawk Down? Be careful what accusations and insults you throw around. For every 10 democratic senators you name as being out of control I can name you 10 republican.
2006-11-01 15:40:51 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
It is the job of ALL citizens, including elected officials, to question what the government is doing. Disagreeing with a president is not disloyalty or egomania, it is using your brain and coming to a different conclusion than he did.
In the case of Sen. Kerry & Clinton, they are both from states which did not vote for Bush, and who as a group tend not to agree with his policies. As such, speaking against said policies was not arrogance, it was doing their job and representing their constituents.
The Presidency is an office, and worthy of respect. The President is a man, and may or may not (lately, it's mostly not) be worthy of respect. Presidents are not kings or gods, they are not divinely inspired, and they are just as capable of being wrong as any other mortal. And it is our duty as Americans to call him on it when he is.
2006-11-01 15:50:07 · answer #5 · answered by triviatm 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Because they are entitled to do so. It's called free speech, there is nothing prohibiting a public calling out of the President. Where have you been? This has been done in this country since it's inception. Where did you get the idea that being the President entitles you to live in a vacuum? Respect for the Office of the President is alive and well, what you are talking about is a lack of respect for the man occupying it currently. That is not only allowed, it is part of our right as Americans to speak out and criticize if we feel the need to do so. What does it matter how big their states are? They didn't surrender their citizenship when they became Senators, they have a total right to speak out as they see fit, it's their duty for crying out loud.
2006-11-01 15:39:24 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
actually the entire country didn't vote for Bush both times...in 2000 he actually lost the popular vote. also Clinton is the Senator from NY and NY is the second biggest state in the US. and a congressperson can call out the president whenever they feel like he is doing something wrong...it is called checks and balances, go back to high school and study political science.
the president is the one who is an egomaniac who thinks he can do anything he wants unilaterally.
2006-11-01 15:55:18 · answer #7 · answered by Voicekiller 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Given the two senators in question, I would venture to guess it is because their positions on the issues they want to discuss have been so diverse that there's no real point in having a conversation with them privately, so they can't get face-time with the President.
2006-11-01 15:39:26 · answer #8 · answered by open4one 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Hey, an arch-Conservative here.... that's their right .... what I despise is the press, television and Hollywood focusing on them and ONLY presenting the left of center opinions to the public.... or finding ways to ignore selectively what does go on in the real world.
2006-11-01 15:40:32 · answer #9 · answered by R S 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Dictator Dumbya is UNelected, totally clueless and has no equal for arrogance. Second only to only CA, NY is NOT a "small state", the constituency of Sen. Clinton. And Senators are doing THEIR job in providing checks and balances against this INSTALLED executive. Down with Dictator Dumbya!!!
2006-11-01 15:36:18 · answer #10 · answered by rhino9joe 5 · 4⤊ 5⤋
I don't know why they would think that. He couldn't have a public conversation with a myna bird let alone two senators.
2006-11-01 15:45:49 · answer #11 · answered by Rja 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋