You stupid assholes had no business sending that bill to the President in the first place. All you accomplished by doing so was:
Fuck each and every one of you with a splintery broomstick.
So trying to get them OUT of harms way proves to you that they don’t give a rat’s ass about the troops that ARE in harm’s way? Interesting logic.
Regardless of the merits of the bill, how was sending a bill to the President showing ignorance of the Constitution? Congress was playing its constitutional role and the President was playing his.
Of course the Prez vetoed it. I bet his Wednesday was already full.
Please don’t breed.
How’d that happen, I wonder?
Talk about your quick withdrawals.
I see, make it about Clinton!
You (stupid poster) had no business starting this thread in the first place. All you accomplished by doing so was:
Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution:
The President is the CiC, NOT the Congress. The Congress attempted to usurp the authority of the President in that bill. Had they managed to override the veto, I would imagine that a lawsuit would immediately have been filed and the bill found to be unconstitutional for that reason.
That needed to be said and enforced at least two generations ago.
Amazing, a post so lacking any intelligence that I’m sticking up for the U.S. Congress.
Oh, fuck you, glee.
I obviously know more about the Constitution than you do - see my response to Renob.
And where did I try to make George Bush look good? Oh, sorry, that’s only in your sweaty little mind. My argument was solely on the constitutional issue and the fact that the Congress is so blindly anti-GWB that they are willing to ignore the law.
And then the Judiciary would have been involved, and the whole checks and balances part of the Constitution would have come into play, just as it should.
As I’m not a lawyer, and I have better things to do rather than dive into a bill’s verbiage to determine which portion exactly usurps the President’s role as commander-in-chief, who don’t you post those excerpts.
How can W not look good?
He’s the Commander Guy!
You may not be aware of this, but ‘Commander Guy’ is several steps up from ‘Cable Guy’.
How is that bill going to get anyone killed? Do you honestly think funding for the war will be even slightly disrupted?
(The obvious follow-up question is of course why it’s OK for the President to veto a bill that is so imperative to the troops’ safety, but since it’s Clothahump I know that’s a pointless question.)
Can you please demonstrate how withholding funding for the military based on just about anything represents usurping the authority of the President as CinC?
In my little fantasy world, the dumb fucks in Congress would react to the veto by saying “Well darn, we tried - Guess he didn’t want the money after all. Moving right along…”
Sometimes I wonder if **Clothahump **is just a long-running and extremely sophisticated kaufmanesque flame persona.
That does not mean he gets to decide when to begin or end a war. That is Congress’ call. Under the Constitution.
Congress also gets to control the money.
No cite, but I recall reading the funding won’t actually run out until late this summer.