[QUOTE=gonzomax]
If this is a war, and now we we are edging toward spending a trillion dollars fighting a war on terrorism, we must have killed some. What do these terrorisms look like.?
[/QUOTE]
When you kill 'em, their bodies evaporate kinda like dry ice. Which is why you never see any pictures of 'em.
Geez, do I have to explain everything? 
[QUOTE=Clothahump]
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.
[/QUOTE]
You have no clue about the actual legislation, do you? Congress has the constitutional power of the purse, and if they can put restrictions on how that money is used. Yes, the President is Commander in Chief, but he cannot just spend money for whatever he wants. The Founders designed it this way on purpose. They were well aware of the importance of the power of the purse. In English history, for instance, it was one of the few avenues that Parliament had to control a King who was waging a war with which they disagreed.
Your knowledge of the Constitution, the appropriations process, and the history of the Founding era is pretty deficient. Check up on it before you try and give me any lessons.
The Humpster listens to Fox or Rush and they say something stupid and he agrees ,Yeah what about that. Then he says it on the board and never wonders what went wrong.
[QUOTE=gonzomax]
The Humpster listens to Fox or Rush and they say something stupid and he agrees ,Yeah what about that. Then he says it on the board and never wonders what went wrong.
[/QUOTE]
That’s rich, coming from someone with your record of relying on left-wing “cites” long on conspiracy theory and short on facts.
[QUOTE=Frostillicus]
Clearly, Clothahump is angling to be Gee Dubya’s next selection when an opening appears on the Supreme Court. Given Bush’s track record of selecting people based not on excellence or even competance, but on boot-licking loyalty to all things Bush, I think Clothahump really has a chance.
[/QUOTE]
Please don’t frighten me like this; I’m old and could have a heart attack at any moment.
But didn’t you know? Bush isn’t just The Decider, he now has another secret identity as "Commander Guy’. 9/11 changed everything, remember?
I normally stay out of political debates, but it seems to me that the current Bush war plans have quite a lot in common with the “Zapp Brannigan Vs. the Killbots” strategy…
<Zapp> Killbots have a pre-set kill limit, so i simply sent wave after wave of my own men at them until they reached their pre-set kill limit and shut down…
the difference being, the Iraqis don’t have a pre-set kill limit, so sending wave-after-wave of troops at them is folly…
[QUOTE=Telemark]
Can you please demonstrate how withholding funding for the military based on just about anything represents usurping the authority of the President as CinC?
[/QUOTE]
Ya know…
Up at the top of the page, it says “Fighting ignorance since 1973 (it’s taking longer than we thought)”. I hate to say it, Telemark, but your question shows why it is taking longer.
Besides all the pork that got loaded into the bill (and let’s not even go there), the Congress imposed a deadline for troop withdrawal. That is not their province. That’s a military decision, and the President is the CiC of the military. As such, it’s his call when to pull the troops. The inclusion of the deadline was an attempt to usurp the authority of the President, and Bush was absolutely correct in vetoing it.
But, hey - let’s not let a little thing like the separation of powers stand in the way of an opportunity to do some political posturing and try to make George Bush look bad. Especially when you were told ahead of time that the bill would be vetoed, and you passed it anyway. And let’s certainly ignore and overlook the fact that that very same posturing is going to be picked up on by the enemy, and they will rejoice to know that the U. S. Congress supports them and not the troops.
Nah, that’s all just minor trivialities. The important thing is that the libs now get to vilify Bush for vetoing the funding bill, conveniently forgetting the fact that they made it necessary for him to do so. Yay! We Congresscritters made GWB look like Teh Ant1Kr1st. Ain’t we just da shit?
Yeah…you are.
You didn’t actually read *any * of the rest of this thread, did you?
“The important thing”, btw, isn’t making Bush look bad, it’s preventing any more of our people from getting killed uselessly. But nothing can get in the way of you hating “the libs”, can it? Not fact, not reason, not even basic human decency. All you have is your own hatred and the deliberate ignorance that sustains it. * And you’re proud of it.*
[QUOTE=Clothahump]
t got loaded into the bill (and let’s not even go there), the Congress imposed a deadline for troop withdrawal. That is not their province. That’s a military decision, and the President is the CiC of the military. As such, it’s his call when to pull the troops. The inclusion of the deadline was an attempt to usurp the authority of the President, and Bush was absolutely correct in vetoing it.
[/QUOTE]
Except, you haven’t demonstrated that putting a requirement for congressional funding is a military decision. Would it be OK for Congress to completely unfund the Pentagon without any strings attached? If so, they why are strings suddenly an unconstitutional use of the power of the purse?
These are matters of politics, not constitutionality.
Teaching a pig to sing …
[QUOTE=Renob]
That’s rich, coming from someone with your record of relying on left-wing “cites” long on conspiracy theory and short on facts.
[/QUOTE]
I admit being a lefty. You and XT think you are neutral. You are as righty as I am lefty and your programming is complete. You really believe the crap they hand you. You could use a huge injection of skepticism. You children still think name calling and insults are debate methods.
[QUOTE=gonzomax]
I admit being a lefty. You and XT think you are neutral. You are as righty as I am lefty and your programming is complete. You really believe the crap they hand you. You could use a huge injection of skepticism. You children still think name calling and insults are debate methods.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t believe that either XT or renob think of themselves as neutral, least as far as I’ve seen their posts. They are unabashedly conservative.
Nevertheless, renob’s cut at you was absolutely correct. You are the clothahump of lefties. I, as a leftie, am embarassed by you, and I shudder when you post.
That’s harsh, Frank. At least **Clothahump’**s posts are decent grammar wise. And I accept that’s not a debate technique - that’s me calling gonzomax a moron.
Is it possible that Clothahump starts these threads as a form of performance art?
How can anyone have over 4,000 posts on this board and still be so stupid? It defies logic.
[QUOTE=Frostillicus]
How can anyone have over 4,000 posts on this board and still be so stupid? It defies logic.
[/QUOTE]
This statement defies logic.
[QUOTE=Frank]
I don’t believe that either XT or renob think of themselves as neutral, least as far as I’ve seen their posts. They are unabashedly conservative.
Nevertheless, renob’s cut at you was absolutely correct. You are the clothahump of lefties. I, as a leftie, am embarassed by you, and I shudder when you post.
[/QUOTE]
Repeat after me. In my opinion Renobs cut at you was correct. How can you always be so sure. This board is full of people who speak as if their opinions are fact. I would like to see some of you geniuses say IN MY OPINION occasionally. You are not speaking from the mount. It is opinion. This whole board is opinion.
[QUOTE=gonzomax]
Repeat after me. In my opinion Renobs cut at you was correct. How can you always be so sure. This board is full of people who speak as if their opinions are fact. I would like to see some of you geniuses say IN MY OPINION occasionally. You are not speaking from the mount. It is opinion. This whole board is opinion.
[/QUOTE]
Of course this whole board is opinion. That’s what makes it redundant to say it. That’s why they teach you in academic writing (or should have) not to use those sorts of statements, because its quite obvious that what is being said is your opinion.
[QUOTE=Baldwin]
Is it possible that Clothahump starts these threads as a form of performance art?
[/QUOTE]
Not exactly. Every now and then, the rivalry for the post of Our Stupidest Doper heats up, and it looks like Humpy might be dislodged from his throne. When that happens, he takes center stage, squats, and effortlessly squeezes out one of these threads; and thus does he beat off his rivals. The fact that by so doing he also beats himself off is for him merely a bonus.