Tony Snow and the new American dictatorship

[CynicalGabe]

Link (watch the video)

According to Tony Snow, Congress has no oversight ability over the executive branch, particularly the White House.

My first thought on hearing this was

WHAT… THE… FUCK…

Has anyone in this administration ever paid attention in a grammar school civics class?

Somehow I seem to recall CHECKS and BALANCES being the ENTIRE FUCKING POINT of our system of government.

[Hung_Mung]

@CynicalGabe

Link (watch the video)

According to Tony Snow, Congress has no oversight ability over the executive branch, particularly the White House.

My first thought on hearing this was

WHAT… THE… FUCK…

Has anyone in this administration ever paid attention in a grammar school civics class?

Somehow I seem to recall CHECKS and BALANCES being the ENTIRE FUCKING POINT of our system of government.

The Bush admin thinks we have a strong form of government. The9/11y’ve had many strong discussions about our government and agree that it is a good government9/11. However, it is necessary for the executive to have unilateral power to enhance the United St9/11ates’ global position. Those who seek to limit that power do not have the interests of the citizens of our great coun9/11try in mind.

[RedFury]

@CynicalGabe

Link (watch the video)

According to Tony Snow, Congress has no oversight ability over the executive branch, particularly the White House.

My first thought on hearing this was

WHAT… THE… FUCK…

Has anyone in this administration ever paid attention in a grammar school civics class?

Somehow I seem to recall CHECKS and BALANCES being the ENTIRE FUCKING POINT of our system of government.

But he is right as a matter of practice if not principle, isn’t he? After all, what “checks and balances” has Dubya had throughout his murdering/lying Administration?

Blank check is more like it. Fucker’s done as he’s pleased.

[Daithi_Lacha]

@Hung Mung

The Bush admin thinks we have a strong form of government. The9/11y’ve had many strong discussions about our government and agree that it is a good government9/11. However, it is necessary for the executive to have unilateral power to enhance the United St9/11ates’ global position. Those who seek to limit that power do not have the interests of the citizens of our great coun9/11try in mind.

Heh. The new fnord.

[Cheesesteak]

@CynicalGabe

Somehow I seem to recall CHECKS and BALANCES being the ENTIRE FUCKING POINT of our system of government.

You seem to have misspelled “oversight” in this sentence. The concept of oversight is one of dominance. You oversee something that you are in charge of. Congress is not in charge of the President any more than the President is in charge of Congress. Congress does not oversee the President, they have their own powers and are free to use them to counter whatever the President is doing. Tony Snow can’t stop them because he’s not in charge of anything but his own mouth.

I don’t even understand why it’s worth noting that a politician speaks one way about an issue when its to their favor and a completely different way about it when it’s not in their favor, or that they would tell the press they have authority they don’t have. It happens constantly. You may as well be complaining about how much his lips move when he talks.

[Hung_Mung]

@Daithi Lacha

Heh. The new fnord.

Really now, I don’t know what you’re talking about.
Immanentizing the eschaton since 2000

[elucidator]

He’s pining for the fnords.

[BobLibDem]

Have you driven a fnord lately?

[Jodi]

@CynicalGabe

Somehow I seem to recall CHECKS and BALANCES being the ENTIRE FUCKING POINT of our system of government.

I guess the word “oversight” doesn’t mean to you what it means to me. Congress doesn’t have oversight of the Presidency (as the term “oversight” is generally used) any more than it has oversight of the Supreme Court.

Not gettin’ the outrage here.

[Qadgop_the_Mercotan]

@Jodi

I guess the word “oversight” doesn’t mean to you what it means to me. Congress doesn’t have oversight of the Presidency (as the term “oversight” is generally used) any more than it has oversight of the Supreme Court.

Not gettin’ the outrage here.

What Jodi said.

Each branch of government has powers and duties specific to them.

[Kythereia]

@BobLibDem

Have you driven a fnord lately?

My sister bit a fnord once…

[Cervaise]

@Hung Mung

The Bush admin thinks we have a strong form of government. The9/11y’ve had many strong discussions about our government and agree that it is a good government9/11. However, it is necessary for the executive to have unilateral power to enhance the United St9/11ates’ global position. Those who seek to limit that power do not have the interests of the citizens of our great coun9/11try in mind.

I am suddenly filled with the strange compulsion to bellow the Star Spangled Banner and mount a singing rubber fish on the wall of my den.

[Absolute]

Obviously you are the one who has not paid attention in your grammar school civics class. Congress does not have any oversight ability over the Executive Branch, any more than the Executive Branch has oversight ability over the Congress - or the Judiciary.

If Congress truly did have oversight ability over the President, then there would be no checks and balances. Congress could do what it wants, and order the President to comply.

But of course, since you dislike Bush, that’s what you’d seem to prefer at the moment. Up until we get an intelligent, Democrat president, and a lunatic, frothing-at-the-mouse Christian zealot Congress.

[Jodi]

@Cervaise

I am suddenly filled with the strange compulsion to . . . mount a singing rubber fish on the wall of my den.

How are you going to cling up there long enough? Crampons? Wouldn’t it be easier to take the fish off the wall first?

[Bricker]

@CynicalGabe

Link (watch the video)

According to Tony Snow, Congress has no oversight ability over the executive branch, particularly the White House.

My first thought on hearing this was

WHAT… THE… FUCK…

Has anyone in this administration ever paid attention in a grammar school civics class?

Somehow I seem to recall CHECKS and BALANCES being the ENTIRE FUCKING POINT of our system of government.

As other, wiser heads have already pointed out, “Check and balances =/= oversight.” Congress does NOT have oversight over the Executive Branch.

[ArizonaTeach]

Is this going to turn into one of those “I know what he said, and what the law says, and what common sense says, and what the truth is, but since only I may decide reality, what he really means is…” debates?

[Clark_K]

I think Congress does have an oversight role (“oversight” as in “review,” not "control’). The Senate votes on whether to confirm presidential nominees. Congress scrutinizes the way executive offices spend the money that Congress has appropriated. Congressional committees hold hearings on executive policies.

The whole idea of “checks and balances” is that each branch has some ability to, if necessary, influence the actions of the others.

If you’re going with the notion that all the branches are somehow entirely separate, then the president shouldn’t be able to veto legislation.

[JohnBckWLD]

The reverse dynamic would be when Congressmen from both farties squealed like stuck pigs over the (Executive Branch’s) FBI raid on William Jefferson’s office. How dare they treat members of the Legislative Branch like a common criminal…and confiscate all that hard-earned bribe money.

[John_Mace]

Here’s what wikipedia says about Congressional oversight. Anyone want to challenge or affirm it? I honestly don’t know how accurate it is, although the discussion page notes that it is taken verbatim from a report to Congress, so it seems rather one sided.

Congressional Oversight refers to oversight by Congress of the Executive Branch, including the numerous Federal Agencies.

<snip>

Report on the Organization of Congress[2]

Oversight is an implied rather than an enumerated power under the U.S. Constitution. The government's charter does not explicitly grant Congress the authority to conduct inquiries or investigations of the executive, to have access to records or materials held by the executive, or to issue subpoenas for documents or testimony from the executive.

There was little discussion of the power to oversee, review, or investigate executive activity at the Constitutional Convention of 1787 or later in the Federalist Papers, which argued in favor of ratification of the Constitution. The lack of debate was because oversight and its attendant authority were seen as an inherent power of representative assemblies which enacted public law.

Oversight also derives from the many and varied express powers of the Congress in the Constitution. It is implied in the legislature's authority, among other powers and duties, to appropriate funds, enact laws, raise and support armies, provide for a Navy, declare war, and impeach and remove from office the President, Vice President, and other civil officers. Congress could not reasonably or responsibly exercise these powers without knowing what the executive was doing; how programs were being administered, by whom, and at what cost; and whether officials were obeying the law and complying with legislative intent.

The Supreme Court made legitimate the oversight powers of Congress, subject to constitutional safeguards for civil liberties, on several occasions. In 1927, for instance, the High Court found that in investigating the administration of the Justice Department, Congress was considering a subject "on which legislation could be had or would be materially aided by the information which the investigation was calculated to elicit."

[tomndebb]

@ArizonaTeach

Is this going to turn into one of those “I know what he said, and what the law says, and what common sense says, and what the truth is, but since only I may decide reality, what he really means is…” debates?

Nah. The OP is mistaken, but he is not G W Bush.