Posted on 12/15/2006 6:57:30 PM PST by upchuck
I suppose certain puffed-up congressmen are feeling their oats since the election, but that’s no excuse for their unauthorized trips overseas to meet with leaders of foreign nations. This destructive practice must be stopped.
Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson traveled to Syria and met with its president, Bashar Assad, without the authority and contrary to the wishes of the Bush administration, including the State Department.
The well-known policy of the Bush administration is that the United States has limited diplomatic ties with the Syrian government because of its support for terrorist organizations Hezbollah and Hamas, its support of terrorism and ethnic strife in Iraq, and its policy toward Lebanon.
The Constitution firmly places the conduct of U.S. foreign policy in the hands of the executive branch because the Framers understood the pitfalls of conducting foreign policy by committee.
Legislators, no matter how personally popular or professionally respected, and irrespective of the wisdom or foolishness of the policies they are seeking to promote, have no business -- as a matter of Constitutional law, historical practice and common sense -- meeting with foreign leaders without executive permission. (Some would even argue that Nelson’s unilateral junket violates the Logan Act -- which carries criminal penalties -- but there’s insufficient space to address that here.)
It doesn’t matter that the Iraq Study Group recommended that we begin negotiating with the terrorist-sponsoring states of Syria and Iran in contravention of the Bush Doctrine. It doesn’t matter that most Democrats probably support the idea -- even though they just won back both legislative houses. The president is still in office, and this is still his call.
The Democrats have been bellyaching for years about President Bush’s allegedly nefarious efforts “to consolidate power in the executive branch.” This has always been a bogus charge, but it is especially specious coming from Democrats, who are wholly comfortable with routine usurpations of legislative authority by activist federal judges and completely unbothered by Sen. Nelson’s trip.
Just think about it for a minute. A nation can’t effectively conduct foreign policy when it speaks with more than one voice any more than a private business can optimally negotiate a transaction when two of its principals are sending mixed signals to the other side. You must speak with one voice, or you will allow the other side to divide and conquer you. Some may object that Sen. Nelson had every right to go because he is a member of the Senate Armed Services and Foreign Relations committees. To the contrary, such credentials enhance his apparent authority and make his actions more damaging.
Others may defend Nelson’s trip, saying he was not holding himself out as having any actual authority but simply wanted to open up a dialogue between our two nations. But that doesn’t excuse Nelson’s actions. He has no right even to open up a dialogue when it is the official policy of the United States not to initiate such a dialogue.
Of course Nelson was purporting to speak for the U.S. -- at least for Bush’s political opponents. This wasn’t a social trip. He was clearly trying to influence Assad’s policy -- he asked him to do more to stabilize Iraq. If nothing else, Nelson definitely sent a signal to Assad that powerful people in the U.S. disagree with the nation’s official policy and will do everything they can to change it.
And, of course, Assad is going to tell the hapless senator that he’ll cooperate because it makes President Bush look bad -- at least to those who believe we should negotiate with terrorists.
This strengthens Assad’s hand and encourages him to play up the idea that Bush is stubbornly refusing to deal with him. Alternatively, it gives Assad tacit permission to continue to misbehave, with the hope that his actions will go unpunished as long as Democrats accede to the executive branch in 2008.
Sen. Kerry recently took a similar trip to Egypt. Other senators, including Republican Sen. Arlen Specter, are planning such trips in the future. We know about Sen. Kennedy’s dishonorable missions in the past.
But surely reasonable people, even those who disagree with Bush’s posture toward Syria, will understand that their preferred policy end does not justify the means of violating the Constitution and turning our foreign policy into a jumbled mess.
We are talking about vitally important foreign policy during time of war. Where is the outrage? We shouldn’t dismiss these trips so lightly, and the Bush administration must condemn them in stronger terms.
Republican Sen. Specter (RINO-PA) plans Syria trip (The Bush administration "objects.")
I am, and have been, outraged. But where is the outrage from the Republicans? Same place it was when Kerry went to Hanoi and Paris, no doubt.
The real outrage is soon to come. It takes longer when those acting up are Democrats, because the press is on their side. But the truth will come out. Give it a couple of days.
How old are you? Because, if you're younger than 110, the press hasn't gotten outraged at anything the Dems have done in your lifetime.
If they like it soo much over there, let em stay over there!
Instead of objecting .. The WH should send them this terse note: The moment you step foot on enemy territory .. your visa to re-enter the USA will be cancelled.
Go ahead .. make my day!
The President, never particularly willing to confront even the most treasonous Democrats, now operates from a position of extreme weakness. He lacks any political capital whatsoever, and his continuance in office depends existentially upon his ability to leverage the political minority of House Republicans to run interference within the Democrat caucus enough to deny the votes for impeachment. In other words, the President depends upon certain House Democrats. He absolutely cannot issue an condemnation, however meek, that might unite the Democrats behind his impeachment. So Democrats have free rein to commit treason and support the terrorists at will--or welcome President Nancy Pelosi.
My party has become "milk toast' and they don't seem to care.
Good grief! It appears you have the President drawn and quartered and strung up already.
Sorry .. people still "misunderestimate" this President. The NYT may think he's weak, but as far as I can see - after the Baker/Hamilton fiasco - Bush is still holding all the cards. The liberals never catch on.
Thanks to the "Oh so much more conservative than you" stay at home crowd, this is just the begining of this crap. Thanks dumb asses.
The only thing I "Miss" about this president right now is his potency.
For gods sake Dubya, pick up the bull horn and re assert the power of the executive branch.
The press will never like you quit trying to win their hearts and addled minds.
Slam these senators down.hell arrest them or at the very least stall them at customs refuse to re admit them.....force the country to see what they are doing.
Silence on their actions is acceptance.
This Administration will be unable to muster up any outrage for this, or even a desire to defend itself from more meddling. It's become a habit.
One may as well ask, where is their outrage for the critical national security secrets published on the front page of the New York Times? See anybody headed to jail lately?
This Administration has been played the fool for years by it's political enemies and all it does is turn the other cheek and wring it's hands for more bipartisanship.
Look for more of the same, much more, as it's political enemies continue to taste blood and smell the scent of a wounded and passive Administration that won't take on any outrage or defend itself from the worst treachery!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.