Posted on 03/28/2006 7:52:53 PM PST by Karl Rand
All of the things you listed have been done by various Presidents. Pres. Bush is not the first. He won't be the last. Itt's going to take a while to get a true Constitutionalist in the White House. The last one we had is Pres. Herbert Hoover.
When the general cares not a wit for victory or is actively working for the enemy, termination is not onyl probable, but necessary.
Half the people in Congress right now fit the criterion three hundred times more than the President. It would be the equivalent of letting rapists, murderers, terrorists, and child molestors execute an alleged theif.
That is not justice and that is not what America stood for.
You seem to forget that the president can veto anything that the Congress does. Yeah, it may not survive an override, but he can still exercise that authority.
This president has chosen never to do that. He is complicit in what has happened on his watch.
It's too late now for what the past presidents have done. It's not too late for this one -- or the judges or the congresscritters (that so many even here) would gladly reelect.
If you get a gift that's good for the most part but has some bad stuff in it, chances are you are going to take the whole package. That's the connundrum the President finds himself in on a regular basis and that's what those b@$tards always do, put bad stuff in the good and play chicken with the Pres. No party discipline whatsoever.
Of course perceptions may vary. Generally I wish he'd veto more but understand where he is coming from. You on the other hand will say veto it. This is understandable but it is importatn to tkeep in mind that the PRes. thinks differently than most of us and the Congresscritters. That Terrorist Protection Amendment coupling with defense and WOT packages was disgustingly inexcusable.
He has sold us out on the most fundamental conservative belief that exists -- belief in the right of the people to govern themselves.
George Bush took an oath of office to faithfully execute the laws of the land. He is the chief EXECUTIVE. It is his constitutional duty to enforce the laws and he has no right to pick and choose those laws he wants to enforce and to ignore those he doesn't personally like. This is what our self-governing system is all about. It is the people's will as expressed through our representatives in legislation that is supposed to decide these matters.
By his ongoing failure to enforce the democratically enacted laws against illegal immigration and his constant attempt to force amnesty programs on an unwilling citizenry President Bush has shown his contempt both for democratic self-governance and the American people. His arrogant refusal to perform his constitutional duty should be met with the one remedy provided by the Constitution to protect the people against the usurpation of their legislative authority -- impeachment. It is now well past time for Congress to assert the rights of the American people to self-governemnt.
He should veto bills that have bad stuff in them. Veto the bill and then force Congress to override the veto or strip out the garbage.
Why not? What's the down side? If they have to work on the same bill two or three times, that's less time that they have to work on new evil things to do.
There really isn't anything that we need new laws to handle. Just remember, almost every bill passed costs some or all of us money and/or our liberty.
I'd tie Congress up as much as possible.
By the same token, if something was passed in the middle of the night or without due deliberation, I'd veto it on principle. Of course, the President is as guilty of this as Congress.
We can't continue this debate into perpetuity. Let's just say we agree to disagree.
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.