Hmmm....
At whose bidding, I wonder....
This feckless woman screwup isn't good news for missus clinton, (a feckless (woman?) screwup in her own right)....
|
Posted on 04/06/2007 12:09:04 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Like flotsam on a sea of hate, the far left liberal contingency of the U.S. Congress seems to be drifting far from the principles established by the U.S. Constitution.
Having failed, so far, to divide congressional members of the left into numerous commanders in chief to direct America's war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, the one and only, self-proclaimed "most powerful woman in the world," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has taken over the U.S. ship of state and floated off to Damascus, Syria, with a crew made up of members of Congress.
The U.S. Constitution confines the U.S. Congress to matters clearly defined as legislative.
U.S. Senate Majority Leader Arthur Vandenberg under the administration of President Nixon stated quite emphatically, "politics stops at the water's edge." The U.S. Constitution specifically assigns matters of state, including treaties, to the president of the United States, who, through his secretary of state, deals directly with all foreign powers.
President Bush admonished Pelosi in a Rose Garden question-and-answer session on April 3, calling her trip "counterproductive."
"Going to Syria sends mixed signals, signals in the region and, of course, mixed signals to President Assad," Bush said. "And by that I mean, you know, photo opportunities and/or meetings with President Assad lead the Assad government to believe they're part of the mainstream of the international community, when in fact, they're a state sponsor of terror."
In a most contemptible manner, Speaker Pelosi has refused the request of the president of the United States. Pelosi has undercut the effectiveness of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
The text of the law has been posted in this thread twice. The Logan Act applies to any American, even members of congress.
No, I’ve read it various places, including another forum. Seems to me that the key is whether she was operating with the authority of the US Government. The constitution gives that authority to the President. On the other hand, one could say she is part of the US government, 3rd in line for President. A constitutional question. But really, I don’t know.
I’d love to see her get slapped with a felony. I can dream on....
My rep (Please Louise) Louise Slaughter went with her.
Okay, but I've also seen posted here and elsewhere that members of Congress are exempt.
I'd like to see something authoritative on this either way.
It’s more pointed than just “never acknowledging GWB” .. it’s more like jealousy that he won 2000 and “stole” their power. GWB was not entitled to win .. therefore he should not be entitled to rule.
It’s all so logical .. don’t you see ..?????
I don’t really need a tag do I ..??
Yes, mine too .. but according to Rich Galen, the Constitution says that only SENATORS have “advise and consent” granted to them, and HOUSE MEMBERS DO NOT - not even the speaker.
If we had anybody in D.C. with a spine, she would have been handcuffed when she landed back in the USA.
But .. don’t worry .. democrats are NEVER HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS - CRIMINAL OR NOT!!
Hmmm....
At whose bidding, I wonder....
This feckless woman screwup isn't good news for missus clinton, (a feckless (woman?) screwup in her own right)....
|
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.
... While America appears not to be ready for a female president under any circumstances, the post-9/11 realities pose special problems for a female presidential candidate. Add to these the problems unique to missus clinton. The reviews make the mistake of focusing on the problems of the generic female presidential candidate running during ordinary times.
hurdle for any female presidential candidate, and especially missus clinton, historically antimilitary--(an image, incidentally, that is only enhanced today by her 
president as a construct would still be viable... missus clinton's obstacles would be limited largely to standard-issue clintonisms: corruption, abuse, malpractice, malfeasance, megalomania, rape and treason... and, in spite of 