Election facts

SweetbabyJ said:
And congress and the president have been ignoring the act, that's why I said the power of congress has been eroded when coming to military action. How do you think we send troops without a congressional vote of some sort?
Click to expand...
what

The War Powers Act specifically allows the President to deploy troops for 60 days without any Congressional approval. 90% of your examples fell within that time period and the rest did see Congressional oversight of some sort.

Read it.
 
Kurayami said:
what

The War Powers Act specifically allows the President to deploy troops for 60 days without any Congressional approval. 90% of your examples fell within that time period and the rest did see Congressional oversight of some sort.

Read it.
Click to expand...


The War Powers Act has been violated over and over, go look it up. And correct me if wrong, but the president cannot declare war without congress, unless under attack- and that's where the 60 day time frame comes in.
 
SweetbabyJ said:
The War Powers Act has been violated over and over, go look it up. And correct me if wrong, but the president cannot declare war without congress, unless under attack- and that's where the 60 day time frame comes in.
Click to expand...
The War Powers Act was a direct post-war response to the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. It has nothing to do with "being attacked."

I'm not quite sure why I'm even arguing this with you. Nothing that you've said invalidates any of my points.
 
I'm trying to show you that the president has more power than you implied in your first post. Read this,

The existing law, the War Powers Resolution of 1973, has been regarded as unconstitutional by every president since it was passed as a response to the Vietnam War, Baker and Christopher said. It requires presidents to report regularly to Congress about ongoing conflicts, but the provision has been flouted.

"No president has ever made a submission to Congress pursuant to the War Powers Resolution since 1973," former Sen. Slade Gorton, a Republican member of the committee, said Tuesday...Congress has not officially declared war since 1942
Click to expand...

War Powers Act needs fixing, bipartisan panel says - CNN.com
 
You've completely missed my point.
Did I not point out that the executive branch pretty much singlehandedly controls the federal bureaucracy?

This is why it's stupid to attempt to have a discourse with anybody on this forum.
 
You said
The only reason to even bother voting at this point is to influence the appointment of justices. And that only becomes a factor if any step down or die within the next four years.


It's great fun to watch you idiots run around during election years.
Especially those among you that are old enough to know better.
Click to expand...

If the executive branch controls the federal bureaucracy how can this be?

i.e. what if Mccain turns out to be a war monger like alot of people fear
 
Kurayami said:
Electing Obama won't "change" anything.
Universal healthcare will not happen.
Nuclear proliferation will not stop.
The national debt will not be fixed.
The US will not leave the middle east.
National security will be compromised.

McCain will be no better.
More people will die in the middle east.
The US' reputation will continue to deteriorate and the world will hate Americans more than it already does.
The economy will get worse.
Gas prices will be unaffected.
Terrorism will not cease.


Neither will offer significant government reforms. Even if Obama had the best intentions, he would be unable to CHANGE government because Congress is unwilling to shoot itself in the foot in order to support some sort of retarded idealistic concept that he doesn't even truly believe and only uses to dupe morons too stupid to understand how their government works and what powers are actually vested in the Executive branch. And McCain? He's Old Guard, but at least he doesn't try all that hard to hide it.


The only reason to even bother voting at this point is to influence the appointment of justices. And that only becomes a factor if any step down or die within the next four years.


It's great fun to watch you idiots run around during election years.
Especially those among you that are old enough to know better.


Discuss.
Click to expand...

what constitutional issues do you think would be affected by a supreme court nomination?
 
SweetbabyJ said:
You said

If the executive branch controls the federal bureaucracy how can this be?

i.e. what if Mccain turns out to be a war monger like alot of people fear
Click to expand...
I'm starting to think your problem is that you don't entirely understand what the federal bureaucracy is.

It is not a part of the legitimate government of this country.
 
No, I understand. You said the executive branch controls the federal bureaucracy, did you mean the other way around?
 
Well, its "legitimate". It's just not expressly written into our constitution. The executive branch felt that the bureaucracy was necessary to accomplish its tasks...
 
SweetbabyJ said:
No, I understand. You said the executive branch controls the federal bureaucracy, did you mean the other way around?
Click to expand...

umm...you are an idiot if you think its the other way around. :ftard:


edit: I agree with Kurayami. I don't think you understand what the federal bureaucracy really is...
 
It's really taking some idiotic leaps of logic to simultaneously claim that the executive branch has usurped a great deal of power to itself while claiming that it doesn't make any difference who the President is.
 
-§trife- said:
It's really taking some idiotic leaps of logic to simultaneously claim that the executive branch has usurped a great deal of power to itself while claiming that it doesn't make any difference who the President is.
Click to expand...
Go learn about your government.

Then we can discuss this point that sounds counterintuitive to the uninformed, but is absolutely the case.
 
Dumpy Dooby said:
The DC gun ban issue was decided by one vote. So: Second Amendment.
Click to expand...

I am still in awe of that decision...

I can't believe it was that close. I never realized just HOW BAD it was until that decision.

That reason alone is why I'd ever entertain voting for McCain. I disagree with tons of what he says and my views fit almsot perfectly with Bob Barr's but I don't know if I could live with myself if Obama was elected and then for whatever reason he was allowed to select some new justices for the supreme court. At this point it would be a gamble--playing the odds. We just had a decent turnover in justices..and the odds that a liberal justice would step down during a conservative admin and vice versa are pretty slim.
 
Last edited:
link_ said:
umm...you are an idiot if you think its the other way around. :ftard:


edit: I agree with Kurayami. I don't think you understand what the federal bureaucracy really is...
Click to expand...

I didn't say I think it's the other way around, look at the point I was making that led up to that question for kura.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top