Evaluation of the policies of George W. Bush and his Republican conservatives on America.
Published on October 7, 2007 By COL Gene In Politics



The U.S. Constitution is the foundation for our rights and essential for the success of our nation. The federal government was brought into existence by the people through our Constitution. Second, the Constitution is the supreme law of the land that controls the actions of our public officials in all three branches of the federal government. Every elected official swears to UPHOLD the U.S. Constitution. The very foundations of Our Constitution are being violated by the highest elected officials in America and we are allowing this travesty to take place.

The most basic principal upon which the rights of our system are based is the Separation of Powers. This was intended to split and therefore limit the power of each of the three branches of our government. That principal, which was set out by our founding fathers, can not be violated if our government is to protect the rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

Two powers granted to Congress and ONLY to Congress by our Constitution are the power to Declare War and the Power of the Budget. Both of these Congressional responsibilities have been usurped by President Bush. In the case of the budget, Bush has been allowed to establish his spending priorities and the Congress has in effect abdicated their responsibility to set the spending. The most recent example is the S-CHIP funding which Congress passed in a bipartisan vote. Bush has vetoed that decision by Congress which is an abuse of his veto power. If Congress does not override this veto Bush and NOT Congress, as the Constitution Requires, will set the spending policy of our country. Once the majority of Congress chooses a spending level, they have a responsibility to insure that it is established and must override any Presidential veto to insure their constitutional responsibility is met.

What does our Constitution say about war? Our Founders divided war into two separate powers: Congress was given the power to declare war and the president was given the power to wage war. What that means is that under our system of government, the president cannot legally wage war against another nation in the absence of a declaration of war against that nation from Congress. When Congress passed the Iraq War Resolution they delegated that Constitutional power to declare war to the President. There is NO provision in our Constitution to delegate that power to the President. When Congress passed this clearly unconstitutional law, a case should have been initiated to challenge that Iraq War Resolution. No such action was undertaken and the third branch of our government, our courts, was unable to fulfill their constitutional responsibility to insure Congress and the President do not act outside the Constitution.

In both these examples George W. Bush violated his oath of office. Every time Congress does not insure their decision on the budget is enacted they fail their responsibility. The Iraq war resolution is a failure of first Congress then Bush and finally by the fact that a case was not brought to the Federal Courts to challenge the Iraq war Resolution. Technically the Courts did not violate their constitutional responsibility because they can only exercise that power WHEN a case has been initiated. Thus the fact that no case was brought to challenge the action of Congress to delegate a power only Congress can exercise was because no American choose to challenge the resolution in court. I for one believe that such a suit should be brought today to make it clear for the future that ONLY Congress has the power to declare war. Congress DID NOT declare war against Iraq. On December 8, 1941 Congress did not say to President Roosevelt he had the power to declare war against Japan, Germany or Italy. Congress DECLARED WAR and that enabled President Roosevelt to act under his power as Commander-in-Chief. That is NOT what took place in Iraq. Bush acted as both the Congress and as Commander-in-Chief.

We need to STOP the destruction of our Constitution by the President or Congress. The first step in that quest is to tell Congress they and not Bush need to set the spending of the United States. The second action is to bring a case that challenges the Iraq War Resolution which continues today to be the authority by which Bush continues the Iraq War. There is no greater danger then to allow the President or Congress to violate our Constitution!

Comments (Page 1)
9 Pages1 2 3  Last
on Oct 07, 2007
Quit wasting your time here and go file your suit.
on Oct 07, 2007

Reply By: Daiwa Posted: Sunday, October 07, 2007
Quit wasting your time here and go file your suit.



I have suggested that to Senator Obama.
on Oct 07, 2007
Obama's wasting his time here at JU? Hmm.   

on Oct 08, 2007
There is no greater danger then to allow the President or Congress to violate our Constitution!



which is why i keep saying everyone in washington needs to be replaced.
on Oct 08, 2007
Reply By: danielost Posted: Monday, October 08, 2007
“There is no greater danger then to allow the President or Congress to violate our Constitution!



Which is why I keep saying everyone in Washington needs to be replaced.”


Not every member of Congress is failing to follow the Constitution. I would agree with you IF a member of Congress is violating the Constitution. I would also look at any presidential candidates that support the Bush policies. Would they be likely to act like Bush if elected President and also violate the Constitution?

Anyone that believes trying to insure that our Constitution is not violated is "wasting time" is the "real WAST" and is anti- American!
on Oct 08, 2007
Anyone that believes trying to insure that our Constitution is not violated is "wasting time" is the "real WAST" and is anti- American!


stop ranting.

and those who are not trying to change the constitution are allowing the others to do so. meaning that they need to be replaced as well.


as for the congress not declaring war. when they stated that the president could attack Iraq if he fault it was necessary. to me that is a declaration of war.

they just wanted a way out of it if things went wrong.
on Oct 08, 2007
Constitution is not violated is "wasting time" is the "real WAST" and is anti- American!
Reply | Edit | Delete




Reply By: danielost Posted: Monday, October 08, 2007
“Anyone that believes trying to insure that our Constitution is not violated is "wasting time" is the "real WAST" and is anti- American!


stop ranting.” No one is Ranting—Saying we need to follow the Constitution is not ranting!

“and those who are not trying to change the constitution are allowing the others to do so. meaning that they need to be replaced as well.”

The issue is NOT changing the Constitution but following the Constitution!
on Oct 08, 2007
As for the congress not declaring war. When they stated that the president could attack Iraq if he fault it was necessary. To me that is a declaration of war.

They just wanted a way out of it if things went wrong.

Better look again-- There was NO war declaration by Congress against Iraq!
on Oct 08, 2007
Another example of Bush trying to alter our Constitution is his use of “Signing Statements”. These statements are attached to bills passed by Congress before the bills are signed into law by the President. The purpose of these statements is to in some way alter or modify legislation passed by Congress. There is NO provision in our Constitution that allows the President to alter a single word of laws passed by Congress. His only power is to Veto a law and prevent it from becoming law and then Congress has the power to override his veto by a 2/3 vote in BOTH houses.

The Supreme Court said as much when they struck down the “Line Item Veto” law. They ruled that the Line Item Veto would have allowed the President to change the WILL OF CONGRESS, and that was unconstitutional. Never the less Bush has added these statements to over 600 bills. Although there have been a few other times when presidents have attaches signing statement to laws, these is NOTHING close to the way in which Bush has adopted this practice. I would also like to see a case brought to have the Supreme Court declare such signing statements without meaning and end this practice.

A review of the Bush Administration in coming years will reveal a LONG list of attempts to either alter or outright ignore the Constitution of our country during the eight years of his administration!
on Oct 08, 2007

Not every member of Congress is failing to follow the Constitution.


Please point me to ONE who is not, Col!
on Oct 08, 2007
Reply By: Gideon MacLeish Posted: Monday, October 08, 2007

“Not every member of Congress is failing to follow the Constitution.


Please point me to ONE who is not, Col!”

Any that Votes to override the Bush Veto on the S-Chip; Any member of Congress that voted against the Iraq war Resolution!
on Oct 08, 2007
Any that Votes to override the Bush Veto on the S-Chip; Any member of Congress that voted against the Iraq war Resolution!


Col,

First, health care is not a Constitutional right, sorry. If you want to make it such, a Constitutional amendment must be passed first.

Second, those are two issues out of thousands. You contend that only a select group of Republicans have violated the Constitution. I contend that EVERY ONE of the elected leaders in Washington have done so, and that some of them ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE are, in fact, guilty of high treason.
on Oct 08, 2007
I love the fact that Congress allowed all of this, according to Mr Troll here, yet it's Bush's fault. You know for the biggest idiot in this country, Bush sure is a genius. And man, he's got more people scared to death than any mobster, gang member or terrorist group past and present.
on Oct 08, 2007
sorry gene i thought you had something going here until you went off on another one of your bush rants,.
on Oct 08, 2007
Reply By: Gideon MacLeish Posted: Monday, October 08, 2007
“Any that Votes to override the Bush Veto on the S-Chip; Any member of Congress that voted against the Iraq war Resolution!


Col,

First, health care is not a Constitutional right, sorry. If you want to make it such, a Constitutional amendment must be passed first.”


It has NOTHING to do with health care for children. It has EVERYTHING to do with the Congress setting the spending policy of our country as our Constitution established. If Bush controls the spending priorities then the Constitution is not being followed. If the Bush Veto is overridden and the WILL of Congress prevails, they we follow what the constitution set out. The issue with Iraq is the same. Congress delegated their responsibility to declare war and that was improper. Bush took that action and acted beyond the authority granted to his office under the constitution. There are many other examples where our system is being subverted by Bush with the acquiescence of Congress.
9 Pages1 2 3  Last