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 4)
9 PagesFirst 2 3 4 5 6  Last
on Oct 09, 2007
al gore is also not the only one to get the popular vote and lose.
on Oct 09, 2007

Reply By: danielost Posted: Tuesday, October 09, 2007
“because the confusing design in Palm Beach County FL ballot caused 3,500 votes not to be counted.


This was designed by the democrats because it wasn't confusing.”


It was designed by a democrat but it was confusing. Palm beach County was the ONLY County that used this design and the proportion of voided ballots was off the scale in Palm Beach compared will ALL other counties in FL. I live in FL and followed the election very closely. The ballot was a two page design and confusion was between Buchanan and Gore. BUCHANAN WAS THE FIRST NAME AND GORE THE SECOND NAME. Bush was third. The name was on the left and the punch was on the right. Voters in a highly democratic area punched their ballot expecting to cast a vote for Gore. There were surveys taken after the election and it was clear the democrat registered voters whose ballots were voided because of the double punch intended to vote for Gore. They discovered their error while in the voting booth and punched the ballot a second time intending to vote for Gore. 3,500 ballots in one small area populated with elderly Jewish democrats had their ballots invalidated because they were confused. There was never a question of these voters wanted to elect Bush and they did not intend to vote for Buchanan. That confusion and the subsequent double punch of 3,500 votes intended for Gore is the ONLY reason why Bush carried Florida and became President. If all the Votes in Palm Beach County were COUNTED AS THE VOTERS INTENDED, Bush would not have been declared the victor in Florida and would not have been elected President. This is what happened and no amount of BS from Bush supporters can change those facts.


on Oct 09, 2007
Reply | | Delete




Reply By: danielost Posted: Tuesday, October 09, 2007
al gore is also not the only one to get the popular vote and lose.

The issue is that Bush won IN Fl because of a error NOT BECAUSE HE REVEIVED THE MAJORITY OF THE VOTES IN FLORIDA!
on Oct 09, 2007
Another example of Gene's willful ignorance and monomania.

Our President is not elected on the basis of the number of votes received in the country. The Constitution has a little provision in it involving something called the Electoral College. There's also the litle matter of the judicial branch exercising its proper authority under the Constitution to settle the dispute in Florida.

For someone who squeals so loudly about adherence to our Constitution, you should know better, Gene, but you don't give a shit. You drag the Constitution into your arguments only when it suits you and ignore it when it when it conflicts with your prejudices.

Pretending that one county in one state decided the issue all by itself is ludicrous & conveniently ignores all the shenanigans going on in other close states where Bush lost by narrow margins.

But like I said, you don't give a shit about the truth, only your demented Bush Truth.

on Oct 09, 2007

Reply By: Daiwa Posted: Tuesday, October 09, 2007
“Another example of Gene's willful ignorance and monomania.

Our President is not elected on the basis of the number of votes received in the country. The Constitution has a little provision in it involving something called the Electoral College. There's also the little matter of the judicial branch exercising its proper authority under the Constitution to settle the dispute in Florida.”


YOU twist the truth. The issue is that if the 3,500 votes in Palm Beach Country had been counted as the voters intended the total Florida Vote Count would have given Gore Florida by 3,000 votes and he would won the electoral college votes from Florida. That would have given Gore the 2000 election and those are the facts! Because of an error, the votes of 3,500 people who voted for Gore were not counted and that allowed Bush to win Florida.

The issue of the voided votes in Palm Beach County has NOTHING to do with the Supreme Court ruling that ended the recount of votes in Florida. Those 3,500 voted were not part of the recount because they were voided due to the double punch which resulted from the confusion in the ballot design in that ONE Florida County. There should have been a special election just for president in Palm Beach County that would have allowed ONLY those that voted in the presidential election to cast their ballots so the WILL of the voters in that county were counted to determine who won the 2000 election in Florida. That would have given Florida to Gore by 3,000 votes!
on Oct 09, 2007
YOU twist the truth. The issue is that if the 3,500 votes in Palm Beach Country had been counted as the voters intended the total Florida Vote Count would have given Gore Florida by 3,000 votes and he would won the electoral college votes from Florida. That would have given Gore the 2000 election and those are the facts! Because of an error, the votes of 3,500 people who voted for Gore were not counted and that allowed Bush to win Florida.




i have a question for you and the rest of the democrats. unless you interview all 3000 people how do you know what their intentions where. you can't all you can do is guess and since you want them to be on your side of course they would be.
on Oct 09, 2007
all that florida proved was that the democrats think people are too stupid to know who or what they wanted to vote for.
on Oct 09, 2007



Reply By: danielost Posted: Tuesday, October 09, 2007
YOU twist the truth. The issue is that if the 3,500 votes in Palm Beach Country had been counted as the voters intended the total Florida Vote Count would have given Gore Florida by 3,000 votes and he would won the electoral college votes from Florida. That would have given Gore the 2000 election and those are the facts! Because of an error, the votes of 3,500 people who voted for Gore were not counted and that allowed Bush to win Florida.




“i have a question for you and the rest of the democrats. unless you interview all 3000 people how do you know what their intentions where. you can't all you can do is guess and since you want them to be on your side of course they would be.”

GREAT QUESTION

A survey was done after the election and the voters did confirm they intended to vote for Gore. The voters from this area were older Jewish democrats that would never have voted for Buchanan. There was never any possibility of confusion with Bush because he was third on the ballot. The issue was the voters first punched the place for Buchanan and then realized they made en error. They should have requested a new ballot but 3,500 of them tried to correct their initial mistake by punching the ballot a second time in the next position which was Gore. This was an error and that resulted is 3,500 people who VOTED did not have their votes counted for anyone. Their votes if counted as the voters intended would have given the TOTAL vote count to Gore by about 3,000.
on Oct 09, 2007
A survey was done after the election and the voters did confirm they intended to vote for Gore. The voters from this area were older Jewish democrats that would never have voted for Buchanan. There was never any possibility of confusion with Bush because he was third on the ballot. The issue was the voters first punched the place for Buchanan and then realized they made en error. They should have requested a new ballot but 3,500 of them tried to correct their initial mistake by punching the ballot a second time in the next position which was Gore. This was an error and that resulted is 3,500 people who VOTED did not have their votes counted for anyone. Their votes if counted as the voters intended would have given the TOTAL vote count to Gore by about 3,000.


I agree the butterfly ballots were somewhat confusing, COL. But WHY THE HECK did the DEMOCRATS approve them in the first place?

And, honestly, if you're too dang stupid to know who you're voting for, perhaps you deserve to lose the vote!

What happened in Florida in 2000 was insane, anyway you slice it. But there really was no fair way to re-figure those votes. They had to go down as the person they ACTUALLY voted for, not the one they INTENDED to vote for. Even a re-vote in Florida would not have addressed the issue properly; it would have only muddied the waters further.
on Oct 09, 2007
The issue is that Bush won IN Fl because of a error NOT BECAUSE HE REVEIVED THE MAJORITY OF THE VOTES IN FLORIDA!


This is strange don’t you think? Only in democrat controlled counties did you have voter irregularities. No blacks, or old people in republican controlled counties had a problem with the voting. These problems only happened where the supervisor of elections was a democrat, the people that designed the ballot were democrat, and the police that supposedly intimidated the voters was run by democrats. Yet it was Governor George Bush that tried to throw the election.

Don’t you think that with all those democrats in power and control they would have noticed republicans running around their area making trouble?

In Miami you had democrats caught driving around with blank ballots and a voting machine in his car.

Your argument would hold water if it was a republican that was doing all this or even any of this.

In Illinois you had dead people voting in democrat districts.

In others places you had 125% of the vote all voting for the democrats but you wish to claim that the republicans threw the election or some how cheated. When you have 25% more people voting than are registered voters something is wrong don’t you think?

With all the democrats cheating they still lost the election so it must mean that there is a substantial majority that voted for Mr. Bush and very few people that actually voted for Mr. Gore just to get the numbers close.

on Oct 09, 2007
Rumor has it that Gene was in the military but he did not seem to know that drug testing only started after the Vietnam War and was not fully implemented throughout the military until 1987. This would make it ridiculous to say that Lt. Bush refused to take a physical to hide his supposed drug use. Gene are you ever going to research your stories before you post them?
on Oct 09, 2007
A survey was done after the election and the voters did confirm they intended to vote for Gore.


so the democrats called 3500 people who they knew had voted for al gore and asked them if they had intended to do so.


come on the point is that this is a secret ballot so how in the world do the democrats know that they called the right 3500 people they don't. i am not as stupid as you or the democrats are.


remind me if i already told you this. it took 13 rule changes and 6 months before the vote came out the way al gore wanted it to.
on Oct 09, 2007
Reply By: Gideon MacLeish Posted: Tuesday, October 09, 2007
A survey was done after the election and the voters did confirm they intended to vote for Gore. The voters from this area were older Jewish democrats that would never have voted for Buchanan. There was never any possibility of confusion with Bush because he was third on the ballot. The issue was the voters first punched the place for Buchanan and then realized they made en error. They should have requested a new ballot but 3,500 of them tried to correct their initial mistake by punching the ballot a second time in the next position which was Gore. This was an error and that resulted is 3,500 people who VOTED did not have their votes counted for anyone. Their votes if counted as the voters intended would have given the TOTAL vote count to Gore by about 3,000.


I agree the butterfly ballots were somewhat confusing, COL. But WHY THE HECK did the DEMOCRATS approve them in the first place?

I do not know but I bet it was not intended to confuse voters so Bush would win!
on Oct 09, 2007

remind me if i already told you this. it took 13 rule changes and 6 months before the vote came out the way al gore wanted it to.

I do not know what you are talking about but from election night until today the TOTAL VOTE COUNT showed Gore was ahead by about 1/2 a million votes!
on Oct 09, 2007
I do not know what you are talking about but from election night until today the TOTAL VOTE COUNT showed Gore was ahead by about 1/2 a million votes!




and again stupid gore is not the only one to win the popular vote and lose the election. last time it happened is in the 50's.




9 PagesFirst 2 3 4 5 6  Last