"Only dull people are brilliant at breakfast"
-Oscar Wilde		 Brilliant at Breakfast title banner "The liberal soul shall be made fat, and he that watereth, shall be watered also himself."
-- Proverbs 11:25
"...you have a choice: be a fighting liberal or sit quietly. I know what I am, what are you?" -- Steve Gilliard, 1964 - 2007

"For straight up monster-stomping goodness, nothing makes smoke shoot out my ears like Brilliant@Breakfast" -- Tata

"...the best bleacher bum since Pete Axthelm" -- Randy K.

"I came here to chew bubblegum and kick ass. And I'm all out of bubblegum." -- "Rowdy" Roddy Piper (1954-2015), They Live
Thursday, January 31, 2008

This is what happens when you don't stand up to a bully
Posted by Jill | 7:13 AM
So what are Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi planning to do about this:

President Bush this week declared that he has the power to bypass four laws, including a prohibition against using federal funds to establish permanent US military bases in Iraq, that Congress passed as part of a new defense bill.

more stories like this
President touts gains in Iraqi security
Bush asks support on Iraq, economy
Bush urges economic action, Iraq patience
Bush plan for Iraq would be a first
Senate votes to exempt Saddam's Iraq from suits
Bush made the assertion in a signing statement that he issued late Monday after signing the National Defense Authorization Act for 2008. In the signing statement, Bush asserted that four sections of the bill unconstitutionally infringe on his powers, and so the executive branch is not bound to obey them.

"Provisions of the act . . . purport to impose requirements that could inhibit the president's ability to carry out his constitutional obligations to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, to protect national security, to supervise the executive branch, and to execute his authority as commander in chief," Bush said. "The executive branch shall construe such provisions in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President."

One section Bush targeted created a statute that forbids spending taxpayer money "to establish any military installation or base for the purpose of providing for the permanent stationing of United States Armed Forces in Iraq" or "to exercise United States control of the oil resources of Iraq."

The Bush administration is negotiating a long-term agreement with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. The agreement is to include the basing of US troops in Iraq after 2008, as well as security guarantees and other economic and political ties between the United States and Iraq.

The negotiations have drawn fire in part because the administration has said it does not intend to designate the compact as a "treaty," and so will not submit it to Congress for approval. Critics are also concerned Bush might lock the United States into a deal that would make it difficult for the next president to withdraw US troops from Iraq.

"Every time a senior administration official is asked about permanent US military bases in Iraq, they contend that it is not their intention to construct such facilities," said Senator Robert P. Casey Jr., Democrat of Pennsylvania, in a Senate speech yesterday. "Yet this signing statement issued by the president yesterday is the clearest signal yet that the administration wants to hold this option in reserve."

Several other congressional Democrats also took issue with the signing statement.


So are they going to just talk, or are they going to do something to rein in this guy before he hogties the next president before s/he even takes office?

Labels: , , ,

3 comments
Bookmark and Share
3 Comments:
Blogger Kathy Rogers said...
I don't have a political blog. But your last four posts are so Dead On that I'm considering just streaming your stuff on my blog in place of my stupid slice-of-life meanderings.

OK, not really. But I am getting kind of Fan Girl about your blog.

Keep up the good work.
1/31/08, 10:42 AM  
Blogger dguzman said...
What KathyR said, only I do have a political blog. But I'm not brilliant at breakfast, or any other time of the day. You, however, rule.
1/31/08, 4:00 PM  
Blogger Jayhawk said...
Actually, a treaty approved by Congress would "hogtie the next president's hands." An executive agreement between the president and a foreign nation would not. The next president would be quite able to say "That was between you and George Bush. This is me."

The media is hyping this quite a lot, but several scholars, and the references escape me at the moment, have pointed out that such executive agreements are binding only for the term of office. Certainly this is an example of Bush's overweening arrogance, but it's not quite the boogeyman it's being protrayed as.
1/31/08, 6:02 PM  
Post a Comment
<< Home