Comments on: Bush and Signing Statements http://poliblogger.com/?p=10820 A rough draft of my thoughts... Fri, 05 Oct 2007 17:51:24 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4 by: MSS http://poliblogger.com/?p=10820#comment-957524 Thu, 12 Oct 2006 21:40:58 +0000 http://poliblogger.com/?p=10820#comment-957524 SoloD, you ask an excellent question: "how would Republicans act if the name Clinton (Bill or Hillary) was substituted for Bush." I addressed this back in February, and concluded that Republicans have little to fear in this regard. And <a href="http://fruitsandvotes.com/?p=548" rel="nofollow">they know it</a>. (This is the same post that I linked above.) SoloD, you ask an excellent question: “how would Republicans act if the name Clinton (Bill or Hillary) was substituted for Bush.”

I addressed this back in February, and concluded that Republicans have little to fear in this regard. And they know it. (This is the same post that I linked above.)

]]>
by: PoliBlog: A Rough Draft of my Thoughts » More on Signing Statements http://poliblogger.com/?p=10820#comment-956763 Thu, 12 Oct 2006 18:38:17 +0000 http://poliblogger.com/?p=10820#comment-956763 [...] Last week I commented on some stories concerning President Bush and his use of signing statements and noted a link to a Congressional Research Service report that I noted that I would read and return to. [...] […] Last week I commented on some stories concerning President Bush and his use of signing statements and noted a link to a Congressional Research Service report that I noted that I would read and return to. […]

]]>
by: Michelle http://poliblogger.com/?p=10820#comment-943683 Sun, 08 Oct 2006 14:19:27 +0000 http://poliblogger.com/?p=10820#comment-943683 Society as a whole is changing on what is right and where are the limits. On the issue of surveillance, have we as a society have gone off the mark? Have We Gone Surveillance Crazy? http://americaninventorspot.com/being_watched Society as a whole is changing on what is right and where are the limits. On the issue of surveillance, have we as a society have gone off the mark?

Have We Gone Surveillance Crazy?
http://americaninventorspot.com/being_watched

]]>
by: SoloD http://poliblogger.com/?p=10820#comment-941183 Sat, 07 Oct 2006 10:55:10 +0000 http://poliblogger.com/?p=10820#comment-941183 The simple question to ask is how would Republicans act if the name Clinton (Bill or Hillary) was substituted for Bush in your post. Not only would there be howls of outrage, there would be talk of impeachment. And before Republicans complain that the Democrats wouldn't be objecting if it was Clinton (Bill or Hillary) I would remind them that Clinton (Bill) didn't use these statements in the same amount, or for the purpose of undermining or contradicting the will of Congress. The simple question to ask is how would Republicans act if the name Clinton (Bill or Hillary) was substituted for Bush in your post. Not only would there be howls of outrage, there would be talk of impeachment.

And before Republicans complain that the Democrats wouldn’t be objecting if it was Clinton (Bill or Hillary) I would remind them that Clinton (Bill) didn’t use these statements in the same amount, or for the purpose of undermining or contradicting the will of Congress.

]]>
by: Joe Connolly http://poliblogger.com/?p=10820#comment-940606 Fri, 06 Oct 2006 19:57:37 +0000 http://poliblogger.com/?p=10820#comment-940606 Power can only be utilized if allowed! http://connollyschronicles.blogspot.com/ Power can only be utilized if allowed!
http://connollyschronicles.blogspot.com/

]]>
by: Joan Russow http://poliblogger.com/?p=10820#comment-940593 Fri, 06 Oct 2006 18:34:03 +0000 http://poliblogger.com/?p=10820#comment-940593 With a president who presumes that he is above the law, and an administration that defies the rule of international law, the US has become a rogue state. Until the US finally complies not only with its own constitution but also with the rule of International law, sadly the citizens of the United States will be experiencing animosity from around the world. If the US wants to counter terrorism, and end the cycle of US paranoia and fear end the US contribution to global inserurity. If the US wants to counter widespread international anti Americanism (Anti-USism) the US should promote common security – peace, environment, human rights and social justice within a framework of international law – not contribute to global insecurity. The US administration has squandered the international good will that followed the attack on the towers. After the Attack on the twin tours, many were asking “why do they hate us”. Rather than really answering this question, and promoting “common security”; the US administration proceeded to give additional reasons for anti-USism around the world. Some of the many reasons could be (i) maintaining the over 750 military bases around the world; (ii) the circulation and berthing of nuclear powered and nuclear arms capable vessels in other states; (iii) the hypocritical attitude towards the development of nuclear arms; increasing its arsenal and condoning Israeli possession of nuclear arms. (iv) the misconstruing of art 51—self defense – in the Charter of the United, the Nations to justify the invasion of Afghanistan; (v) the adoption of a policy of pre-emptive agressive attack; (vi) the violation of the Convention Against Torture; (vii) the institution of ballistic Missile defense and the use of space for military purposes, in violation of the Outer Space Treaty etc.(from the 52 plus two jokers ways the US contributes to global insecurity). With a president who presumes that he is above the law, and an administration that defies the rule of international law, the US has become a rogue state. Until the US finally complies not only with its own constitution but also with the rule of International law, sadly the citizens of the United States will be experiencing animosity from around the world.
If the US wants to counter terrorism, and end the cycle of US paranoia and fear end the US contribution to global inserurity. If the US wants to counter widespread international anti Americanism (Anti-USism) the US should promote common security – peace, environment, human rights and social justice within a framework of international law – not contribute to global insecurity. The US administration has squandered the international good will that followed the attack on the towers.

After the Attack on the twin tours, many were asking “why do they hate us”. Rather than really answering this question, and promoting “common security”; the US administration proceeded to give additional reasons for anti-USism around the world. Some of the many reasons could be (i) maintaining the over 750 military bases around the world; (ii) the circulation and berthing of nuclear powered and nuclear arms capable vessels in other states; (iii) the hypocritical attitude towards the development of nuclear arms; increasing its arsenal and condoning Israeli possession of nuclear arms. (iv) the misconstruing of art 51—self defense – in the Charter of the United, the Nations to justify the invasion of Afghanistan; (v) the adoption of a policy of pre-emptive agressive attack; (vi) the violation of the Convention Against Torture; (vii) the institution of ballistic Missile defense and the use of space for military purposes, in violation of the Outer Space Treaty etc.(from the 52 plus two jokers ways the US contributes to global insecurity).

]]>
by: MSS http://poliblogger.com/?p=10820#comment-940587 Fri, 06 Oct 2006 18:12:53 +0000 http://poliblogger.com/?p=10820#comment-940587 Oh, and I elaborated on the <a>Republican legal thinking</a> that you allude to, as well. (See in particular, points #2 & 5.) But it took me till February to get around to that, and it was Poliblogger who prompted me to do so :-) Oh, and I elaborated on the Republican legal thinking that you allude to, as well. (See in particular, points #2 & 5.)

But it took me till February to get around to that, and it was Poliblogger who prompted me to do so :-)

]]>
by: MSS http://poliblogger.com/?p=10820#comment-940586 Fri, 06 Oct 2006 18:03:55 +0000 http://poliblogger.com/?p=10820#comment-940586 Steven, welcome on board. This, what I called "<a href="http://fruitsandvotes.com/?p=456" rel="nofollow">The Latin Americanization of the US Constitution</a>," was my main reason for unconditional opposition to Alito back in January. Better late than never, I suppose. Of course, Supreme Court nominees are "forever," while authoritarian executives and the supine legislatures that surernder to them are, we can hope, transient phenomena. Steven, welcome on board. This, what I called “The Latin Americanization of the US Constitution,” was my main reason for unconditional opposition to Alito back in January.

Better late than never, I suppose.

Of course, Supreme Court nominees are “forever,” while authoritarian executives and the supine legislatures that surernder to them are, we can hope, transient phenomena.

]]>
by: Stanford Matthews http://poliblogger.com/?p=10820#comment-940346 Fri, 06 Oct 2006 16:25:28 +0000 http://poliblogger.com/?p=10820#comment-940346 Hail King Andrew I, King Richard and King George. Hail King Andrew I, King Richard and King George.

]]>
by: Dr. Steven Taylor http://poliblogger.com/?p=10820#comment-940317 Fri, 06 Oct 2006 16:07:19 +0000 http://poliblogger.com/?p=10820#comment-940317 Kevin, Not to my knowledge, but I am not an expert on that area. I do know that the usage of these statements have reached a new level in this administration, so in some ways it is new thing. Kevin,

Not to my knowledge, but I am not an expert on that area. I do know that the usage of these statements have reached a new level in this administration, so in some ways it is new thing.

]]>