Nancy Pelosi Going to Syria - Page 4

Nepa · #31 04-04-2007, 12:34 AM

[ QUOTE ]
It would be total chaos to have 100 senators and 535 Congressman traveling the world negotiating treaties. Nancy Pelosi is making an ass out of herself and that makes me happy.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe she is just there on a visit and I do not believe she is negotiating treaties. What evidence do you have that she is negotiating treaties?

I think what you are seeing now in the congress is the separation of powers. No longer is President Bush able to hand a bill to the congress and have them rubber stamp it.

Dan. · #32 04-04-2007, 12:36 AM

[ QUOTE ]
It would be total chaos to have 100 senators and 535 Congressman traveling the world negotiating treaties. Nancy Pelosi is making an ass out of herself and that makes me happy. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree completely! Finally we can see eye-to-eye! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] I only want 100 Senators and 435 congressmen out and about. 100 Senators and 535 Congressmen really would be chaos. I'd be all like "wtf are these 100 extra imposters?!??!"

cardcounter0 · #33 04-04-2007, 03:31 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It would be total chaos to have 100 senators and 535 Congressman traveling the world negotiating treaties. Nancy Pelosi is making an ass out of herself and that makes me happy. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree completely! Finally we can see eye-to-eye! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] I only want 100 Senators and 435 congressmen out and about. 100 Senators and 535 Congressmen really would be chaos. I'd be all like "wtf are these 100 extra imposters?!??!"

[/ QUOTE ]
How many Senators and Congressmen votes will it take to fund the Syrian invasion? Or does the Constitution specify a blank check?

pokerbobo · #34 04-04-2007, 03:39 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It would be total chaos to have 100 senators and 535 Congressman traveling the world negotiating treaties. Nancy Pelosi is making an ass out of herself and that makes me happy.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe she is just there on a visit and I do not believe she is negotiating treaties. What evidence do you have that she is negotiating treaties?

I think what you are seeing now in the congress is the separation of powers. No longer is President Bush able to hand a bill to the congress and have them rubber stamp it.

[/ QUOTE ]

The point being that her going there lends legitimacy to their actions. the reason she should not go is if the executive branch is trying accomplish something by not having contact with them... the speaker of the house going is working against that objective.

Gingrich didnt go visit Milocovich when Clinton was in office. The Dems are just trying to make Bush look bad publicly...and it is at the expense of our country. They (she) is putting politics before patriotism.

Dane S · #35 04-04-2007, 03:52 AM

She is not negotiating foreign policy. As you have said about thirty times in this thread without seeming to understand what it means, she does not have the power to negotiate foreign policy. What are you even talking about?

tehox · #36 04-04-2007, 10:17 AM

You hate liberals. We understand.

Felix_Nietzsche · #37 04-04-2007, 10:39 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Dear Mr. Lyndon Johnson,
May I please go to Vietnam to see if the situation is seemingly as you say, since it is after all my responsibility and not yours to declare war?
Signed,
Congressional leader
Dear Congressional leader,
Thanks for your letter. Sorry, but no, you can't go. Trust me, I'm am an honest john and really brilliant strategist, the situation is exactly as I say. So please keep giving me carte blanche power to wage an unconstitutional war and stay in your office.
Sincerely,
Lyndon (or any other President, for that matter)

[/ QUOTE ]
There is nothing wrong with visiting troops. My issue is Pelosi is trying to play a foreign policy role where she has no authority to do so. Also your mock letters have no resemblence to reality because intelligence is diseminated to the legislative branch through the intelligence committees in the House and the Senate. The executive brnach has no monolopy of information as you try to portray. Perhaps you have swallowed the fish stories of Clinton/Kerry when they claim that Bush fooled them into going to Iraq. A complete lie by both senators. They get the same intelligence the president does. The only difference is the president gets this information in smaller daily doses why members of the intelligence committes get larger but less frequent doses of intelligence.

Felix_Nietzsche · #38 04-04-2007, 10:46 AM

[ QUOTE ]
She is not negotiating foreign policy.

[/ QUOTE ]
She is trying to play a role in foreign policy which is a violation of the concept of the separation of powers.

[ QUOTE ]
she does not have the power to negotiate foreign policy.

[/ QUOTE ]
I have said this many times in this thread. She should respect the constitional powers of the executive branch. My take is she thinks she can sweet talk Assad into being a nice guy... Her trip is undermining the foreign policy of the executive branch. If she wants to conduct foreign policy, then let her run for president. This way she has to be pass muster of the 300 million Americans instead of just the people of San Fran...

Felix_Nietzsche · #39 04-04-2007, 10:56 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I think what you are seeing now in the congress is the separation of powers. No longer is President Bush able to hand a bill to the congress and have them rubber stamp it.

[/ QUOTE ]
Oh? Since when was congress rubber stamping every bill that Bush wanted? Bush's social security reform idea was shot down. The Terry Schivao nonsense was shot down. And I can give many other examples... Despite what other say on this forum, I do NOT like Bush. I think he is causing a lot of harm to this country. I only voted for him because Gore/Kerry are worse. In retrospect, I wish Gore had been president because he would have **** things up so badly that the people would have elected a real conservative instead of a Rockefeller Repub like Bush.

PLEASE! PLEASE! Read this link on what separation of powers is. So next time you can understand it properly and use it correctly in a sentence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separat...s_Constitution

Dane S · #40 04-04-2007, 01:51 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
She is not negotiating foreign policy.

[/ QUOTE ]
She is trying to play a role in foreign policy which is a violation of the concept of the separation of powers.

[ QUOTE ]
she does not have the power to negotiate foreign policy.

[/ QUOTE ]
I have said this many times in this thread. She should respect the constitional powers of the executive branch. My take is she thinks she can sweet talk Assad into being a nice guy... Her trip is undermining the foreign policy of the executive branch. If she wants to conduct foreign policy, then let her run for president. This way she has to be pass muster of the 300 million Americans instead of just the people of San Fran...

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay... so she is violating separation of powers by trying to do something that it's impossible for her to do and that will never happen. Interesting theory.