Permanent Bases - Bush Gives Congress the Finger. Again.

B

Bonestorm

Thrillhouse
So, Congress passed a Defense Authorization bill including a provision that barred the use of any funds from being used to esrablish permanent bases in Iraq:

SEC. 1222. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR CERTAIN PURPOSES RELATING TO IRAQ.

No funds appropriated pursuant to an authorization of appropriations in this Act may be obligated or expended for a purpose as follows:

(1) To establish any military installation or base for the purpose of providing for the permanent stationing of United States Armed Forces in Iraq.

(2) To exercise United States control of the oil resources of Iraq.
Click to expand...


Well, President Bush signed the bill. Great, right? No permanent bases. No so fast. Bush also issued one of his signature "signing statements" which essentially says that he will disregard the above section as it infringes on his ability to carry out his "constitutional obligations that laws be faithfully executed:"

Provisions of the Act, including sections 841, 846, 1079, and 1222, 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. The executive branch shall construe such provisions in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President.
Click to expand...

What a fucking joke.


Links:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c110:2:./temp/~c110SNBktH:e1220293:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/01/20080128-10.html
 
How the fuck are signing statements even legal?

Unreal.

Somewhere in Florida, McCain just jizzed his pants.
 
Beefy said:
How the fuck are signing statements even legal?

Unreal.

Somewhere in Florida, McCain just jizzed his pants.
Click to expand...


I have no fucking clue. The bottom line is that until someone actually takes up the issue, they have the force of law. I won't hold my breath.
 
uscitizen said:
Signing statements if enforced are a clear violation of the constitution.
Click to expand...

So why isn't Bush sitting in a cage eating bread and water?

Oh yeah, because the Democrats are pussies and complicit with him every step of the way.
 
Beefy said:
So why isn't Bush sitting in a cage eating bread and water?

Oh yeah, because the Democrats are pussies and complicit with him every step of the way.
Click to expand...

On the wussies part I fully agree, and agree mostly on the complicit part as well.
 
For the record, just to show what a raging fucking douchebag we have for a president, these are the other provisions he has invalidated with the stroke of a pen:

1) COMMISSION ON WARTIME CONTRACTING IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN.

2) PROTECTION FOR CONTRACTOR EMPLOYEES FROM REPRISAL FOR DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN INFORMATION.

3) COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE COMMITTEES ON ARMED SERVICES OF THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Because we can't have the contracting and contractors investigated. And we can't offer protection to whistleblowers employed by the contracting companies. And god-forbid if Congress is informed by the intelligence community on the conduct of the wars.
 
Dungheap said:
For the record, just to show what a raging fucking douchebag we have for a president, these are the other provisions he has invalidated with the stroke of a pen:

1) COMMISSION ON WARTIME CONTRACTING IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN.

2) PROTECTION FOR CONTRACTOR EMPLOYEES FROM REPRISAL FOR DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN INFORMATION.

3) COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE COMMITTEES ON ARMED SERVICES OF THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Because we can't have the contracting and contractors investigated. And we can't offer protection to whistleblowers employed by the contracting companies. And god-forbid if Congress is informed by the intelligence community on the conduct of the wars.
Click to expand...

If I remember correctly, he has used more signing statements than any other President.

I'm gonna ship him another box of pretzels.
 
i wasn't kidding or just making shit up when i said it. If you know anyone involved with the building of the bases you would know they are not temporary.
 
It was the installation of the super-secret door knobs that only work for Americans that tell you that nobody can use them but Americans. That was the first clue.
 
how so? I have said that the us is building permanent bases in iraq from the beginning.. I also said that it doesn't matter ir Obama, Edward, Hillary or any other person gets into office.. That Iraq would become the future Middle eastern base of operations for the US.

How am I an ass?
 
Chapdog said:
how so? I have said that the us is building permanent bases in iraq from the beginning.. I also said that it doesn't matter ir Obama, Edward, Hillary or any other person gets into office.. That Iraq would become the future Middle eastern base of operations for the US.

How am I an ass?
Click to expand...

Because it does matter. Because just because one president worked it so that it was weighted towards being a permanent policy, and just because some members of the other party are likely to go along with it, not all of them will, and none of them are bound in any way to do so. And he is showing you where members of the other party are attempting to block bush from doing so.
What is so hard to understand?
 
Desh said:
Maybe this is where the Missing money is going which cant be accounted for?
Click to expand...
No, that is paying off the Ayatollahs and other leaders who would otherwise be attacking us. Basically working the Faith Based Charity angle.
 
bottom line: Having our bases in Iraq is better then in Saudi Arabia for a number of reasons.

so unless we get a president that slashes military and abandons the middle east. Iraq is a better place to be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top