Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

This says volumes about King George

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
MadisonProgressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-19-05 01:40 PM
Original message
This says volumes about King George
Q Thank you, Mr. President. I wonder if you can tell us today, sir, what, if any, limits you believe there are or should be on the powers of a President during a war, at wartime? And if the global war on terror is going to last for decades, as has been forecast, does that mean that we're going to see, therefore, a more or less permanent expansion of the unchecked power of the executive in American society?

THE PRESIDENT: First of all, I disagree with your assertion of "unchecked power."

Q Well --

THE PRESIDENT: Hold on a second, please. There is the check of people being sworn to uphold the law, for starters. There is oversight. We're talking to Congress all the time, and on this program, to suggest there's unchecked power is not listening to what I'm telling you. I'm telling you, we have briefed the United States Congress on this program a dozen times.

This is an awesome responsibility to make decisions on behalf of the American people, and I understand that, Peter. And we'll continue to work with the Congress, as well as people within our own administration, to constantly monitor programs such as the one I described to you, to make sure that we're protecting the civil liberties of the United States. To say "unchecked power" basically is ascribing some kind of dictatorial position to the President, which I strongly reject.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
klook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-19-05 01:42 PM
Response to Original message
1. "...people being sworn to uphold the law, for starters."
Um, like the President? Or did he have his fingers crossed when he took that oath?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadisonProgressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-19-05 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. I hate to tell him, but that's not actually a check
a check on yourself by yourself doesn't count
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
billybob537 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-19-05 01:43 PM
Response to Original message
2. Wow he so clear and understandable
I wonder who wrote that propaganda for BUBBLEBOY
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unpossibles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-19-05 01:45 PM
Response to Original message
3. so... they will monitor themselves
hmm. Kind of like letting my dog guard my dinner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grasswire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-19-05 01:47 PM
Response to Original message
5. that was a canned answer
the phrase "unchecked power" and the response "dictatorial power" have already been gamed by press conference rehearsals, I'll bet my best cat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bear425 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-19-05 01:48 PM
Response to Original message
6. Who was that reporter and will he ever work in DC again? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrary1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-19-05 01:52 PM
Response to Original message
7. And who can forget this prophetic statement by the Chimp boy...
Edited on Mon Dec-19-05 01:58 PM by Contrary1
"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator."

**Edit for spelling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arkansas Granny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-19-05 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Definition of dictator: a ruler who is unconstrained by law .
That pretty much says it all, doesn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dunvegan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-19-05 01:54 PM
Response to Original message
8. "... which I strongly reject."
Ah, proof positive that * is just another one of them "rejectionists."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
strizi64 Donating Member (192 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-19-05 02:12 PM
Response to Original message
10. "check"...... like Enron and Andersen? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-19-05 02:27 PM
Response to Original message
11. It seems to me that "we are talking to congress" is not quite the
same thing as "we are listening to congress".

And if the majority in congress is your supporters, would you hear criticisms even if you WERE listening?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 13th 2024, 10:44 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC