Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bush is the "Commander-in-Chief"!!!!!

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 (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Proud Liberal Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-14-07 11:34 PM
Original message
Bush is the "Commander-in-Chief"!!!!!
Does it annoy anybody else out there how all of Bush's apologists and Bush, Cheney, etc. keep ranting about Bush being the "Commander-in-Chief" as though it somehow "immunizes" him from any criticism of how he is running our military, how he is conducting efforts against global terrorism, and, most importantly, any kind of legitimate congressional oversight and restrictions (i.e. war funding)? Ever since 9/11, he (or one of his supporters/apologists) never misses an opportunity to remind us that he is the so-called "Commander-in-Chief" and indeed usually mentions it several times in any given week whenever addressing issues related to the military and/or his so-called "war on terror". What really irks me about it the most is that the same people who, for 8 long years disrespected and badmouthed Clinton (who was also our "Commander-in-Chief") for never having served in the military now blindly honor & celebrate a man who, if anything, only served (maybe) in the National Guard (and certainly never saw combat) but whose enthusiasm for fighting and/or provoking unnecessary wars seems to be endless and whose disrepect for the military is woefully evident in his neglect of our troops both in Iraq and here at home. Every other President in our nation's history has, of course, been the so-called "Commander-in-Chief" because of their command of our military but I do not recall anybody emphasizing this fact more often (or as loudly) than Bush has, not to mention the fact that Bush is clearly using his status as the so-called "Commander-in-Chief" to assert bold new powers (i.e. being able to unilaterally classify anybody as an "enemy combatant") for himself and his (mis-)administration despite (as far as I know) the fact that such "powers" that Bush is asserting under his assumed moniker have no basis in US law or in the Constitution. Is anybody else concerned about this and if so, what can we all do to challenge this? :wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
rpannier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-14-07 11:43 PM
Response to Original message
1. Lest us not forget
He IS the commander-in-chief
He IS the War President
He IS the Decider
He IS Commander Guy

I can't remember all the other titles he's given himself.

Wait...oh yeah...It's HIS government. I realise it's not a title, but merely suggests he owns it...I guess that makes him King, or Emperor, or Pharaoh, or Grand Poobah, or spmething like that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbieo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-14-07 11:48 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. When he activates the May 9th Directives,
you will really know he is the Commander-In-Chief!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emilyg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-14-07 11:48 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. It makes him
a pile of dog-dodo
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbieo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 12:05 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. The really scary thing is that no one is stopping him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sinkingfeeling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 08:58 AM
Response to Original message
5. Yes, and he's the first one ever, don't you know! Thereby, he is above all the laws of nature & men.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IDemo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-15-07 09:09 AM
Response to Original message
6. Why did the * Commander in Chief require a "War Czar"?
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 Wed May 15th 2024, 01:38 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) 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