Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Too much controvery on this board
Old 06-22-2007, 08:58 PM   #1
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
travelover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,899
Too much controvery on this board

There has been too much controversy recently, so I'm not going to comment on this recent development.

On Thursday, a Democratic-led congressional committee reported that since 2003, Mr. Cheney had exempted his office from an executive order renewed that year by President George W. Bush regarding federal procedures for dealing with national security information.


Mr. Cheney not only rejected a request to adhere to the procedures but also sought to the eliminate the office at the National Archives that made the request, said Henry Waxman, a California Democrat who chairs the House of Representatives Government and Reform Committee.



globeandmail.com: Democrats attack Cheney for secrecy
__________________

__________________
Yes, I have achieved work / life balance.
travelover is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 06-22-2007, 09:07 PM   #2
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
REWahoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Texas Hill Country
Posts: 42,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by travelover View Post
There has been too much controversy recently, so I'm not going to comment on this recent development.
If you are truly concerned about too much controversy, I would think the proper thing to do would be not to post this tripe. Sounds a lot like trolling to me.
__________________

__________________
Numbers is hard

When I hit 70, it hit back

Retired in 2005 at age 58, no pension
REWahoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2007, 09:12 PM   #3
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
dex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 5,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by REWahoo View Post
If you are truly concerned about too much controversy, I would think the proper thing to do would be not to post this tripe. Sounds a lot like trolling to me.
agree
__________________
Sometimes death is not as tragic as not knowing how to live. This man knew how to live--and how to make others glad they were living. - Jack Benny at Nat King Cole's funeral
dex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2007, 09:38 PM   #4
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
travelover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,899
Sorry, I was trying to be tongue in cheek. No offense intended.
__________________
Yes, I have achieved work / life balance.
travelover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2007, 06:38 AM   #5
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
ladelfina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,713
Problem is.. it is not "tripe". It's a real constitutional crisis (or could become one). If Cheney says he's not part of the Executive.. does that mean Bush is not his boss? He claims not -- he doesn't have to follow Presidential Directives! Does that mean "executive privilege" extends to him or not (if you conceive of such a concept)? How could he claim such privileges if he's not part of the executive!? This is not minor.

Cheney takes the role of VP into a realm not even claimed by the President himself.. that of absolute autonomy with zero accountability.
__________________
ladelfina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2007, 06:43 AM   #6
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,119
See I did not give any political response. Are you proud of me ?
__________________
newguy88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2007, 08:18 AM   #7
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
cute fuzzy bunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Losing my whump
Posts: 22,697
I guess about 320 million school textbooks are going to need to be changed...

http://www.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/pdf/orgchart05.pdf
__________________
Be fearful when others are greedy, and greedy when others are fearful. Just another form of "buy low, sell high" for those who have trouble with things. This rule is not universal. Do not buy a 1973 Pinto because everyone else is afraid of it.
cute fuzzy bunny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2007, 08:59 AM   #8
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
REWahoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Texas Hill Country
Posts: 42,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladelfina View Post
Problem is.. it is not "tripe". It's a real constitutional crisis (or could become one).
My "tripe" comment was not related to the accuracy/inaccuracy/content of the posted statement. It was directed towards starting a political thread sure to stir the passions of those who feel strongly one way or the other while complaining about board controversy.

Looks like I missed the sarcasm just as you missed the point of my response.
__________________
Numbers is hard

When I hit 70, it hit back

Retired in 2005 at age 58, no pension
REWahoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2007, 09:05 AM   #9
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
cute fuzzy bunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Losing my whump
Posts: 22,697
Uh oh, you're gonna owe justin some money...
__________________
Be fearful when others are greedy, and greedy when others are fearful. Just another form of "buy low, sell high" for those who have trouble with things. This rule is not universal. Do not buy a 1973 Pinto because everyone else is afraid of it.
cute fuzzy bunny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2007, 09:29 AM   #10
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
REWahoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Texas Hill Country
Posts: 42,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by cute fuzzy bunny View Post
Uh oh, you're gonna owe justin some money...

I'll pay him his 50 cents in installments...two cents worth at at time!
__________________
Numbers is hard

When I hit 70, it hit back

Retired in 2005 at age 58, no pension
REWahoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2007, 10:19 AM   #11
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
2B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Houston
Posts: 4,330
It is interesting from a constitutional standpoint. The whole "requirement" comes from an executive order signed by Bush II and he has come out in agreement that Cheney doesn't need to comply. Bush II could simply write a "clarification" to his order and the whole thing goes away.

The office of VP is established separately from the office of president. When amended, the change from "second in the electoral count" to the party ticket, there wasn't any real change in the constitutional duties -- wait for the Pres to die and preside over the Senate.

The "original intent" was that the VP would preside over the Senate as a full time job and be a champion for the body. John Adams did that as the first VP since he had a big part in writing the Constitution. However, Thomas Jefferson who also had a part in writing the Constitution never lifted a finger in the Senate and devoted his entire time as VP towards undermining President John Adams. He did an excellent job of it.

I personally think it's a stupid mess to stir up but it does not have an obvious answer. It is worthy of the Supreme Court to decide if it is allowed to go that far.

As far as "too much controversy" on this forum is concerned I don't mind discussion but I can't stand insulting or patronizing responses. I have come to enjoy the "ignore" option. I don't have many on the list but I feel good when I've added someone.

Of course, no one is probably reading this since I'm probably on the system's "defalt ignore list."
__________________
2B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2007, 10:22 AM   #12
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Rustic23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Lake Livingston, Tx
Posts: 3,624
It will be interesting to follow this thread to see if there are any political/constitutional scholars out there that choose to comment. The VP is an elected official. He can not be fired or replaced by the President. Yet he is a member of the Executive branch. He is President of the Senate and votes in ties. So how much automamy does he have?
__________________
Rustic23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2007, 10:27 AM   #13
Moderator Emeritus
Martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: minnesota
Posts: 13,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladelfina View Post
Problem is.. it is not "tripe". It's a real constitutional crisis (or could become one). If Cheney says he's not part of the Executive.. does that mean Bush is not his boss? He claims not -- he doesn't have to follow Presidential Directives! Does that mean "executive privilege" extends to him or not (if you conceive of such a concept)? How could he claim such privileges if he's not part of the executive!? This is not minor.

Cheney takes the role of VP into a realm not even claimed by the President himself.. that of absolute autonomy with zero accountability.
Oh to be in Constitutional Law class right now, what fun it would be. Cheney's office doesn't actually claim not to be part of the executive, but says it is not solely an executive office as it has legislative functions as well, given that the VP serves as president of the Senate. That argument is extremely weak, especially because the issue deals with executive functions of the VP's office. The arbitrator of disputes under the President's EO is the Justice Department, which is ignoring the issue.

The President could simply change the EO to exempt the VP. Why doesn't he? Or, if he does want the VP to be covered by the order, why doesn't he say so or put pressure on the Justice Department to resolve the dispute? Or maybe the President just thinks this is all minor BS that he shouldn't have to be bothered with. Or he doesn't know what to do with the VP and doesn't want to create any impression of a problem.

I question what authority Senator Waxman has in demanding answers from Cheney on this issue. This isn't a legislative vs executive dispute. This is an excutive office vs. executive dispute.

This situation interesting to me as it gives the dispute a flavor of a dispute between the VP and President. The President can't fire the VP if the VP doesn't behave. The VP office is an elected office. The President can only go get court orders or recommend impeachment. Interesting stuff.
__________________
.


No more lawyer stuff, no more political stuff, so no more CYA

Martha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2007, 10:53 AM   #14
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
travelover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,899
I posted this originally because I am always suspicious when an elected official wants to eliminate scrutiny. To me this is not a political or partisan issue, though I feared it would quickly turn into a right vs left squabble.
__________________
Yes, I have achieved work / life balance.
travelover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2007, 11:49 AM   #15
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
2B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Houston
Posts: 4,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martha View Post
I question what authority Senator Waxman has in demanding answers from Cheney on this issue. This isn't a legislative vs executive dispute. This is an excutive office vs. executive dispute.

This situation interesting to me as it gives the dispute a flavor of a dispute between the VP and President. The President can't fire the VP if the VP doesn't behave. The VP office is an elected office. The President can only go get court orders or recommend impeachment. Interesting stuff.
This is a great perspective. That's why you're attorney general of the ER forum.

I beleive the VP was supposed to have a meaningful role in the Senate in the minds of the original framers but that totally fell apart after Jefferson.

The office of the VP was probably best described by John Nance "Cactus Jack" Garner, first/second term VP of FDR, when asked what he thought of the being VP he replied as "not worth a bucket of warm piss."

If FDR hadn't decided to break the 2 term tradition, Garner would probably have been elected president. Since FDR decided he was the "king," there was a parting of the ways as Garner became upset at this break in tradition and in cutting him out of his chance to be president. That has really been the lure of the office since our country made the VP a "ticket" position.
__________________
2B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2007, 02:20 PM   #16
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
ladelfina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,713
With the VP, perhaps the history is hazy.. but apparently Bush himself considers his own office exempt from this classified info. directive as well... though nothing explicitly states that.

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/06/23/...cutive-branch/


Interesting parry by Emanuel (emph. mine):
Quote:
Washington, D.C. House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel issued the following statement regarding his amendment to cut funding for the Office of the Vice President from the bill that funds the executive branch. The legislation the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations bill -- will be considered on the floor of the House of Representatives next week.

"The Vice President has a choice to make. If he believes his legal case, his office has no business being funded as part of the executive branch. However, if he demands executive branch funding he cannot ignore executive branch rules. At the very least, the Vice President should be consistent. This amendment will ensure that the Vice President's funding is consistent with his legal arguments.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/6/23/132229/743
__________________
ladelfina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2007, 03:28 PM   #17
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
2B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Houston
Posts: 4,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladelfina View Post
With the VP, perhaps the history is hazy.. but apparently Bush himself considers his own office exempt from this classified info. directive as well... though nothing explicitly states that.

Think Progress Bush claims he’s not part of the executive branch.


Interesting parry by Emanuel (emph. mine):

Daily Kos: Emanuel Ups the Ante
I wouldn't say the VP history is hazy but less well known. There are constitutional issues that can be raised for the power of any branch of our government. Sometimes the people or institution just goes along and other times the issue gets thrown into Federal Court with the Supreme Court the final word (usually but not always).

The dems now control congress but by a slim margin. Since taking over, there have been non-stop investigations and assualts on repubs in congress and on the entire executive branch. Some of the attacks are deserved but I think they are going too far in most of their attacks. The threat to cut funding for the VP is something that can come back at them when the times change.

I think it's almost a given that a dem will be in the White House in 2008. That assumes they don't self-destruct with another suicide candidate like Kerry. Bush II was so disliked that Kerry still almost won. The dems will also probably keep control of both houses of congress. They will then have 2 years to show they can lead the country. In 2010 they will face the inevitable mid-term election and almost certainly lose many seats. They may even lose both halves of congress and then they have given the repubs the recent historical justification to repeat the current process on them.
__________________
2B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2007, 07:01 PM   #18
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
cute fuzzy bunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Losing my whump
Posts: 22,697
Quote:
This amendment will ensure that the Vice President's funding is consistent with his legal arguments.
Niiiiice...
__________________
Be fearful when others are greedy, and greedy when others are fearful. Just another form of "buy low, sell high" for those who have trouble with things. This rule is not universal. Do not buy a 1973 Pinto because everyone else is afraid of it.
cute fuzzy bunny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2007, 05:51 AM   #19
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
ladelfina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,713
Yeah.. since Bush apparently considers himself and his office also inexplicably exempt --despite no words to that effect in the EO-- maybe the Dems can threaten to w/hold funding for the Office of the President as well!!

Emanuel admits it is a 'stunt'.. but it's a logical one given the circumstances. One way or another this has to get cleared up.

Aside from all the classified stuff Bush lets him manage anyway.. Cheney has also been "stealing people's mail" w/in the WH for years.

Quote:
At the White House, Bellinger sent Rice a blunt -- and, he thought, private -- legal warning. The Cheney-Rumsfeld position would place the president indisputably in breach of international law and would undermine cooperation from allied governments. Faxes had been pouring in at the State Department since the order for military commissions was signed, with even British authorities warning that they could not hand over suspects if the U.S. government withdrew from accepted legal norms.

One lawyer in his office said that Bellinger was chagrined to learn, indirectly, that Cheney had read the confidential memo and "was concerned" about his advice. Thus Bellinger discovered an unannounced standing order: Documents prepared for the national security adviser, another White House official said, were "routed outside the formal process" to Cheney, too.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/chene...ers/chapter_1/

Colin Powell found out about the detainee order on the tee-vee. Rice had no idea, either. Ashcroft was "astonished". Cheney holds all the cards, or at least knows where all the bodies are buried; Bush is just a figurehead, but I think we've known that since day 1.
__________________
ladelfina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2007, 09:08 AM   #20
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
kcowan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Pacific latitude 20/49
Posts: 5,735
Send a message via Skype™ to kcowan
One thing the current administration is demonstrating is that the checks and balances in the design of government may be inadequate.
__________________

__________________
For the fun of it...Keith
kcowan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What's the best way to browse this board? Nords Other topics 11 06-03-2007 09:11 AM
Why in the world would you post to (eeeuw) a discussion board?!? Nords Other topics 88 08-22-2006 11:08 PM
This keeps getting deleted at the other board iwanttoretire FIRE and Money 12 03-20-2005 04:21 AM
New to board tuffy88 Hi, I am... 4 03-26-2004 03:44 PM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:49 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.