Skip to content

Say Congress.....got a minute?

Political Discussion
13 9 716
  • Excellent point.

  • Of course I would support those presidential powers if and when there is a president worthy of them.

    And I don't discount the possibility that Obama's advisers might prompt him to do the right thing at some point and then I would not want Congress to slow or halt that decision whatever it may be.

    As much as I dislike the Obama administration I also feel that the opposition does take the knee-jerk reaction too far sometimes.

    WSS

  • I have grown skeptical of having a president worthy of those powers. And there is a lot of wisdom in giving Congress and not the executive branch war making powers.

    This editorial by Rand Paul is not knee jerk in the least. And where Obama or people in his administration have chosen to insert themselves, especially in the middle east, the results have been disasterous.

  • I have grown skeptical of having a president worthy of those powers. And there is a lot of wisdom in giving Congress and not the executive branch war making powers.

    This editorial by Rand Paul is not knee jerk in the least. And where Obama or people in his administration have chosen to insert themselves, especially in the middle east, the results have been disasterous.

    @mohican said:

    I have grown skeptical of having a president worthy of those powers. And there is a lot of wisdom in giving Congress and not the executive branch war making powers.

    This editorial by Rand Paul is not knee jerk in the least. And where Obama or people in his administration have chosen to insert themselves, especially in the middle east, the results have been disasterous.

    If you give congress the powers, nothing will get done. Even on something like this where, judging by the comments from the conservative types where, there was widespread support, nothing has been agreed.

  • The constitution (I know, who follows it) very clearly gives war making power to Congress - and not the President. And the "get's stuff done" or "doesn't get stuff done" is a non sequitor to me.

    Stuff I want to see done - Repeal of ACA

    Repeal of 16th and 17th amendments

    Repeal act that set House representation at 435 members, no matter the size of the population.

    i could go on...

  • The constitution (I know, who follows it) very clearly gives war making power to Congress - and not the President. And the "get's stuff done" or "doesn't get stuff done" is a non sequitor to me.

    Stuff I want to see done - Repeal of ACA

    Repeal of 16th and 17th amendments

    Repeal act that set House representation at 435 members, no matter the size of the population.

    i could go on...

    @mohican said:

    The constitution (I know, who follows it) very clearly gives war making power to Congress - and not the President. And the "get's stuff done" or "doesn't get stuff done" is a non sequitor to me.

    Stuff I want to see done - Repeal of ACA

    Repeal of 16th and 17th amendments

    Repeal act that set House representation at 435 members, no matter the size of the population.

    i could go on...

    Agreed. 2 more words for ya:

    TERM. LIMITS.

  • @mohican said:

    I have grown skeptical of having a president worthy of those powers. And there is a lot of wisdom in giving Congress and not the executive branch war making powers.

    This editorial by Rand Paul is not knee jerk in the least. And where Obama or people in his administration have chosen to insert themselves, especially in the middle east, the results have been disasterous.

    If you give congress the powers, nothing will get done. Even on something like this where, judging by the comments from the conservative types where, there was widespread support, nothing has been agreed.

    @gftchris said:

    If you give congress the powers, nothing will get done. Even on something like this where, judging by the comments from the conservative types where, there was widespread support, nothing has been agreed.

    Dude, your government is ran by a bunch of fuckin blokes who still wear powered wigs and an 89 year old woman in a fucking flower hat.

    101652.jpg

  • @gftchris said:

    If you give congress the powers, nothing will get done. Even on something like this where, judging by the comments from the conservative types where, there was widespread support, nothing has been agreed.

    Dude, your government is ran by a bunch of fuckin blokes who still wear powered wigs and an 89 year old woman in a fucking flower hat.

    101652.jpg

    @walterwhite said:

    Dude, your government is ran by a bunch of fuckin blokes who still wear powered wigs and an 89 year old woman in a fucking flower hat.

    101652.jpg

    Well, 1 - they don't wear wigs; 2 - the queen has no input.

    And still, they get a lot more done than the US government.

  • @walterwhite said:

    Dude, your government is ran by a bunch of fuckin blokes who still wear powered wigs and an 89 year old woman in a fucking flower hat.

    101652.jpg

    Well, 1 - they don't wear wigs; 2 - the queen has no input.

    And still, they get a lot more done than the US government.

    @gftchris said:

    Well, 1 - they don't wear wigs; 2 - the queen has no input.

    And still, they get a lot more done than the US government.

    Thats debatable. But they should since your country is tiny in comparison.

  • @gftchris said:

    Well, 1 - they don't wear wigs; 2 - the queen has no input.

    And still, they get a lot more done than the US government.

    Thats debatable. But they should since your country is tiny in comparison.

    @diehardbrownsfan said:

    Thats debatable. But they should since your country is tiny in comparison.

    It is indeed. But then we do have to deal with the EU.

  • @gftchris said:

    If you give congress the powers, nothing will get done. Even on something like this where, judging by the comments from the conservative types where, there was widespread support, nothing has been agreed.

    Dude, your government is ran by a bunch of fuckin blokes who still wear powered wigs and an 89 year old woman in a fucking flower hat.

    101652.jpg

    @walterwhite said:

    Dude, your government is ran by a bunch of fuckin blokes who still wear powered wigs and an 89 year old woman in a fucking flower hat.

    101652.jpg

    Powered wigs... you mean something like this? That'd be pretty cool...

    proxy.jpg

  • @walterwhite said:

    Dude, your government is ran by a bunch of fuckin blokes who still wear powered wigs and an 89 year old woman in a fucking flower hat.

    101652.jpg

    Well, 1 - they don't wear wigs; 2 - the queen has no input.

    And still, they get a lot more done than the US government.

    @gftchris said:

    And still, they get a lot more done than the US government.

    Then why is over 1/4 of London in complete poverty?

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-24517391