Posts Tagged ‘Congress’

Congress Grilling FBI Director Comey

Posted by Troy on 7th July 2016 in Current Events, Political

Originally, I thought that this would be a total waste of time.  However, after seeing some of the highlights: WOW.  They did as good a job of making Director Comey look as inept as Director Comey accused Hillary of being, and that is saying a lot.  I am of the impression that the NSA must know about Director Comey’s affair or him looking up dog on clown porn or some other such thing.  That’s really the only rational reason why he wouldn’t press charges.  I think the most damning line of questioning came from Jim Gordon.  He went point by point about how her actions and lies pretty much suggests that she did everything so that no one would ever have access to things she didn’t want them having access to.  I also like when someone asked if the FBI director would ever give someone with these actions security clearance.  It is SAD that he couldn’t say, “No.  I would never give someone like this security clearance after they showed such reckless incompetence or disregard to safeguarding classified materials.”  That’s how you know he’s being held hostage.  If he really thought that the issue was she was simply incompetent, he would have been free to say such a thing because there is NO WAY anyone in charge of serious security clearance would EVER give ANY clearance to someone that showed THIS level of judgement.

Long Live the Constitution!

Rand Paul’s Epic Takedown of John Kerry

Posted by Troy on 3rd September 2013 in Current Events, Political

Thank you, Rand Paul.  You seem to be the only person in the government that actually cares about the Constitution.  Here’s a question for all of you peeps that say that the President can send our forces where ever, whenever.  If Canada fired some missiles into New York City, do you think we would buy it if they said, “Oh!  We didn’t declare war on you.  Our Prime Minister can just has the ability to do whatever he wants.”  Or do you think we would have the same caviler attitude if Obama was talking about shooting off some missiles into China for their numerous human rights abuse?  We are supposed to be outraged by the use of chemical weapons, but what is the difference between that and the human rights abuses of China?  The starving of citizens in North Korea?  All of the warlords and massacres throughout Africa and the Middle East?  Why do we seem to be so willing to get involved in this particular conflict and not any of the others?  1,400 people have died from chemical warfare.  Where was Obama’s outrage while 100,000 were slaughtered while he was busy pushing gun control and all his other pet projects?  The answer is that the only reason he cares about this is that he had to open his mouth and lay down this “red line.”  Now HIS reputation is on the line.  He doesn’t care about America’s reputation.  In truth, we should not view our reputation as in line with Obama’s reputation.  Just because you screw up and elect an imbecile for President does not mean you have to back every moronic stance he has.  Why are we determined to have innocent Americans and Syrians killed at our hands to save Obama’s reputation?  The Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war.  Presidents as far back as Kennedy have made the case that, as leader of the military, they can do whatever they want.  The fact of the matter is that an act of war is defacto declaring war.  Don’t believe me?  Have Obama throw a tomahawk down in China and try to explain the subtle differences to the Chinese.  It is clear from anyone that’s read the Federalist Papers, as Rand Paul obviously has, that Congress is supposed to declare war first before our forces are moved into foreign countries.  There is no upside at this point.  We can look like we chickened out or we can risk material and lives in war.  Obama can say that this is some sort of limited engagement, but will he still say the same thing if Russia sinks one of our war ships?  This situation is perilous and could drag us deeper into a bigger war.  And for what?  To help install Al Qaeda related forces to power?  Is that our big win then?  The other option is that the engagement is going to be so limited that it won’t accomplish anything at all.  If so, why do it?  If you’re not willing to actually fight a war, don’t fight it.  If you’re not willing to put boots on the ground and actually win the war, don’t fight it.  It’s that simple.

Long Live the Constitution!

Obama thinks we’re idiots

Posted by Troy on 10th October 2012 in Current Events, Political

There are two choices on the Libya attacks:  either the administration is incompetent, or they lied to us.  Of course, it could be both.  Both do make some sense… but I would say that I believe the Obama crowd is lying to us.  They knew that it was a terrorist attack immediately, and yet they told us it was all about the video.  Why?  Obviously because Obama had been gloating about how he had been bashing in terrorists’ skulls all over the place and killing Osama, and here we are!  Boom!  9/11, and a terrorist attack.  That’s not gonna play well in the polls, and Obama’s got an election to win.  So what does he do?  He lies!  He tells us that there was a spontaneous protest over a movie.  He knew the truth would come out…eventually, but by that time the American people would be busy shopping for Christmas and watching football and whatnot.  He hopes that we will have lost interest and it wouldn’t be a big deal anymore.  In other words, Obama thinks we’re stupid.  They really do.  I think that they believe that we’ll believe whatever they tell us to believe.  I can’t believe his audacity to hope that we’d believe all this!  Can you believe it?

Long Live the Constitution!

Obama Exceeds Constitutional Authority

Posted by Troy on 30th April 2012 in Current Events, Political

It is the power of the Congress to control the finances.  This is commonly called the power of the purse strings and is a part of the checks and balances system the Founding Fathers put in place. 

When Palestine decided to bypass the United States peace process and apply for statehood directly to the UN, Congress decided to withhold the 192 million dollars they were going to give them in aid.  President Obama has decided to pay the money to Palestine regardless of Congress’ wishes.  His rationale for this is that this payment is important to the security of the United States.

Even if you were to agree with his logic, you cannot give the President (or any branch of government) an easy work around for the checks and balances.  What if Obama were to say that internet security is important to the security of the United States and takes full control of it?  What if they say that energy use is important to the security of the United States and forces everyone to live in 200 square foot apartments with seven foot ceilings to minimize energy use? 

One of my favorite quotes is by William Pitt, “Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human liberty; it is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.”  This quote inspired a lot of the material in 2084.

I am sick of how many times this President has exceeded his Constitutional authority.  No one seems to be willing to cry foul.  At least some people cried foul when Bush exceeded his authority.  Where are these whistle blowers now?  Or is it only about the D or R after their name that really matters?

Long Live the Constitution!

War Powers Act

Posted by Troy on 17th May 2011 in Political

The deadline for the War Powers Act looms.  If Congress does not approve of Libya, Obama must pull all military resources out.  This could be an interesting political show down, but I don’t think it will happen.  Congress never wants to be seen as against the troops, so they always end up approving it.  However, with the back drop of the budget crisis, the Republicans could deal a huge political blow to Obama and taunt him to see if he will break the War Powers Act and risk impeachment.

There is talk about how the War Powers Act is unconstitutional because it makes the military shared by the Congress and the President, but this is not the case.  The President controls the military.  He commands them.  However, Congress is the one that declares war.  If a President commits troops on foreign soil without Congress declaring war, it is the President who is going against the Constitution and should be impeached.  He has no right to do this.  In fact, the Founding Fathers would have viewed such behavior as tyrannical and jeopardizing the United States best interests by putting way too much power into the hands of a single man who could act on a whim.

I, for one, would like to see us go back to the Constitution on this.  We should only go to war if Congress authorizes it.  That way, we don’t end up in all these stupid police actions.  And if we go to war, we should fight to win.  Trying to make war moral is nonsense.  As General Sherman said, “War is all hell.”

Long live the Constitution!