• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Does Dick Cheney believe in the Constitution?

ADK_Forever

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 6, 2008
Messages
3,706
Reaction score
1,001
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
YouTube - Dick Cheney Says The Powers Of The President Are Unlimited

Is this fool not the most dangerous VP, or man, in the world? With this neo-con, right winger whispering in dumbo's ear, is it any wonder why Bush has taken the illegal, anti-American, treasonist actions that will guarantee he goes down in history as the Worst President In History?

Listen to this entire video and then ask yourself,
"Does Dick Cheney believe our government should follow the U.S. Constitution?"
 
Unibrow Dude

"Unibrow Dude"
Listen to this entire video and then ask yourself, "Does Dick Cheney believe our government should follow the U.S. Constitution?"
Actually, the narrator appears to have fallen off the ex-jock turned sports narrator turnip truck and landed in politics.
 
Re: Unibrow Dude

"Unibrow Dude"
Actually, the narrator appears to have fallen off the ex-jock turned sports narrator turnip truck and landed in politics.

And just what exactly does that have to do with what Cheney said? :doh
 
YTY - ToT - Battleground

"YTY - ToT - Battleground"
And just what exactly does that have to do with what Cheney said? :doh
Cheney requested, propositioned, and specifically addressed contexts of the war powers act. - /wiki/War_Powers_Resolution#Questions_regarding_constitutionality


Here is the the (roughly) transcribed dialogue:
"CHENEY The congress clearly has the ability to write statutes and has certain constitutional authorities granted in the constitution.

CHENEY I would argue that they do not have the right by statute to alter presidential constitutional power.
In other words, you cannot override his constitutional authority and responsibilities.

...
They have, for example, passed the War Powers Act.
The War Powers Act is still in force today, it requires certain notifications to the congress and give them the authority to supercede those by a vote if they want to when it comes to committing troops.
No president has ever signed off on the proposition that the War Powers Act is constitutional.
I would argue that it is in fact a violation of the constitution that it is an infringement upon the presidents authority as a commander in chief.
Its never been resolved, but I think it is a very good example of the way in which the congress has tried to limit the president's authority and frankly can't."


/wiki/War_Powers_Resolution -
There is also an unresolved legal question, discussed by Justice White in INS v. Chadha of whether a "key provision of the War Powers Resolution", namely 50 U.S.C. 1544(c), constitutes an improper legislative veto. (See Chahda, 462 U.S. 919, 971). That section 1544(c) states "such forces shall be removed by the President if the Congress so directs by concurrent resolution". Justice White argues in his dissent in Chadha that, under the Chadha ruling, 1544(c) would be a violation of the Presentment Clause. The majority in Chadha does not resolve the issue. Justice White does not address or evaluate in his dissent whether that section would fall within the inherent Congressional authority under Article I Section 8 to "make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces."
 
Last edited:
Dick Cheney Says The Powers Of The President Are Unlimited

Is this fool not the most dangerous VP, or man, in the world? With this neo-con, right winger whispering in dumbo's ear, is it any wonder why Bush has taken the illegal, anti-American, treasonist actions that will guarantee he goes down in history as the Worst President In History?

Listen to this entire video and then ask yourself,
"Does Dick Cheney believe our government should follow the U.S. Constitution?"

No, Leading Question.

Leading Again.

Yes.

Your War Criminal Obamanation's Party wanted to continue the lukewarm "liberal" arts of war of ethnic cleansing of scary Shiites, using Saddam as a Wesley Clark "cork in the bottle" containing the 1979 French whine, until Saddam fell away into the dustbin a lucrative old age retirement, all in violation of the UN Charter, UN resolutions, and laws of our land, so apply that to what you think the Constitution says. { some links provided to back up what I said.}

"Article 1
The Purposes of the United Nations are:

1. To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;
3. To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion; and
4. To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends." Charter of The United Nations

"The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States;" Donate to the Legal Information Institute

I can hear Cheney, I do not need some MORON telling me what he said and getting it wrong.

"To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;" Donate to the Legal Information Institute

"But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history."
Barack Obama and Joe Biden: The Change We Need

"Stuart Varney: Is it, is it possible that America's interests have in fact been well served by the war in Iraq? Let me explain that. We have taken the fight to the enemy. The enemy is divided completely, and the enemy is now killing itself, fighting each other. Is that not long-term, in a way, in America's strategic interests?


GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well, actually, I don't think so. The enemy, so to speak, were the people that attacked us on 9/11. Saddam had, really, nothing to do directly with those people. He didn't encourage the attack. He didn't aid it. He wasn't part of it. In fact, they viewed Saddam as part of the enemy camp. So, we attacked Afghanistan. We took out the government that supported the people that attacked us, and then in my view, in a strategic blunder, moved against Saddam Hussein. He was contained. Yes, he was an unpleasant person. Yes, he was a potential danger like every, every tyrant I guess is, but he couldn't directly strike the United States, and he was performing the function of a cork in the bottle in the-


Stuart Varney: Ah.


GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: -Persian Gulf, containing the power of Iran
." (Wesley Clark, Obamanation supporter) 12/28/06 - General Wesley Clark on Your World with Neil Cavuto | WesPAC

"Iran is proceeding now in ways that were unimaginable until we invaded Iraq and basically did what they said, which is provide the Shia with the ability to do what they haven't been able to do in 1200 years, gain a position of dominance over the Sunni." (Democrat, Sen. KERRY, Obama supporter)

Impeach and put in prison the war criminal ethnic cleansers of the Obamanation!
 
Last edited:
If the above transcription is accurate regarding what Cheney said, what the hell is the problem?

All he's saying is what any responsible reader of the Constitution would conclude...that a legislative statute does not trump constitutional authority.

I see ignorant and irresponsible posters like ADK want to equate that to an argument of unlimited Executive authority, but that's his ignorance clouding his judgment.

Of course mere legislative statutes cannot trump constitutional provisions. That would destroy the adversarial nature of the three branches of government that the Framers designed. If Congress were permitted to minimize or otherwise repeal authority granted by the Constitution to either the Executive or Judicial branches then the three branches would no longer be co-equal branches. Congress would, by its own hand, have elevated itself to a superior position among the three branches.

Seriously, ADK, where do you see Cheney arguing for unlimited constitutional authority? He simply is not. He's properly arguing that as a co-equal branch, Congree may not rescind or otherwise alter the constitutional authority granted to the Executive branch.

What is your problem with that?
 
If the above transcription is accurate regarding what Cheney said, what the hell is the problem?

All he's saying is what any responsible reader of the Constitution would conclude...that a legislative statute does not trump constitutional authority.

No, that is NOT all he is saying. If you could remove your neo-con partisan blinders and listen, or in your case read, how Cheney answers the questions you would see that. But, as you have demonstrated over and over, that is asking too much of you.

I see ignorant and irresponsible posters like ADK want to equate that to an argument of unlimited Executive authority, but that's his ignorance clouding his judgment.

I can, and do, listen to someone I don't agree with and acknowledge their point. This is impossible for you to do.

Cheney is agreeing with what Nixon said, that "if a president does it, it is not illegal". And that is a crock of shiite! As I said, he admits this in his actions trying to immunize he and his law breaking, treasonist administration from prosecution.

Case closed. You lose... like always. :mrgreen:
 
Obviously, Dick Cheney hates the constitution, and must be killed for his beliefs!
 
If the above transcription is accurate regarding what Cheney said, what the hell is the problem?

All he's saying is what any responsible reader of the Constitution would conclude...that a legislative statute does not trump constitutional authority.

I see ignorant and irresponsible posters like ADK want to equate that to an argument of unlimited Executive authority, but that's his ignorance clouding his judgment.

Of course mere legislative statutes cannot trump constitutional provisions. That would destroy the adversarial nature of the three branches of government that the Framers designed. If Congress were permitted to minimize or otherwise repeal authority granted by the Constitution to either the Executive or Judicial branches then the three branches would no longer be co-equal branches. Congress would, by its own hand, have elevated itself to a superior position among the three branches.

Seriously, ADK, where do you see Cheney arguing for unlimited constitutional authority? He simply is not. He's properly arguing that as a co-equal branch, Congree may not rescind or otherwise alter the constitutional authority granted to the Executive branch.

What is your problem with that?

Cheney and Bush overstepped their authority, for sure - Especially with executive orders that seek to change laws. That is the jurisdiction of the Legislative Branch.
 
Cheney and Bush overstepped their authority, for sure - Especially with executive orders that seek to change laws. That is the jurisdiction of the Legislative Branch.
Are you referring to those many, many, "signing statements?"
 
Are you referring to those many, many, "signing statements?"

Correct. Bush does not have the authority to make many of them either. His job is to ENFORCE the laws Congress passes.
 
Correct. Bush does not have the authority to make many of them either. His job is to ENFORCE the laws Congress passes.

Actually, it seems obvious that he thinks his role is to "tell" Congress what laws they should pass. :cool:
 
I cannot wait for January 20, 2009 to come. Cheney can go to hell (even though I don't believe hell exists).
 
I cannot wait for January 20, 2009 to come. Cheney can go to hell (even though I don't believe hell exists).

I wonder if you'll admit that you miss having a competent President and VP in 2 years...
 
I wonder if you'll admit that you miss having a competent President and VP in 2 years...
What the hell are you talking about? We haven't had one the last 8 years!
 
Cheney has actively promoted an expansion of the powers of the presidency, saying that the Bush administration’s challenges to the laws which Congress passed after Vietnam and Watergate to contain and oversee the executive branch—the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the Presidential Records Act, the Freedom of Information Act and the War Powers Resolution—are, in Cheney's words, “a restoration, if you will, of the power and authority of the president.”[96][97]

Dick Cheney - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
YouTube - Dick Cheney Says The Powers Of The President Are Unlimited

Is this fool not the most dangerous VP, or man, in the world? With this neo-con, right winger whispering in dumbo's ear, is it any wonder why Bush has taken the illegal, anti-American, treasonist actions that will guarantee he goes down in history as the Worst President In History?

Listen to this entire video and then ask yourself,
"Does Dick Cheney believe our government should follow the U.S. Constitution?"

I think it's a mistake to think that Bush is innocent with someone whispering in his ear. No doubt Cheney is evil, and profiting from war. But then so is Bush. So did daddy Bush in the first Iraq war. So did Bush's grandpa, Prescott Bush before him when he made money from WWII and was a part of the financial architects of Nazism, since he was a director of the firm involved.

Ever notice how the financial collapse we are facing now how mimicked the great depression? Think Wilson. Then think of this Bush administration. Think about how Hitler did away with the rights of the people by staging a terrorist act, and then think of the Bush administration and the patriot act after a terrorist act.

Think about the "North American Union" legislation Bush signed without a single vote, the development of the "Amero" to replace all the currency in North America (Canada, The US, and Mexico). Think of the four divisions of world power - Asian states, North America, Arab, Euro...

How easy it would be to form a New World Order - A One World Government - when only four players in the game? How, with that "NWU" it would be easier to make the Constitution go away, since it does not apply to a single North American Union, because it is written just for the United States. The very Constitution the clueless Republicans think the Democrats want to destroy. Now go back to thinking about Prescott Bush and his ties to his grandson, George W. Bush. Think of Prescott Bush's ties with Rockefeller and the Morgans and so on and on...

No, I don't think they're fools.
 
I think it's a mistake to think that Bush is innocent with someone whispering in his ear. No doubt Cheney is evil, and profiting from war. But then so is Bush. So did daddy Bush in the first Iraq war. So did Bush's grandpa, Prescott Bush before him when he made money from WWII and was a part of the financial architects of Nazism, since he was a director of the firm involved.

Ever notice how the financial collapse we are facing now how mimicked the great depression? Think Wilson. Then think of this Bush administration. Think about how Hitler did away with the rights of the people by staging a terrorist act, and then think of the Bush administration and the patriot act after a terrorist act.

Think about the "North American Union" legislation Bush signed without a single vote, the development of the "Amero" to replace all the currency in North America (Canada, The US, and Mexico). Think of the four divisions of world power - Asian states, North America, Arab, Euro...

How easy it would be to form a New World Order - A One World Government - when only four players in the game? How, with that "NWU" it would be easier to make the Constitution go away, since it does not apply to a single North American Union, because it is written just for the United States. The very Constitution the clueless Republicans think the Democrats want to destroy. Now go back to thinking about Prescott Bush and his ties to his grandson, George W. Bush. Think of Prescott Bush's ties with Rockefeller and the Morgans and so on and on...

No, I don't think they're fools.

I hear that Alex Jones has a radio show.
 
I wonder if you'll admit that you miss having a competent President and VP in 2 years...

The last time we had a competent president and VP was in 2000.
 
The only thing wrong with Cheney is his title, it should have been "Mr. President" instead of "Mr. Vice President". We would all be much better off. He tells it like it is and that in a politician, is rare.
 
Cheney and Bush overstepped their authority, for sure - Especially with executive orders that seek to change laws. That is the jurisdiction of the Legislative Branch.

Hey, I'm all for reasonable arguments demonstrating such overreach. But whining about signing statements just ain't convincing.

BTW - if you are talking about Executive Orders, please cite one or two you believe sought to "change laws."

Thanks in advance.
 
The last time we had a competent president and VP was in 2000.

That you know of.

I think much was done without us knowing it that was quite competently conceived and executed but not well publicized.
 
Back
Top Bottom