Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ChoppinBroccoli

(3,784 posts)
Thu Mar 7, 2013, 12:29 AM Mar 2013

Presidential Constitutional Authority Is NOW A Hot Topic On Everyone's Lips?

I find it funny how this has become a major issue NOW. When a lot of us were screaming that the President didn't have the authority to do warrantless wiretaps on our phones, or to hold prisoners indefinitely without a trial in Guantanamo Bay, or torture prisoners of war for information, or send Amercian soldiers off to die based on nothing, where was Rand Paul and everyone else who is suddenly outraged as if nothing like this has ever happened before?

While it makes me uneasy vesting life-or-death power in the hands of one person without any oversight, I recognize that in certain emergencies, that authority may need to exist. So I would suggest that the President DOES have this authority, but that if that authority is ever USED, that there has to be major, major oversight after-the-fact, and that there need to be serious consequences if wrongdoing is found. Like war crimes-type consequences.

But I think there's an awful lot of hand-wringing going on over this question when there doesn't really need to be. The President has the ability to send the military anywhere he wants for any reason for 30 days. If a President really wanted a US citizen dead, he'd just have that citizen conscripted into the military, he'd then concoct some forged intelligence of WMDs in some hostile country, ship that US citizen off to that foreign country, and let their military people off him in combat. Wait, that sounds kinda familiar. Was that the plot of a movie or something recently? I swear that sounds vaguely familiar.

11 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Presidential Constitutional Authority Is NOW A Hot Topic On Everyone's Lips? (Original Post) ChoppinBroccoli Mar 2013 OP
Part of the hand-wringing is over the fact that drones are cheap. PDJane Mar 2013 #1
Message auto-removed GRENADE Mar 2013 #2
I give a damn about rights; frankly, the drone thing gives me hives. PDJane Mar 2013 #4
Rand Paul wasn't around when Bush was president LeftInTX Mar 2013 #3
How has this become "a major issue"? brooklynite Mar 2013 #5
Been there, done that... 4nic8em Mar 2013 #6
Like I Said....... ChoppinBroccoli Mar 2013 #7
If I'm not mistaken, 4nic8em Mar 2013 #8
That is deadly dangerous partisanship and full blown amorality. TheKentuckian Mar 2013 #9
Indeed, I took this very personal... 4nic8em Mar 2013 #11
Yeah where were they 10 years ago when Bush signed the Patriot Act? Initech Mar 2013 #10

PDJane

(10,103 posts)
1. Part of the hand-wringing is over the fact that drones are cheap.
Thu Mar 7, 2013, 12:38 AM
Mar 2013

Jets are not, and if the country doesn't buy them, there will be several really sleazy defence contractors out of pocket.

It's a distraction.

Response to ChoppinBroccoli (Original post)

PDJane

(10,103 posts)
4. I give a damn about rights; frankly, the drone thing gives me hives.
Thu Mar 7, 2013, 01:09 AM
Mar 2013

That's not what I'm getting at. Like Dubya's sins, the only reasons that this is getting attention has to do with the money. It should have everything to do with civil rights, but your much-vaunted civil rights died in the 9-11 debacle, and no one posted the eulogy.

LeftInTX

(25,523 posts)
3. Rand Paul wasn't around when Bush was president
Thu Mar 7, 2013, 12:51 AM
Mar 2013

He's a libertarian. My hunch is he would be filibustering a Republican nominee too.

4nic8em

(482 posts)
6. Been there, done that...
Thu Mar 7, 2013, 02:00 AM
Mar 2013

How's this for a flash back....can anyone say "Unitary Executive"? If you'll recall, during the reign of Dimson, this was "all the rage" regarding torture, Patriot act, waterboarding and just about every fucking thing else Bush 43 did to justify his "war president" dictatorship. I'm sure some will remember...

ChoppinBroccoli

(3,784 posts)
7. Like I Said.......
Thu Mar 7, 2013, 02:04 AM
Mar 2013

..........the people who are outraged about the concept of Presidential Authority NOW were eerily silent back when a white Republican was doing the frickin' Riverdance on our Constitutional rights. Now all of a sudden they're all Constitutional authorities walking around waving copies of the Constitution as if it's something new they just discovered.

4nic8em

(482 posts)
8. If I'm not mistaken,
Thu Mar 7, 2013, 02:21 AM
Mar 2013

my memory recalls that during the Bush "Unitary"authority debate Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito himself was "all a twitter" and "wetting his gown" justifying Presidential authority, particularly during war. We are still currently engaged in Afghanistan. I wonder if he still feels the same now that a Democratic President is in office? Especially a very competent black one. Oh my heavens to betsy, the hand wringing must be absolutely awful now. I'm just curious, "why do they hate Murca?"...sumbitches.

TheKentuckian

(25,029 posts)
9. That is deadly dangerous partisanship and full blown amorality.
Thu Mar 7, 2013, 02:46 AM
Mar 2013

I think many just are about an angle of attack and circling the wagons and that is it.

It is what it is to me, not who it is other than really softening for "our guys" in consideration of the alternatives and the jackals at bay but the shit must be condemned on no uncertain terms.

4nic8em

(482 posts)
11. Indeed, I took this very personal...
Thu Mar 7, 2013, 03:09 AM
Mar 2013

At the time during which President Bush was actively seeking his "Unitary Authority", I was absolutely petrified of the possible passage of this "mandate" from the relinquishing of powers from the other branches of our government.

Here is the email I sent to my long time DEMOCRATIC Senator while the "Unitary Executive" was being kicked around for passage in the Senate.

My email was dated January 19, 2006

Senator XXXXX,

I am absolutely fearful of our current administrations consideration and illegal use of what Judge Alito refers to as the "Unitary Executive" privilege. I do not want this unlawful exclusion granted in any form, to any President, Democrat or Republican, now or in the future. After watching the Senate hearings on Judge Alito's nomination to replace Justice O'Conner's vacated seat on the SCOTUS, I am convinced by the response from Judge Alito during these hearings that he will promote and interpret this executive privilege to it's fullest, overriding any semblance to a system of checks and balances that is mandated by our country’s Constitution. Indeed sir, the President himself has already shown a great disdain for you and your fellow Senators by ignoring the power and the authority vested to the Senate to hold the office of the President accountable. Because of this most recently flagrant abuse of power by the executive, and the very likely possibility that Judge Alito will mandate this privilege by his interpretation of standing law, I passionately urge you to oppose his confirmation by whatever means that may be available to you. I certainly am no student of law, but I do understand the notion of "three co-equal" branches of the Federal government, and particularly what it was intended to provide the American people. Frankly Senator, in my opinion, this one issue would have the most detrimental impact on our nation’s future, any other nuances regarding Judge Alito aside. It is unbelievable to me that this privilege could even be remotely considered or validated by our Democratic government.

Thank you for your consideration sir.


He responded on the affirmative that he believed the President DID have the inherent authority and did indeed vote as such.

We all know the rest of the story...

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Presidential Constitution...