Examples??  And don't try to pull Kyoto because that was never approved 
by the Senate and the last Geneva Accord was not approved either.

THE ANNOINTED ONE wrote:
> Bush did not implement treaties he broke them without Congressional
> approval.
>
> On Jul 6, 11:55 am, dick thompson <[email protected]> wrote:
>   
>> How is this like what Bush did.  Bush did not implement a treaty without
>> the approval of the Senate first.  That is what Obama is trying to do.  
>> Suppose he implements it and the Senate votes it down.  Then what happens.
>>
>>
>>
>> Frederick The Moderate wrote:
>>     
>>> It seems the Dems are now doing exactly what Bush did - except it's
>>> the GOP who's compaining this time. Now if Obama starts telling us how
>>> "We absolutely must do this right away or they will blow us all up
>>> with WMDs!", he will have completed his journey to the Dark Side of
>>> the Force.
>>>       
>>> I don't like the smell of it but will wait to see if they actually try
>>> it, before getting to rattled...
>>>       
>>> On Jul 6, 9:14 am, dick thompson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>       
>>>> Sounds right to me.  I don't see where the president can just make the
>>>> treaty without the consent of the US Senate.  If I remember right it
>>>> takes both of them to approve the treaties.  It is not really a done
>>>> deal if the president signs it unless the senate also approves it.  
>>>> Guess they forgot that one.  Of course they also tried to forget that
>>>> when it came to Kyoto for a while as the Dems tried to force the US to
>>>> implement a treaty that the Senate never ratified.  Looks like another
>>>> one coming along.
>>>>         
>>>> *The Constitution Imposes Severe Limits On A President's Treaty-Making
>>>> Powers:  * Here's the relevant section
>>>> <http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_States_of_Am...>:
>>>>         
>>>>     He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the
>>>>     Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators
>>>>     present concur;
>>>>         
>>>> The Obama administration is finding that limitation inconvenient
>>>> <http://hotair.com/archives/2009/07/05/obama-hey-lets-bypass-the-senat...>,
>>>> and so they are thinking of "temporarily bypassing"
>>>> <http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/07/us-russian-arms-negot...>
>>>> the Senate.   Not on any important matter, just a little agreement with
>>>> the Russians on limiting nuclear arms.
>>>>         
>>>> I looked carefully through the Constitution, and could not find any
>>>> provision that allows a president to bypass, temporarily or otherwise,
>>>> that limit on his treaty-making powers.
>>>>         
>>>> Senator Byrd --- among others --- isn't going to like this one little bit.
>>>> - 8:08 AM, 6 July 2009   [link]
>>>> <http://www.seanet.com/%7Ejimxc/Politics/July2009_1.html#jrm7578>- Hide 
>>>> quoted text -
>>>>         
>> - Show quoted text -
>>     
> >
>
>   

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to