Did the President of the United States get a UN Resolution to use force, or did he get permission from the U.S. Congress to use force when we invaded Kosovo? Did we have an exit strategy? Do we plan on letting them become self-governing?
On Jul 7, 9:26 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > Travis, > > Tell us how many times this has happened in our entire history. > > On Jul 7, 11:22 pm, Travis <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Dick: Do you know how many senators it actually takes to approve a treaty? > > > Didn't think so. Try TWO (2). > > > That is all. One (1) to preside over the senate and one (1) to vote yes. > > > That one (1) vote YES is two-thirds (2/3) of the senators present (1) and > > voting (again 1). > > > This was a grave mistake the founding fathers made when they did not make > > the vote a required two-thirds (2/3) of the senate. > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 11:14 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/~jimxc/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. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
