Dan Froomkin - Bush Thumbs Nose at Congress

We're going to go out on a Limb, but, 'Dubya' Bush was a Sneaky Bast*rd
Not PC, Re-framed by Pat Darnell | Dec 29, 2012 | Bryan TX

[Picture LINK]

Dan Froomkin - Bush Thumbs Nose at Congress:
In 2008 the Democrats controlled the House, and 'Dubya' Bush thumbed his nose at them. He conveniently abused his power to ignore certain protocols of legislation that were put in place to balance powers of Houses and Executive, especially in spending for military bases and for declarations of war.

" ... It's about as basic as it gets: Congress has the power of the purse. And Section 1222 of the massive defense appropriation bill enacted this week [Wednesday, January 30, 2008] asserts that power. It reads, in its entirety:

"No funds appropriated pursuant to an authorization of appropriations in this Act may be obligated or expended for a purpose as follows:

"(1) To establish any military installation or base for the purpose of providing for the permanent stationing of United States Armed Forces in Iraq.

"(2) To exercise United States control of the oil resources of Iraq."  ( Dan Froomkin. washington post. Wednesday, January 30, 2008; HERE) ... "

    'via Blog this'
What Dubya did was to not veto any bills from the Democratic led Congress. He signed all the bills and invited all the authors to a grandiose signing photo op ... then afterwards he made Executive Notes called: "signing statements" on those bills. He did not intend to follow much of those bills. What a ruse, eh?

" ... But it's Bush's cavalier dismissal of the ban on funding for permanent military bases that really speaks volumes -- not just about his view of the role of the legislative branch, but also about his intentions for Iraq. ... " (ibid.)

All we at MooPig Political Round Ball Department can figure is that 'Dubya' Bush wanted it to look like he was actually working, when in fact " ... Calls to several Presidential libraries reveal that President Obama’s predecessor, George W. Bush, was on vacation more — 1,020 days — than any U.S. President since Herbert Hoover and possibly more than any other President in history. (Lauren Victoria Burke. May 08, 2012. HERE)... "

Bush's surreptitious scheme to "quietly assert his right to ignore legislation passed by Congress – including its ban on torture – first came to light in January [2006] due to some aggressive reporting by Boston Globe reporter Charlie Savage. (Charlie Savage, Globe Staff | January 4, 2006)"

" ... January 4, 2006

WASHINGTON -- When President Bush last week signed the bill outlawing the torture of detainees, he quietly reserved the right to bypass the law under his powers as commander in chief. (ibid.) ... "

CONCLUSION
'Dubya' Bush set precedence that others will surely follow. He was a lazy, anti-democracy, evil-doer, bully, who was raised in Washington, DC environment by his "public servant" dad.

MooPig is sorry that it could not break the codes of the past better while it parlayed through the Bush lame duck years.

We failed you, our faithful reader.

[Picture Source unknown]

_______________________Reference
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2008/01/30/BL2008013001912.html
http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=ask_this.view&askthisid=211
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/04/30/bush_challenges_hundreds_of_laws/?page=full
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/01/04/bush_could_bypass_new_torture_ban/
http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:h.r.4986.enr:
http://politic365.com/2012/05/08/obamas-vacations-of-any-president-bush-racked-up-the-most/
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/01/04/bush_could_bypass_new_torture_ban/
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/signingstatements.php#axzz2GUZbFnfx
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/signingstatements.php#q4
http://www.lazyiguana.org/blog_photos/signing/

I'll be Frank -- Part Deux

Previously: "Virtue is excellence and perfection, just as vice, its contrary, denotes a defect or absence of perfection. In its strictest meaning, however, as used by moral philosophers and theologians, it signifies a habit super-added to a faculty of the soul, disposing it to elicit with readiness acts conformable to our rational nature." (June 9, 2009; HERE)


Tornado Proofing our Family Structures with Virtue
by Pat Darnell

Families are proving ground for young ones learning virtues, simply by providing opposites of virtues. How? For instance, where else can a child learn bribery, graft, usurpation, avarice or jealousy, bargaining, pecking order, time-wasters, and blundering. A child learns early these torments, and how others deal with them -- where else besides in a family of siblings, cousins, grandparents, aunts and uncles. As above: "a habit super-added to a faculty of the soul, disposing it to elicit with readiness acts conformable to our rational nature."

For me that little definition implies family life -- no matter how virtuous or not -- is rational. Also, how can one depart from one's soul, and not seek virtues in the presence of one's own family members? Tornadoes will come in whirlwinds of family life, expect them.

Sure, one can read virtue in Shakespeare, or listen to music describe virtue in the remnants of life -- life as work, life as eating, life as sleeping, as history -- birth and death. It turns out, no infant I know can read at her age of one year. That cancels out Shakespeare as a source reference for Baby's dealing with her litter of siblings, cousins, parents and their siblings.... right?

You bet that is right. By age five, supposedly, a child may have locked in what her personality will be. It has to do with birth order, genetic arrangements and the condition of her domicile. No other frame of reference is used that magically dominates a child's condition.

Looking around, but of course, I find no first person narrative has ever been written from the first five years of infancy. Not even the first five years of Jesus's life is written in a first person guide to aid in our development as virtuous family members. However, later Jesus did ask his followers to receive His faith in His next of kin -- God the Father... eh? [Thanks to Garnetgurl]

Like some cultures, we also could consider children of infancy are absolutely in their own communion with their universe. As "beings" not of our world, Virtue is born there, in the secret language of infants.

I realize this is a monster assumption, on many levels, and therefore looks like a conspiracy. My frame of reference comes from observation of our six children. I sincerely hope our men-children and women-children transcend my assumption, and prove someday where virtue really does spawn. I only ask that some how we at last apply -- continually -- virtues, for which there is no law against, in our lives as family members. I know in my heart there is plenty room for improvement in all resolve of stormy times amongst family people.

There can be no harm in exploring possibilities of tornado proofing our domiciles with virtues purchased and forwarded by our ancestry; and should we invite an elephant into our Living Room, we should at least discuss it's presence there... no?

Response to Pribek.net: First Ever Caption Contest

[Contest- Click HERE]

Will the real Li'l Orphan Annie and Daddy Warbucks stand up please?