Posted by
arandomguy on Friday, March 16, 2007 12:10:39 AM
Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean has made some interesting remarks as of late. He has claimed that he is speaking with foreign leaders in an effort to bridge relationships between their countries and the United States of America. He says he wants to repair the "extraordinary damage" the Bush administration has caused to US credibility around the world.
Says Dean: "I am trying to build relationships with other governments in preparation for a Democratic takeover. I want to make clear that there is an opposition in America and that we are ready to take power and that when we do, we are going to have much better relationships with them."
What is it with Democrats and interfering with Presidential responsibilities? Are they that power hungry that they believe they can do better than the President, even when they are not in office? Do they believe that it is there job to make up for the president's mistakes? Do they believe that they should act where the President will not? I don't know what they believe, but in case after case after case, I see Democrats increasingly violating core principles of our Constitution. They want to steal away the command of the armed forces from the President. They want to now take away his power to make foreign policy and to conduct foreign policy.
This is not the first instance either. John Kerry and others were over in Iran and Syria earlier this year, "building relationships" with leaders of those countries, because they believed their foreign policy was better than the president's, and that they should go ahead and exercise it even though they had no legal right to do so. It pisses me off to no end that people believe they can just ignore the constitution like this, and pretend certain provisions don't exist.
The Democrats don't have to like that the Republicans hold the white house. The fact is they do, and until that is no longer true, the Democrats do not get to make and conduct foreign policy. That is a strictly executive responsibility, as defined in Article II of the US Constitution. The Democrats don't even have to agree, and they can certainly voice that disagreement (though they perhaps should propose some clever alternatives). They do... should... NOT however get to decide they don't like the President's foreign policy, ignore it, and operate as if they themselves run the country.
It is also interesting that Dean says he doesn't like "magical thinking," when referring to Democrat claims that victory is inevitable. However speaking with foreign leaders in preparation for a "democratic takeover," seems like magical thinking to me. What makes Dean think the Democrats stand an ice-cubes chance in hell of winning come November 2008? Their positions don't resonate with people, and the only reason they won in 2006 is because the voters were upset about Republican inefficiency and corruption.
This kind of thing makes me hopping mad, and I hope there are others of you out there like me, who hate to see our Constitution violated in such a manner. The Democrats need to learn where the line is, and what that line is, and they need to remember that it is the PRESIDENT who is in charge of foreign policy, NOT THE CONGRESS. Again, they don't have to like it, but that's the way it is. The Republican's didn't supersede the President's authority when Democrats were President. This is because Republicans generally believe in following the Constitution, like it or not.