RSS 2.0
Reid and Pelosi Are Not The Commanders In Chief
In trying to understand the current conflict between the President and the Congress over the war in Iraq, it is helpful to actually read the Constitution. The Constitution is clear that Congress can not try to manage troop movements legislatively.
Article II, Section 2 states, “The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States . . . .”
By trying to dictate troop movements with a spending bill has it occurred to Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, or any of our citizenry that they are committing their own type of unauthorized invasion? They are invading the constitutional authority of the President. He alone is the Commander in Chief and it is solely within his constitutional power to “command” the military. The Democrats did not become the commanders in chief when they won the November elections.
Even the normally dem-friendly Washington Post has highlighted the unauthorized and unconstitutional invasion of the dems. In examining the actions of Ms. Pelosi over the last month the Post stated, “The really striking development here is the attempt by a Democratic congressional leader to substitute her own foreign policy for that of a sitting Republican president. Two weeks ago Ms. Pelosi rammed legislation through the House of Representatives that would strip Mr. Bush of his authority as commander in chief to manage troop movements in Iraq. Now she is attempting to introduce a new Middle East policy that directly conflicts with that of the president. We have found much to criticize in Mr. Bush’s military strategy and regional diplomacy. But Ms. Pelosi’s attempt to establish a shadow presidency is not only counterproductive, it is foolish.”
Foolish indeed — and treasonous.