T Nation

Cancel Funding to VP Office?

I am sure most up to date people here have read that Cheney has claimed that his office is no part of the Executive Branch so he does not have to hand over classified documents.

Despite the ludicrousness of that statement, a Senator has offered a unique counter to that: If you are not part of the Executive Branch, then your office does not need its funding from the Executive Branch.

Interesting move? We’ll have to wait and see.

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?bid=1&pid=207869

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Top_Democrat_announces_overwhelmingly_positive_response_0625.html

funny stuff

This is actually quite interesting from a legal perspective – The VP office is the only Constitutional position that straddles the executive and legislative branches.

For instance, if Cheney were to be impeached, do you know who would preside? That’s right: Cheney… ( http://instapundit.com/archives2/006575.php )

As for the claim that executive restrictions shouldn’t apply though, it seems any authority the VP exercises in the executive arena is actually a delegation of power from the President (just like the rest of the executive branch), so in the exercise of that authority he should be subject to executive restriction and regulation.

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
This is actually quite interesting from a legal perspective – The VP office is the only Constitutional position that straddles the executive and legislative branches.

For instance, if Cheney were to be impeached, do you know who would preside? That’s right: Cheney… ( http://instapundit.com/archives2/006575.php )

As for the claim that executive restrictions shouldn’t apply though, it seems any authority the VP exercises in the executive arena is actually a delegation of power from the President (just like the rest of the executive branch), so in the exercise of that authority he should be subject to executive restriction and regulation.[/quote]

Good post. Never really thought of it that way.

Nothing will happen, Cheney has outsmarted all of his competitors(says a lot considering he is a moron) and it would take years for any court to rule on this “case”.

In the meantime Cheney eludes any oversight and retires happily ever after, laughing all the way.

[quote]SouthernBrew wrote:
Nothing will happen, Cheney has outsmarted all of his competitors(says a lot considering he is a moron) [/quote]

Cheney is many things - a moron is not one of them.

[quote]SouthernBrew wrote:
Nothing will happen, Cheney has outsmarted all of his competitors(says a lot considering he is a moron) and it would take years for any court to rule on this “case”.

In the meantime Cheney eludes any oversight and retires happily ever after, laughing all the way.[/quote]

Cheney is incredibly bright for a politician and he continues to outsmart his opponents.

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
SouthernBrew wrote:
Nothing will happen, Cheney has outsmarted all of his competitors(says a lot considering he is a moron)

Cheney is many things - a moron is not one of them.

[/quote]

The mans a goddamn genius.

An evil, greedy genius, but a genius none the less.

While I truly believe Dubya and the rest of the crew are making their honest attempt to do what is best for America, I just can’t seem to think of Cheney as anything more than a greedy, Halliburton proxy.

Of course, who am I to judge his character…

Oh wait. I’m an American. That’s what I’m supposed to do.

Not really, there is a hell of a lot more he could do if he wanted to make money…

For example…He could attack Iran, arrange a small terrorist plot in the U.S

Go after Sudan(they have oil and the Democrats would support a “peacekeeping force”…

Cheney is a pretty damn good politician, I’m not sure how good because Bush is the President and I doubt anyone is going to use him as an example of a smart human being.

However he is a horrible tactician and even worse he is an idealist.

Combine those two and you get Cheney.

?Doubt is uncomfortable, certainty is ridiculous.?Voltaire

[quote]SouthernBrew wrote:

An evil, greedy genius, but a genius none the less.

Not really, there is a hell of a lot more he could do if he wanted to make money…

For example…He could attack Iran, arrange a small terrorist plot in the U.S

Go after Sudan(they have oil and the Democrats would support a “peacekeeping force”…

Cheney is a pretty damn good politician, I’m not sure how good because Bush is the President and I doubt anyone is going to use him as an example of a smart human being.

However he is a horrible tactician and even worse he is an idealist.

Combine those two and you get Cheney.

?Doubt is uncomfortable, certainty is ridiculous.?Voltaire

[/quote]

Wait… did you just call Cheney an idealist?

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
SouthernBrew wrote:

An evil, greedy genius, but a genius none the less.

Not really, there is a hell of a lot more he could do if he wanted to make money…

For example…He could attack Iran, arrange a small terrorist plot in the U.S

Go after Sudan(they have oil and the Democrats would support a “peacekeeping force”…

Cheney is a pretty damn good politician, I’m not sure how good because Bush is the President and I doubt anyone is going to use him as an example of a smart human being.

However he is a horrible tactician and even worse he is an idealist.

Combine those two and you get Cheney.

?Doubt is uncomfortable, certainty is ridiculous.?Voltaire

Wait… did you just call Cheney an idealist?
[/quote]

From a political “If we take out Saddam everyone will love us and the Middle East will find peace” type of viewpoint.

[quote]SouthernBrew wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
SouthernBrew wrote:

An evil, greedy genius, but a genius none the less.

Not really, there is a hell of a lot more he could do if he wanted to make money…

For example…He could attack Iran, arrange a small terrorist plot in the U.S

Go after Sudan(they have oil and the Democrats would support a “peacekeeping force”…

Cheney is a pretty damn good politician, I’m not sure how good because Bush is the President and I doubt anyone is going to use him as an example of a smart human being.

However he is a horrible tactician and even worse he is an idealist.

Combine those two and you get Cheney.

?Doubt is uncomfortable, certainty is ridiculous.?Voltaire

Wait… did you just call Cheney an idealist?

From a political “If we take out Saddam everyone will love us and the Middle East will find peace” type of viewpoint.
[/quote]

Then you’re not reading too much. He’s always been the opposite, a cold-hearted realist (not meant as a criticism really). Even his conversion on Iraq was more likely in a realist sense of using it as a show of strength, not as bringing democracy to the Middle East. That was other people’s bag (Wolfowitz, Feith, etc.).

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
Then you’re not reading too much. He’s always been the opposite, a cold-hearted realist (not meant as a criticism really). Even his conversion on Iraq was more likely in a realist sense of using it as a show of strength, not as bringing democracy to the Middle East. That was other people’s bag (Wolfowitz, Feith, etc.).[/quote]

I disagree, if he was a cold-hearted realist the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan would have gone MUCH better(although we wouldn’t have gone into Iraq).

His actions have been those of an idealist not of a realist.

A realist would have left Saddam alone knowing he kept Iran in check, he would have enforced our borders immediately, he would have kicked the other neocons in the ass for their idealistic ideas etc…

[quote]SouthernBrew wrote:
His actions have been those of an idealist not of a realist.[/quote]

We’re in Iraq to steal the oil, that’s Cheney’s angle (Bush has his own angle). Cheney didn’t knock off Saddam because he cares deeply about Iraqis having a democracy, hell Cheney doesn’t even like having a democracy over here all that much. Only a sucker believes that we have idealistic motives in Iraq.

We’ve been trying to get the Iraqi government to sign the ownership rights to their oil, over to our oil companies. Once that happens, ‘mission accomplished’ for Cheney.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines07/0228-05.htm

Well, it looks like Cheney and his office are backing off on their claims of not being part of the Executive Branch.

I guess the scheduled defunding vote, and the crap ton of past quotes by him saying that his office IS part of the Executive Branch took their toll.