CNN.com has just posted the following:

The Republican-controlled Congress that has largely given President Bush his way in post-9/11 America -- and largely kept silent even when his actions offended -- is now beginning to challenge the administration about the expanding role of the executive branch. </img>


More...

That is exactly the way the federal government SHOULD operate.

It's called "Checks and Balances".

And if the dumbass Democrats could EVER get their act together, there would not have been a Republican-controlled "everything".


No news here.

Don't you just LOVE how they always try to find some way to turn this into a "blame the democrats" issue?

Let's ignore what the Republicans are ACTUALLY DOING, and just blame the Democrats...

Did I ignore anything?

No.

I'm saying that there SHOULD have been a "balance of power" all along. Unfortunately, you Democrats can't seem to ever field a candidate that isn't a completely un-electable dumbass.

Perfect example: John Kerry. The 2004 Presidential election SHOULD have been a landslide for the Democrats, but you can't even provide a decent candidate.

Losers.

This article is about checks and balances of CONGRESS v EXECUTIVE.

And YOU are trying to turn it into a checks and balance issue of Republicans v Democrats, which has nothing to do with it.

These checks and balances exist even when it's all one party in power.
It's not the democrats' fault that the republicans have ignored the limitations of each area...

Jefferson made a valid point regarding the Democratic party. While this article is about Congress and the Executive, the article itself discusses party affiliation. (e.g. Republicans) It makes the assertion that the Republicans in Congress are standing up to the Republican President and exercising their authority.

If party affiliation is a nonissue in this article, then it should not have been mentioned in the first place, however, it was. Another attempt to say look at what the Republicans are doing. Quite frankly, Jefferson is right, perhaps if the Democrats could field a viable candidate, this would not be a problem. People on this forum have long complained about the Check and Balances being non-existent because the Republican Party controls the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of government. Why is that?? Perhaps it has to do with the simple fact that other than the Democratic party agenda of opposing everything Republicans do, they have no real agenda of their own. What a sad state for the opposition party.

dmk

And that is relevant.
Who is blurring the balance of power between Congress and Presidency?

But don't try to blur the issue here. Just because the Republicans are examined on one issue, the balance of power, doesn't mean that any lame retort against the Democrats is fair game.

IF you could show how DEMOCRATS were blurring the lines of balance of power, THAT WOULD be relevant.

But that's not what Jefferson did.


Say whaaaa?
I'm not saying that party affiliation SHOULD NOT be brought up.
I'm saying that we should stick to the topic of BALANCE OF POWER.

Jefferson's reply on "democrats" had nothing to do with the BALANCE OF POWER issue, unless you can point to something Jefferson meant that I missed.

Jefferson is trying to change the subject from "Power struggle between Bush, Congress", to an issue of "Power struggle between Republicans, Democrats".
And I see that you are joining him in that ploy of changing the subject...

Good lord you're stupid so much of the time!

It is LOGIC and COMMON SENSE to recognize that you will NOT have a balance of power - a checks and balances - when the SAME POLITICAL PARTY CONTROLS BOTH THE "ACTING" BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT.

But keep up the pointless post-humping if that somehow makes you horny.

You call me "stupid", and then demonstrate your own abject stupidity...

The "checks and balances" ARE NOT referring to "party" issues.
They are referring to the SEPARATE limitations and powers of the legislative and executive branches.

These powers exist REGARDLESS of which parties control the legislative and executive branches jointly, or separately.

For example, Bush DOES NOT have the power to wire-tap U.S. citizens without a warrant.
Yet Bush ABUSED his limitation.

YOU keep wanting to try to make this about democrats and republicans.

It's about the EXECUTIVE and LEGISLATIVE branches.

Just because the Republicans in Congress catered to their PARTY and not to their CONGRESSIONAL DUTIES is not a negative statement on the Democrats.
It's amazing that you try to paint it as such...

You and your fucking wiretaps. Get over it. You know as well as everyong else who is being tapped and why. You liberals politicize everything. Tell it so somebody who cares.