Complaint Review: US Congress

"Check your history. every president, (including President Johnson) has had generals and citizens offer their opinions on wars going on at the time. President Wilson. NO ONE was on his side! Your dismissive attitude (Sure,Whatever) is commonplace and is an example of the blind elite attitude the Democrats project! Take off your snow goggles, unless you are afraid of going blind with the truth!"

Did those Presidents fire everyone, and anyone that dared to counter the party line? Did they actively subvert other agencies of our government to bolster fraudulant ideas?

NO.

Sure there were disagreements (such as Truman and MacArthur). Sometimes disagreements run so deep, someone has to go.

But this is not the case here. Bush's wholesale dismissal and forced retirement of so many is ridiculous. The sheer number alone shows that its out of the ordinary, and obviously political (Sniff. smells similar to the way he handles our federal courts too eh? Gonzales. another cronie). The whole BS about snitching out on a CIA op. is the same deal.

Sorry bud, no snow goggles here. I think we know the truth now about Bush and his agenda. Only the completely blind (forget any goggles!) can still think this man is honest, and dare defend him with so much overwhelming evidence. Not only has his who agenda been "caught with its hand in the cookie jar", its hand is still in the jar and they just mock us when we tell them to stop.

Where is your "truth" when it comes to the connection between Saddam and Al Quada?

Where is your "truth" about the yellow cake from Niger?

Where is your "truth" about the WMD's in Iraq?

Where is your "truth" about who (Rove!) gave away CIA cover?

Where is your "truth".

The list is as endless.

Nobody can ever defend Bush and use the word "truth" at the same time. The two are about as distant as Charles Manson and Sanity.

Oh, and I love how political threads always bring up the point about "democracy" and "republic" and "representative" etc. yadda yadda yadda.

Someone brings up the subject of "we are a democracy" and then someone (always a Bushy) has to blast back "we are not". Then go on to explain how "we really only are this" blah blah blah. "its just REPRESENTATIVE" blah blah blah.

It basically comes down too "we dont believe that you should have a say in the way things are being run, because its diferent from what we believe. if you thought you had a voice in your government. you are mistaken. please let me twist reality for you so you understand that we dont care what you think and your vote means nothing. its what the Founding Fathers wanted. shall I break out my Websters Dictionary and look up DEMOCRACY for you? now please move out of the way so that the administration we support (yet no longer is supported by a majority the people) can go about doing its business against the peoples wishes."

That kind of crap is really the scary stuff. When someone has to stoop so low as to redefine, or clarify just what our government is...

...so they can go run amok!

Simplify it first, then water it down some more. Gotta make it thin, to walk all over it. Fudge the lines a bit, and make it all fuzzy.

Its the way dicators come to power.

So anyone that goes off on this tanget to justify an administrations actions tells me they have no respect for what the PEOPLE want. Break out your dictionary and spout off about the exact definition of what our government is. Find all the loopholes you want. Call it what you want. Break out a schematic of all the forms of "government", and point to the one we are "supposed" to be. Hell, make up a new name like Bushalist, or Neoconacy.

To me it is, and should always be a "Government of the People".

Democracy blah blah blah. Representative Republic blah blah blah.

Always the same. As soon as someone says "HEY! this is a democracy. I have a vote dammit!".

Some knucklehead has to come out of the wood work and say "Shut up, we are not a democracy! And for thinking so, you get nothing".

Well, after reading many comments on this post, and the redundant use of the word "democracy" and "representative democracy", I must state strongly that we do NOT now or have we EVER lived in any of these two forms of mob rule. The United States of America is a constitutional REPUBLIC, not a democracy. It was never intended to be a democracy and our founding fathers warned against the tyranny of democracy.

As a matter of fact, Thomas Jefferson described a democracy as "3 wolves and a lamb sitting around a camp fire voting on what to have for dinner!" In other words, mob rule. This is why we have an electoral college. An instution vastly hated by socialist democrats and republican liberals. Please do not feel that I am writing this post because of any party affiliation.

I am an independent voter. However, I can assure you that I would not vote for any candidate either major party vomits forth. We merely have the red socialist and cosmopolitians on the left and fascist control freaks on the right. The self-serving plutocracy and their media lackeys we are struggling with today was certainly not envisioned by our founders nor would it have been tolorated by them.

Thanks for listening.

I blame the president & the republicans for paying more for gas the gas prices now are $2.73 in my area & getting higher. The gas companies are stealing from us americans! we never had to pay $2.00 for gas until bush became president. now we have to suffer paying $2.73 for regular. The democrats have nothing to do with the paying more for gas! bush has screwed up everything! & so has the repubicans! let bush veto everything bush & the republicans have always said democrats have no plan for iraq.

I'm sure you will support a woman who made $100,000 on a $1,000 investment for president! She will revisit a National Health care program and again will fail. Her only claim to the White house is having lived there with her husband. History will not be kind to her or her lack of experience. Maybe Wesley Clark will be her VP nominee! That would be a pair.

Check your history....every president, (including President Johnson) has had generals and citizens offer their opinions on wars going on at the time. President Wilson....NO ONE was on his side! Your dismissive attitude (Sure,Whatever) is commonplace and is an example of the blind elite attitude the Democrats project! Take off your snow goggles....unless you are afraid of going blind with the truth!

Sure..... Whatever.

"So much "holdover" stupidity, self-important, and poorly trained, staff from the Clinton years, Bush should have fired them all, and THAT is the reason, I would vote against him in another election. He was too naive, Ignorant, and oblivious to the truth. He was set up and he took the fall. History will be recorded as such."


Sure. Whatever.


Stalin had the same attitude in the 1930's. Only with him he just had all of them executed. Russia paid for it dearly in the early parts of WW2. Not just their best but the only battle trained commanders wasted. The only way they pulled out of it was by the sheer numbers of troops.

Cannon fodder.

Disgruntled my a**. These are the same commanders that were forged in Vietnam, Granada, Panama, and the first war in Iraq. Maybe not as "glorious" as WW2, but combat still. Born and raised during the Cold War.

Did we have any better? Do we have any better?

Bush picks his cronies for political reasons only. Yes men and personal friends to the core. Disagree with his "politics" and your out.

I cant find anytime in our history, other than the civil war, that so many from the military have come out against what this President is doing.

Next thing we know he will have someone whos only major accomplishment in life is managing a horse show running "the war". After all, all those people in disaster management from the "Clinton Years" must have been "old" and "disgruntled". We can all see how managing a horse show was so wonderful for managing hurricane Katrina. Good thing Bush got rid of those "stupid, self-important, and poorly trained" folks. And put a real horse show manager in there.

History is recording all right.

It can even be seen from Google Earth now.

Just a couple of things. First, I hope that Wesley Clark is one of the last Generals promoted to their rank during the Clinton years, that continues to be a weak, ignorant "leader" screaming about the Iraq war! There is a reason so many "Generals" are retiring. they "put in their time" and now it is to their BEST interests to draw their retirement pay and stay out of harms way.

Personally, I wouldn't follow General Wesley Clark across the street, let alone to war! Now you have many retired Generals voicing their objections to the Bush administration and the Iraq war.

Hogwash! Mostly disgruntled, poor commanders, with poor leadership skills. Too willing to take the credit for success, rightfully belonging to the troops, for themselves. With superior insightful skills that make them qualified to be "armchair quarterbacks" calling the plays after seeing what works and doesn't work on the TV!

The retired Democrats who, through time became Generals, didn't properly train our servicemen, maintain our equipment, or help develop strategy, have the audicity to complain about the war, the troops, the President and yes, our country, should be demoted to Major and see their retirement paychecks reduced to that amount!

Their opinion was worthless when they were active duty, and more so now! Second, the cost of gasoline, please do some research, has gone up since the election of a Democratic majority, last November! The only reason I look at the Democrats to blame, is the fact that the worlds investors see how the Democratic US Congress is "blowing with the wind" and buying the "futures" accordingly.

Not knowing how the business world is going to react to the US Congress's actions is scary enough! That causes fluctuations, ERGO, higher gas prices.

Third, and lastly. Does anyone remember that George Tenant, the former CIA director was first appointed by the Democrat President, Bill Clinton? SO HE WAS THE Source of intelligence given to President Bush about Iraq! It was his department, that had a "covert" operative, Valerie Plame, suggest that her husband go to Nigeria to investigate the Iraqis attempt to buy yellowcake uranium.

Who knows their spouse better than that spouse's boss. NO ONE! She knew her husbands political leanings and his penchant for doing his job "Halfassed" He was a career diplomat. He had to brag about his "trophy" wife, Valerie Plame as a CIA operative! She had been outed for a few years before this situation came up. Only history will tell the truth, and the truth will likely be, Madeline Albright, needed a brain transplant, George Tenant, needed ten Democrat CIA operatives to find his own nose, and Wesley Clark, had he kept his mouth shut, the Bosnian war would have been over sooner.

So much "holdover" stupidity, self-important, and poorly trained, staff from the Clinton years, Bush should have fired them all, and THAT is the reason, I would vote against him in another election. He was too naive, Ignorant, and oblivious to the truth. He was set up and he took the fall. History will be recorded as such.

First you say that Pelosi had talked to the president first. The news (including your liberal media) reported that the White House did not want her to go. Fox news is not the only one upset about this. You Liberal buddies at CNN were the first ones that came out with the fact that what she did may be a felony. No one said they were upset about her scarf since that is the custom of the country and she did respect that (that must of been conjured up in your imagination).

Either she was set up by Israel or she lied to Syria. We have only her word and the diplomat from Israel. We may never learn the true story here.

You mention that Bush took a vacation the same time Congress Did. Please tell me what he could have done. Congress has to deliver him the bill before anything can be done. He has asked Congress to come discuss the issue and in their usual WHINY way they are saying they will only come if he agrees to a withdrawal first. The reason they are fighting him this way is because they know they do not have the votes to override a veto.

Charles, Please tell me how George Bush has caused gas prices to go up? You put the blame solely on him. Maybe if we elected some Congressmen and senators that care about the country instead of their own careers they would do something to help our country. Both democrats and Republicans..

Just my opinion.
The war in the middle east is not as simplistic as "blood for oil".
Other than the oil we drill for here in the US, from what country do we import the most?
It is not Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, in fact it is not from the middle east at all.
We import the majority of our oil from Canada.
Shale oil, and other fields in the Yukon.
The high price of gas is just a matter of the oil companies screwing us. Why? Because they can.
They have congressmen and senators in their pockets.

The oil lobby, the lawyer lobby, the gun lobby.
These guys are pretty much running the show.
Until there is some kind of reform, we may as well get used to it.

You think that congress gives a d**n about 3 bucks a gallon for gas?

They do not have your best interest in mind.

Just my opinion.
The war in the middle east is not as simplistic as "blood for oil".
Other than the oil we drill for here in the US, from what country do we import the most?
It is not Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, in fact it is not from the middle east at all.
We import the majority of our oil from Canada.
Shale oil, and other fields in the Yukon.
The high price of gas is just a matter of the oil companies screwing us. Why? Because they can.
They have congressmen and senators in their pockets.

The oil lobby, the lawyer lobby, the gun lobby.
These guys are pretty much running the show.
Until there is some kind of reform, we may as well get used to it.

You think that congress gives a d**n about 3 bucks a gallon for gas?

They do not have your best interest in mind.

Just my opinion.
The war in the middle east is not as simplistic as "blood for oil".
Other than the oil we drill for here in the US, from what country do we import the most?
It is not Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, in fact it is not from the middle east at all.
We import the majority of our oil from Canada.
Shale oil, and other fields in the Yukon.
The high price of gas is just a matter of the oil companies screwing us. Why? Because they can.
They have congressmen and senators in their pockets.

The oil lobby, the lawyer lobby, the gun lobby.
These guys are pretty much running the show.
Until there is some kind of reform, we may as well get used to it.

You think that congress gives a d**n about 3 bucks a gallon for gas?

They do not have your best interest in mind.

If people realize 6 years ago what would be happening today they would have never voted for bush. thanks to people voting for bush & to bush we know have to pay $2 for gas & for what nothing. We know have to pay $2.63 for gas today 6 years later in 2008 we will vote for a democrat presdient. gas prices are nearly $3 & what is their excuse this time to rise the gas prices. By next week gas price will rise to $2.70 & probally buy the end of the month gas will be $3.00 which it was. $3.00 during hurricane katrina in 2005.

Nowhere on any election form did I see, vote for this Democrat and we will end the war and bring home our servicemen/women. I haven't seen anywhere the "proof" that the Democrats in congress were elected to do so. I do know that the prevailing thought was that maybe a Democrat led congress might "stir" up things and get some things accomplished. Well, nothing has been accomplished, except ego trips for Reid and Pelosi.... I really wouldn't be surprised by a total abandonment of the Democrats in the next election! The American people voted George Bush the President twice....regardless of how hard the Democrats "squeal" about the 2000 race! Are we the people, happy with the way Bush has handled the war? NO, we are not. The ignorant and elite believe that by voting in the Democrats into Congress....is the quickest way to get out of Iraq.....not so. The "swing" voters (independants) voted in the Democrats, not because they wanted the war to end in failure....rather to win by other methods. If the election were held tomorrow....the Democrats would be totally blown away and mystified by their loss! Why? The would still continue to believe that THEY still know more than anyone, and they couldn't be wrong. he he he. The election of 2008 will be a eye opener for the Republicans and Democrats. I still believe in the American way of life.


Somehow, someway, the American people will be given a choice of "WHO" will lead, "WHO" will go to Congress and enact our laws. Most importantly, in the next year the American people will be very disappointed in the way the Democrats bicker, bribe, and "salt away" for their future, running this great and wonderful country. They can't help but loose, they are ignorant. Should the Republicans loose again....will tell them that they haven't embraced the facts yet! So please people, let's stop ignoring the facts and laying blame on Bush.....it is our fault...for not demanding our Congressperson, do their job!

John, Let me clue you in on some rebuttals to what you are saying:

"Are you telling me that 535 politicians are in a better position to make war staffing and supply decisions then the generals on the ground and the defense department?"

**The generals on the ground that have told Bush it's not winnable have all been forced into retirement. He keeps only Yes men generals on the ground, so yes, they do.

"If thy want to stop the war they have the constitutional authority to defund it. They won't do that because they know the american people don't want that. Instead they are adding a group of measures to a bill to BUY votes and dictating the deadline which they don't have the authority to do."

**What they said was that Bush can have his money to fund his war as long as there are deadlines to begin withdrawl. Whatyou may not understand is there was a gurantee of a specific deadline when Congress first authorized his use of force. All they are asking him to do is live up to that agreement.

"So they will put our troops in jeopardy because they are totally aware that the bill as it is will be vetoed and they had to take their precious vacation instead. I don't understand why they won'r negotiate now instead of wasting the time now to negotiate a jhouint house and senate bill which they know d**n well won't be accepted."

**The only person who has put our troops in jeopardy is our President who has gone to war based on lies and misinformation. There were no WMD's, there was no "yellow cake" from Nigeria (the true story behine the Plame affair), our own government has declared even within the last week that Saddaam had NOTHING TO DO WITH 9-11. Our troops went to Iraq for lies.

"Why didn't they work through their VACATION instead of delaying the bill. Oh yeah, they needed the vacation time so that the president Nancy can go and ruin rour relations instead of governing the country"

**Now the funny thing about your problem with them taking a vacation is BUSH TOOK ONE LAST WEEK TOO!! Why don't you get on his case for taking more vacation time than any other president, and this is in a time of war. He can go on vacation but HASN'T BEEN TO ONE SOLDIERS FUNERAL.

Oh, and as for The speakers trip to Syria, I see you right wing guys have your knickers in a bunch over the fact that she went and that she wore a head scarf. I guess you missed the article that said she spoke to the president about it and had his blessing for the trip, and that the First Lady wore a similar scarf on her last trip to the region. But I guess when you watch Faux News only, you only see one side of the issues.

Thanks, to bush being president gas prices has doubled to almost $3 it is know $2.63 in my area gas was $1.05 in 2002 before the war started know we have to pay $2.63 a gallon thanks to bush & the people, who voted for bush. Also, john why do u think they are so many bad businesses know treating people unfair today, yeap u guessed it. Thanks, to the republicans!.

Thanks, to bush being president gas prices has doubled to almost $3 it is know $2.63 in my area gas was $1.05 in 2002 before the war started know we have to pay $2.63 a gallon thanks to bush & the people, who voted for bush. Also, john why do u think they are so many bad businesses know treating people unfair today, yeap u guessed it. Thanks, to the republicans!.

Thanks, to bush being president gas prices has doubled to almost $3 it is know $2.63 in my area gas was $1.05 in 2002 before the war started know we have to pay $2.63 a gallon thanks to bush & the people, who voted for bush. Also, john why do u think they are so many bad businesses know treating people unfair today, yeap u guessed it. Thanks, to the republicans!.

Let, bush veto everything bush is the most stubborn president we have ever had their is no reason to continue to stay in iraq, & keep killing our troops!. The, republicans never cared for the troops the demcorats get accused of not supporting them!, well let bush veto everything the democrats are in power & can disapprove everything of bush!. Bush, needs to realize he has to work with democrats a divided country, will not stand!.

Let, bush veto everything bush is the most stubborn president we have ever had their is no reason to continue to stay in iraq, & keep killing our troops!. The, republicans never cared for the troops the demcorats get accused of not supporting them!, well let bush veto everything the democrats are in power & can disapprove everything of bush!. Bush, needs to realize he has to work with democrats a divided country, will not stand!.

Let, bush veto everything bush is the most stubborn president we have ever had their is no reason to continue to stay in iraq, & keep killing our troops!. The, republicans never cared for the troops the demcorats get accused of not supporting them!, well let bush veto everything the democrats are in power & can disapprove everything of bush!. Bush, needs to realize he has to work with democrats a divided country, will not stand!.

Let, bush veto everything bush is the most stubborn president we have ever had their is no reason to continue to stay in iraq, & keep killing our troops!. The, republicans never cared for the troops the demcorats get accused of not supporting them!, well let bush veto everything the democrats are in power & can disapprove everything of bush!. Bush, needs to realize he has to work with democrats a divided country, will not stand!.

You said, "So they will put our troops in jeopardy because they are totally aware that the bill as it is will be vetoed and they had to take their precious vacation instead."

Let me remind you: it was BUSH who put our troops in jeopardy with this ridiculous war. He took one tragedy and turned it into a regional conflict, maybe for revenge against the man who had tried to kill his father, maybe for endless oil profits after he leaves office. Whatever the reason, HE is responsible for this quagmire our troops find themselves in. I don't recall Nancy Pelosi ever voting to send troops into an urban war that had nothing to do with 9/11.

Oh, and as for your assertion that the American people don't want to end this war, I only need point to the 2006 midterm election as proof that your assertion is 100% false. We, the people, have had it with this administration's lies at the expense of our troops' lives and the public's tax dollars.

Erickson,

Are you telling me that 535 politicians are in a better position to make war staffing and supply decisions then the generals on the ground and the defense department?

If thy want to stop the war they have the constitutional authority to defund it. They won't do that because they know the american people don't want that. Instead they are adding a group of measures to a bill to BUY votes and dictating the deadline which they don't have the authority to do. So they will put our troops in jeopardy because they are totally aware that the bill as it is will be vetoed and they had to take their precious vacation instead. I don't understand why they won'r negotiate now instead of wasting the time now to negotiate a jhouint house and senate bill which they know d**n well won't be accepted. Why didn't they work through their VACATION instead of delaying the bill. Oh yeah, they needed the vacation time so that the president Nancy can go and ruin rour relations instead of governing the country

Uh, yes John (White, GA)...it's called a REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY. You know, checks and balances against one branch of government strong-arming an unjust and unpopular policy against the will of those he or she governs?

If you wish to live in a country where only one person makes such life and death decisions against the will of the people, perhaps a plane ticket to North Korea or Venezuela would be appropriate. Here in the United States, WE THE PEOPLE decide matters of national policy, NOT GEORGE BUSH.

You are telling me that all the decisions for War are in the hands of 535 Politicians. Congress can only perform two functions. They can Declare War (which they agreed to in this case), or they can defund the war. The authority to pull outr the troops and set troop levels is at the sole discretion of ONE Commande-in-chief. And that is not Nance Pelosi or Harry Reid.

John, I was not questioning what they want to spend their money on I was questioning why all thgat portk has to be added to an Emergency Defense Bill. They are more than welcome to submit a seperate bill for all those other things but they should not be used to BUY votes just to pursue an agenda.

If the Congree want to end the war then do it in the way tha tthey have the authority to do. Defund the war, as Harry eid is now threatening. So if they don'e get their way they threaten. What a bunch of idiots (on both sides of the aisle).

Excellent posting, John. What I love is how this administration actively tightens or eliminates laws that would help the poor and middle class in this country, including bankruptcy laws (yep...those credit card companies have a friend in Bush, don't they?) and penalities if student loans aren't paid on time, yet at the same time squawks about needing additional hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars to fight a war that neither Iraqis nor Americans want.

Maybe instead of wasting lives and money with this ridiculous war, the president should concentrate his focus on Americans in need.

But then again, when did this creep do ANYTHING that wasn't in the best interest of the rich and greedy? I am so ashamed that this country re-elected him.

Oh, and for the OP and his query "Can someone please tell me when the Constitution was changed and the Senate and House of Representatives have the authority to dictate when the Military must pull out of a conflict?" Relax...no constitution changing needed. The election of a new congress, you know, THE PEOPLE'S ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES?, accomplished the task of dictating a new direction in Iraq.

Maybe now the president can spend his own money and send his own children to fight this war further instead of deciding for the rest of us that we should "volunteer" our money and children.

Excellent posting, John. What I love is how this administration actively tightens or eliminates laws that would help the poor and middle class in this country, including bankruptcy laws (yep...those credit card companies have a friend in Bush, don't they?) and penalities if student loans aren't paid on time, yet at the same time squawks about needing additional hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars to fight a war that neither Iraqis nor Americans want.

Maybe instead of wasting lives and money with this ridiculous war, the president should concentrate his focus on Americans in need.

But then again, when did this creep do ANYTHING that wasn't in the best interest of the rich and greedy? I am so ashamed that this country re-elected him.

Oh, and for the OP and his query "Can someone please tell me when the Constitution was changed and the Senate and House of Representatives have the authority to dictate when the Military must pull out of a conflict?" Relax...no constitution changing needed. The election of a new congress, you know, THE PEOPLE'S ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES?, accomplished the task of dictating a new direction in Iraq.

Maybe now the president can spend his own money and send his own children to fight this war further instead of deciding for the rest of us that we should "volunteer" our money and children.

Excellent posting, John. What I love is how this administration actively tightens or eliminates laws that would help the poor and middle class in this country, including bankruptcy laws (yep...those credit card companies have a friend in Bush, don't they?) and penalities if student loans aren't paid on time, yet at the same time squawks about needing additional hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars to fight a war that neither Iraqis nor Americans want.

Maybe instead of wasting lives and money with this ridiculous war, the president should concentrate his focus on Americans in need.

But then again, when did this creep do ANYTHING that wasn't in the best interest of the rich and greedy? I am so ashamed that this country re-elected him.

Oh, and for the OP and his query "Can someone please tell me when the Constitution was changed and the Senate and House of Representatives have the authority to dictate when the Military must pull out of a conflict?" Relax...no constitution changing needed. The election of a new congress, you know, THE PEOPLE'S ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES?, accomplished the task of dictating a new direction in Iraq.

Maybe now the president can spend his own money and send his own children to fight this war further instead of deciding for the rest of us that we should "volunteer" our money and children.

Excellent posting, John. What I love is how this administration actively tightens or eliminates laws that would help the poor and middle class in this country, including bankruptcy laws (yep...those credit card companies have a friend in Bush, don't they?) and penalities if student loans aren't paid on time, yet at the same time squawks about needing additional hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars to fight a war that neither Iraqis nor Americans want.

Maybe instead of wasting lives and money with this ridiculous war, the president should concentrate his focus on Americans in need.

But then again, when did this creep do ANYTHING that wasn't in the best interest of the rich and greedy? I am so ashamed that this country re-elected him.

Oh, and for the OP and his query "Can someone please tell me when the Constitution was changed and the Senate and House of Representatives have the authority to dictate when the Military must pull out of a conflict?" Relax...no constitution changing needed. The election of a new congress, you know, THE PEOPLE'S ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES?, accomplished the task of dictating a new direction in Iraq.

Maybe now the president can spend his own money and send his own children to fight this war further instead of deciding for the rest of us that we should "volunteer" our money and children.

"Congress shall have the power..To declare War...To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a term of longer than two years"

If Congress can start a war (even if the President doesn't want to), by any reasonable interpretation Congress also has the power to order the USA to "pull out" of a war. The part about funding the Army seems very clear to me that the Founders intended Congress to have the "purse strings" power to check the President's ability to use the Army anywhere he or she wanted to.

"Congress shall have the power..To declare War...To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a term of longer than two years"

If Congress can start a war (even if the President doesn't want to), by any reasonable interpretation Congress also has the power to order the USA to "pull out" of a war. The part about funding the Army seems very clear to me that the Founders intended Congress to have the "purse strings" power to check the President's ability to use the Army anywhere he or she wanted to.

$107,000 to study the sex life of the Japanese quail.

$1.2 million to study the breeding habits of the woodchuck.

$150,000 to study the Hatfield-McCoy feud.

$84,000 to find out why people fall in love.

$1 million to study why people don't ride bikes to work.

$19 million to examine gas emissions from cow flatulence.

$144,000 to see if pigeons follow human economic laws.

Funds to study the cause of rudeness on tennis courts and examine smiling patterns in bowling alleys.

$219,000 to teach college students how to watch television.

$2 million to construct an ancient Hawaiian canoe.

$20 million for a demonstration project to build wooden bridges.

$160,000 to study if you can hex an opponent by drawing an X on his chest.

$800,000 for a restroom on Mt. McKinley.
$100,000 to study how to avoid falling spacecraft.

$16,000 to study the operation of the komungo, a Korean stringed instrument.

$1 million to preserve a sewer in Trenton, NJ, as a historic monument.

$6,000 for a document on Worcestershire sauce.
$10,000 to study the effect of naval communications on a bull's potency.

$100,000 to research soybean-based ink.

$1 million for a Seafood Consumer Center.

$57,000 spent by the Executive Branch for gold-embossed playing cards on Air Force Two.
Total: $ 45,980,000

I'm sure the "commander in chief" really needed those playing cards.

John
Rhinelander, Wi