BGbootha wrote: StlSluggers wrote:
BGbootha wrote:4. How is it possible that he can Veto this? Why is it even Vetoable?
it be vetoable? Isn't that what the whole checks-and-balances thing is about?
Yes, but the very idea that the President needs their permission to have troops over there, and now he no longer has that permission, by vetoing this, he is in essence vetoing checks and balances itself.
I don't see that as the case.
1) The President wanted troops in Iraq, Congress agreed. That was the "check and balance."
2) They (or some of them) want to bring them back. The President does not agree. That is the "check and balance."
They're not the same thing. I mean they sort of are, but they're separate "moves" if you will. Just because Congress failed to stop the troops from going in the first place doesn't mean they should have the ability to pull them back whenever they feel like upping their PR.