Why's Bush43 offering explanations for the way he has ruled as President w/o any real Congressional oversight?

Question

The word "rule" is meant to point to the manner of leadership which has lately not been as democratic as I expect it to be based on my experience with Presidents going back to IKE & JFK. Pls avoid meaningless labels ansd stick to explaining ideas like the analyst did! Don't like my Q? Then Skip it.

Answer 1

There are three branches of government;

The executive

The judicial

The legislative

The duties and powers are all defined in the constitution. There is a distinct separation between the ‘powers’. This separation is a system of ‘checks and balances’, which you may be confusing with ‘oversight’

Oversight of the executive is NOT a duty, nor power vested in the congress, the same as the congress does not have oversight power of the Supreme Court (i.e. the judicial)

As has been stated  previously by others here; the president does not ‘rule’.

Analyst, Ph.D.

Answer 2

You say that as if it is fact. We have a democratic Congress that makes the laws and spends the money. Bush, like every other President, is subject to what Congress does. Beside Kings and Queens rule and (US) Presidents govern.

Answer 3

Our Presidents do not rule, they lead.  There has been plenty of congressional oversight.  Your liberal media is just not talking about that part of it.  They are counting on lazy stupid people to give them power.