"Prof. Vincent Brannigan" wrote in message
...


Tarver Engineering wrote:

"Prof. Vincent Brannigan" wrote in message
...


The founding fathers knew exactly what they were doing. Congress had
the
power
to create an army and navy, but the president was its "commander".
The
president gives "military" orders to subordinate commanders. He does
not merely
give "policy" direction as the Prime minister did in England.

The President is "commander" because that was the price of getting
George
Washington to agree to be President.

you are confusing rationale with the basis for power. The status as
commander
in chief derives from the constitution.

I am educating you professor, don't attempt to project your confusion on to
me.

The DoD is a mechanism whererby Congress' money is spent. That is why
Congress has the Authority to confirm, or reject, Cabinet level
Executive
heads.

no, The constitution confers that power , and its the senate, not congress
that can Advise and consent.
has nothing to do with the spending power.

All Cabinet level positions are created by Congress to spend Congress'
money. It is a way for Congress to evade their responsibility for spending.
If Congress had to write a check each time, as provided for by the
Constitution, there would be no excuse for out of control spending.