Tarver Engineering wrote:


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.


I'm always happy to be educated. I studied Constitutional law. I've even
published on it.
see below



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.

Its the governments money, not "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.

nonsense. Spending is an executive function. Congress "appropriates" money

"No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in consequence of appropriations
made by law; and a regular
statement and account of receipts and expenditures of all public money shall be
published from time to time. "

Appropriation is a legislative function. Spending money is an executive
function.

Vince