How about a controversial thread?
#1241
#1242
I also find renewed faith in our constitutional system. The portion of Bush
s position that panders to the religous right has met the system of checks and balance and found itself wanting
fltsfshr
s position that panders to the religous right has met the system of checks and balance and found itself wanting
fltsfshr
#1243
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Denton, Texas
Posts: 4,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by fltsfshr,Mar 23 2005, 05:51 AM
I also find renewed faith in our constitutional system. The portion of Bush
s position that panders to the religous right has met the system of checks and balance and found itself wanting
fltsfshr
s position that panders to the religous right has met the system of checks and balance and found itself wanting
fltsfshr
Funny how he has changed his tune. A true flip flopper!! A willful waffler!! A presumtious panderer!!
I just wish Congress would be as quick to react to the Nations needs as pandering to a sect of voters.
#1244
It never fails to amaze me how much people try to blame the President. But that's alright. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I for one totally disagree with the above statements. I back President Bush and Congress in this matter!
#1245
I voted for Bush.
In this instance however he needs to stop pandering. Any legal scholar could have told him there was no real chance of success. I think Bush knew that and is just busy stroking the religous right. We'll see if the pandering continues.
What I think he has done is demostrate his parties congressional power very dramatically.
I think it's scaring the hell out of the democrats. A lot of other legislation will feel the changes this demonstration has wrought throughout both houses.
fltsfshr
In this instance however he needs to stop pandering. Any legal scholar could have told him there was no real chance of success. I think Bush knew that and is just busy stroking the religous right. We'll see if the pandering continues.
What I think he has done is demostrate his parties congressional power very dramatically.
I think it's scaring the hell out of the democrats. A lot of other legislation will feel the changes this demonstration has wrought throughout both houses.
fltsfshr
#1246
Registered User
It never fails to amaze me how much people will do anything to back the President and Congress in any matter. Somehow they must have been chosen by divine right if they're holding down "positions of power".
So when is it NOT okay for Congress to interfere in your life? When you decide to have shrimp salad for dinner?
So when is it NOT okay for Congress to interfere in your life? When you decide to have shrimp salad for dinner?
#1247
Registered User
Originally Posted by fltsfshr,Mar 23 2005, 11:41 AM
I think Bush knew that and is just busy stroking the religous right.
#1248
Registered User
Anyone else find it laughable how fast congress can pass a law when they want to, yet how many years do they take on other legislation? I guess they figured there wouldn't be any lobbiests spreading money around on this issue, so they might as well vote.
#1249
What's really amazing is that there were only 3 (!) Senators even in town. Everyone else was on Spring Break. They had to call all the rest of them wherever they were around the world to get the votes.
#1250
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: SoCal
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's a crappy situation, any way you look at it. I also hear the phrase "hard cases make bad laws", which seems to have held up as well.
There is a real circularity to this case--there are so many thoughts and legal questions--each stance can be argued, and rebutted, and rebutted, ad infinitum.
There is a real circularity to this case--there are so many thoughts and legal questions--each stance can be argued, and rebutted, and rebutted, ad infinitum.