Ulrich

By the way, what are your thoughts about the flip-side?

As Michael Schiavo said when he filed his motion that Congress violated the Constitution when it passed the bill because the action was improperly intended to overturn state court rulings on the matter:

"That is not an exercise of legislative power, but trial by legislature."

Does Congress have the authority to legalize forum shopping?

cordycord

Ulrich,

Judges do not render rulings to establish principles. Judges are there to interpret the law based on the Constitution or the laws of the state--whichever applies. Roe v. Wade is not part of the Constitution, and therefore can be overturned like any number of other rulings have been this year.

An example is that Justice Kennedy felt 15 years ago that it was legal to execute 16 year olds based on the constitution, and today he has overturned his own ruling. His rationale? He looked at laws in other countries! Wrong. See paragraph one.

Congress is the voice of the people. Okay, of the people and the lobbies. They have a right and obligation to overturn a bad ruling, or to change their bad law that has caused the bad ruling, as long as their action is constitutional.

The Schiavo case is a mess. It is also in the American spotlight to show the right to life/death argument. There's extra gravy in this story for the media because it is so messy. Frankly, it's easy for me not to like Mike Schiavo after he ceased all therapy on Terry after winning the court case. Guess what the money was supposed to go for? That's personal, but that personal aspect gets enmeshed into the legal portion of this case.

And for the record, I have never BOUGHT a National Enquirer.

cordycord

If you want some interesting reading on the Schiavo case, go here:

http://studentorg.cua.edu/federalist/SenateBrief.doc

It is the Amicus brief filed by some legislators trying to explain what they were trying to achieve with the law.

ralper

Thanks flts. I thought that this tax season would be a little easier than last year's, but I was wrong. In spite of the fact that we got off to an early start and got some of the more complex clients done early, this season is turning out to be a horror story. Not that there have been many surprises, just a lot of work. We've been working 7 days a week. We are now doing electronic filing and because I am in charge of the computers, I am also in charge of the e-filing. My day starts at 7:00 am and ends at 11:15 pm. I'm going home soon.

anarky

Me, I like the World Weekly News...the only REAL news operation out there that tells the REAL truth.

Have a good night Rob.

I'll be in London tomorrow so I'll think of your unending efforts to maximize your client's returns from my benevolent Uncle while I'm dining on fish and chips.

MsPerky

Oooohhh - love London. Have fun, Jeff!!

Chazmo

[QUOTE=ralper,Mar 24 2005, 11:02 PM] Thanks flts.

ralper

[QUOTE=Chazmo,Mar 25 2005, 08:45 AM]
So, controversy:

Chazmo

Good points, Rob. I agree it won't ever happen unless I'm elected president. I.e., it won't ever happen.

I think the definition of income would not be so hard, Rob. Certainly no more complex than today, anyway.

I guess I've always felt it's wrong to set social agenda with tax policy. I mean, really, how fair is it that government favors home owners, child exemptions, etc... I realize this is, in part, what makes being an accountant interesting, but I still think it's unfair.

MsPerky

I just got around to changing my status from "married" to "single" (forgot to do it last year). The result was $400 less in my paycheck this month. So much for the marriage penalty.