President Bush Promises to Veto Homosexual Hate Crime Bill if Passed
-- is conservative.
This --
-- is not.
Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
Posted on 05/03/2007 11:49:21 AM PDT by Princip. Conservative
WASHINGTON, May 3, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The Executive Office of the President has issued a statement promising to veto "hate crimes" bill H.R. 1592 should it be approved in Congress today. Concerned Women for America, one of the leading groups fighting the legislation praised the President's move. "We thank President Bush for honoring our nation's constitutional tradition of equal protection under the law," said Matt Barber, Policy Director for Cultural Issues at Concerned Women for America.
The text of the statement follows form the executive office follows:
"The Administration favors strong criminal penalties for violent crime, including crime based on personal characteristics, such as race, color, religion, or national origin. However, the Administration believes that H.R. 1592 is unnecessary and constitutionally questionable. If H.R. 1592 were presented to the President, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill."
"State and local criminal laws already provide criminal penalties for the violence addressed by the new Federal crime defined in section 7 of H.R. 1592, and many of these laws carry stricter penalties (including mandatory minimums and the death penalty) than the proposed language in H.R. 1592. State and local law enforcement agencies and courts have the capability to enforce those penalties and are doing so effectively. There has been no persuasive demonstration of any need to federalize such a potentially large range of violent crime enforcement, and doing so is inconsistent with the proper allocation of criminal enforcement responsibilities between the different levels of government. In addition, almost every State in the country can actively prosecute hate crimes under the State's own hate crimes law."
(Excerpt) Read more at lifesite.net ...
Excellent Mr President! We are going to see a lot of vetos!
Well, there goes the gay vote.........
LOL!!!
Uh oh. He’ll be on Rosie’s sh*t list now...
This is great news. Really great! But he must also veto the dreadful ENDA.
these hate crimes laws just are making a political statement. That’s all they do. This is Orwellian newspeak. Is the crime victim any more of a victim because the perpetrator thought he was a homosexual or other “protected class”? It’s feel good legislation that in the real world will have no practical effect.
President Bush Promises to Veto Homosexual Hate Crime Bill if Passed
-- is conservative.
This --
-- is not.
Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
In veto veritas.........again......
The Dems tried to push that bill in through the “ back door “
If queers could not vote, this would not be happening and the Dems would not even know what gay or lesbian even means.
Conyers - almost smirking - offered to add military and elderly people to the bill if the Republicans would pass it.
The two groups did in fact make it into the bill.
So to race and religion, we can now add gay, transgendered, elderly and military as protected classes.
Is anyone missing?
Thank you Mr. President. You continue to inspire and remain an example for how to conduct ones life, especially when it seems no one is with you!
If Rudy became President America would be the Laughingstock of the Earth.
Thank the Lord for GWB. We are safe from most of the Dems’ more extreme acts for another 19 months at least. After that, God knows. Will we even be able to write about “God” in public net forums like this after 2009?? I truly fear for the future.
Almost every thread lately ends up being a place where “conservatives” bash Rudy.
The primary election process will take place. Get out there and campaign for the candidate you feel will be the best President in 2008.
If Rudy wins this primary and you stay home (as many of you claimed to have done in November, 2006), will you merely claim that the party was taught a lesson again?
Of will you finally understand that elections have consequences (as evidenced by the liberals in charge of Congress).
If Rudy claims he would not have vetoed this legislation, and Rudy ends up winning the GOP nomination, then you have a reason to vote for a democrat. Or stay home. Or do whatever you think best serves the country.
But, why don’t you give the election process a chance?
Caucasian males are missing from the protected class.
And they always will be.
Q: What race am I?
A: Homo Sapiens - Human
Now if they can just repeal all hate crimes laws. It is not equal protection under the law.
HOW ABOUT A VETO OF MEXICANS RUNNING WILD ACROSS OUR BORDER?
Considering we have more than enough votes in the Senate to block cloture, Republicans ought to let the DemocRATS bring this bill to the floor. I wonder how many DemocRATS would actually vote for it knowing it will be vetoed. What about the group of “conservative DemocRATS” the DemocRATS ran in swing districts last year? I’d like to see them squirm on this bill several months from now.
This is why Conyers was smirking and offering his false "equity" for the bill, I think.
Caucasian she/he's will have the same protection against "hate crimes" as Caucasian Special Forces operators.
Ain't that cute? Conyers thought it was.
It's unconstitutional om the face of it.
If yesterday was any indicaton, they’ll vote “their conscience” and fail on Bush’s override attempt.
Democrats really are young children, after all.
Its the reason we can’t let Fruity Rooty get elected either.
He would not only sign it, he would ask the Congress to send him a bill to sign.
Way to go, Mr. Prez!
I’ll commit suicide on FR and say that gays should not be discriminated against. It’s just as bad as discriminating against Jews, women, blacks, the mentally retarded, the way someone looks or their beliefs or age. Call me crazy (gasp) but I look towards the preamble of the Declaration of Independence to confirm my opinion on this matter.
No, this doesn’t mean I support gay marriage or gay adoption. It means I do not support real discrimination against someone (ie. refusing to hire them, pay them less, not rent to them).
Let the flaming begin...no pun intended.
“If Rudy claims he would not have vetoed this legislation, and Rudy ends up winning the GOP nomination, then you have a reason to vote for a democrat. Or stay home. Or do whatever you think best serves the country.
But, why don’t you give the election process a chance?”
Why don’t you understand that its better to expose the fact that he would sign it and his past record proves that.
I should also make it clear that I do not support this bill even though I disagree with discriminating against gays.
Why shouldn’t an employer or landlord have the right to hire or rent to anyone they want?
Thanks Goodness!! We don’t need the Thought Police.
W has my appreciation for finally using the veto club!
— JoeRepublc
Haw aabout adding fat people?
How about adding fat people?
Is anyone missing?
White males? Aw, nevermind, they're all rich anyway.
Well, I guess Ann Coulter won’t be calling President Bush a “faggot” anytime soon
No. I'll claim that there really isn't much diffence between Roodie and a Dem, so why bother? And did you happen to see the pic in post 9 of the guy some propose should be the distinguished leader of the free world?
“Well, there goes the gay vote.........”
Funny, yes, but the gay vote is largely an illusion except in San Francisco and such places.
“This is great news. Really great! But he must also veto the dreadful ENDA.”
Well, who says he won’t? Don’t forget that, while President Bush has been a bit weak on certain things, he’s still the man who put John Roberts and Sam Alito on the US Supreme Court. Righteousness at the highest level. I love it.
? NO one here is saying gays should be discriminated against. We are saying they DON'T NEED EXTRA PROTECTIONS. They are no better than anyone else (except to themselves, like all radicals) and deserve no SPECIAL laws to protect them.
VETO! VETO! VETO!
I survived eight years of Clinton. Four years of Hillary wouldn’t be any worse. Besides, the woman has more balls than that effete limp wristed greaseball from Long Island.
If you saw the list of sick-o people who would be protected by this bill, your teeth would fall out!
Just how much of the "gay" agenda do you support?
I see.
So, a guy who wears a “dress” during a Saturday Night Live show, a show that is taped in his city, is automatically disqualified.
Drinking the liberal kool aid, are we?
So, this is how it works. The drive by media tells you that Rudy is really a cross dresser (they EVEN have pictures), and the gullible among you eat it up like there’s no tomorrow. Why, we can’t vote for him, the AP told us he wears dresses!! You can’t vote for him, he’s not conservative enough. You have to stay home!! Gulp, gulp.
Yes, subterfuge, it would be much better to nominate a white flag surrender type than a man who would nominate justices like Scalia. Yes, I see your point.
Beagle8u, I think everyone should expose everything about all of the GOP candidates. And, go from there.
If you’ll ONLY vote in November, 2007 if YOUR candidate is nominated, you better work harder than you expect to. No matter who gets the nod, many people will be upset that their person didn’t win the party nomination. So, what to do. Stay home? As many did in November, 2006?
Please don’t insult my intelligence by telling me there’s no difference between the parties.
Reid/Pelosi and their comrades are proof of that.
TalonDJ, At this point, I’m not “supporting” anyone.
Of the candidates I’ve heard and seen (and honestly that will change after tonight), he’s the one I trust with this nation’s security.
After tonight, maybe there will be a better sense of where they all stand. I have an open mind, I’m not automatically disqualifying a candidate because of an issue (real or perceived). I’m waiting to hear from all of them.
My point IS, the Rudy bashers aren’t waiting.
Relax Rudy Gayliani is not going to win the nomination anyways. Rudy would have signed this hate crime bill in a NY minute. Thank God he will never be President.
Okay, Clemenza, fair enough.
But don’t ever post anything about abortion.
You KNOW what you’re getting with her. You’re getting someone who will nominate justices like Breyer not Scalia.
So, I understand......it’s okay to attack Rudy and call him a “greaseball” (your term), but nothing but praise for the Senator.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.