Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Once-Ler
"I didn't say CFR was good for the nation I said it was good for the Republican Party. I didn't say CFR was a violation of the First Amendment, or in the (best) interest of the people. I said the people wanted CFR."

So it's okay to violate the Constitution ,just as long as it helps the GOP? I must have missed that part in the oath during inauguration.

And again, you keep saying that the people wanted CFR as if that is an excuse for the President ignoring his duty to veto unconstitutional legislation. If the people want to say, confiscate all guns, should the President just smile and send out the troops?

You said, "Representatives are suppose to act in the interests of their constituents" as a defense of Bush signing CFR. So was he acting in the best interests of the people? If so, you said what I said you said. If not, your own words condemn the failure to veto the legislation.

" The CFR restrictions did not stop anyone from expressing their opinions through 527s."
President Bush and Senator MCBeavis want to eliminate 527s.

"Our Founding Fathers did not trust the Constitution to protect freedom. That is why they made it amendable."

Funny thing is, they did amend it. I think it was called the First amendment. Now did I miss the part where CFR was passed as a Constitutional amendment repealing the first?

"Show me a strict constitutionalist and I will show you a man unable to get elected above Congressman"

Was Senator John Ashcroft not a strict constructionalist?
434 posted on 01/30/2005 9:15:19 AM PST by radicalamericannationalist (The Senate is our new goal: 60 in '06.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 432 | View Replies ]


To: radicalamericannationalist
You said, "Representatives are suppose to act in the interests of their constituents" as a defense of Bush signing CFR. So was he acting in the best interests of the people?

I did not say Dubya acted in the best interest of the people. I said he did what the people demanded. I further stated that the people don't always know what is in their best interest but the alternative to doing what the people want it do is totalitarianism.

I have answered all of your question in my last post to you. You do not like the answers and are asking the same questions. Read the post before responding next time.

436 posted on 01/30/2005 7:59:46 PM PST by Once-Ler (Beating a dead horse for NeoCon America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 434 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson