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

To: presidio9

Isn't the law objective and the perceived need to protect, fairly subjective?


6 posted on 02/08/2006 9:05:52 AM PST by stuartcr (Everything happens as God wants it to.....otherwise, things would be different.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: stuartcr
Isn't the law objective and the perceived need to protect, fairly subjective?

Nope. The authors OPINION of the law are subjective based on his personal political feelings. Since he is neither Judge nor Legislator his OPINION of what the law means is just so much hot air. Since the President is the chosen Representative of the people HIS opinion of what the law means is one of the few that matters here.

The President is invested by the people to exercise certain powers on our behalf. His opinions have legal standing. Bruce Moron is just some self important twit writing on a website, his feeling about the matter are irrelevant babbling. The President's opinions are the only ones that count between the two.

The President, our chosen Representative, has said, "I have these powers". Some in Congress are objecting to his position. Someone will bring suit and the Courts will decide which branch is correct. That is how our system of Checks and Balances works.

All the screaming about "illegality" by website authors and self proclaimed legal "experts" is just so much meaningless noise. Just cause Bruce Moron, based on his political prejudices, want to claim it is illegal is irreverent to the facts at hand. He has no standing to rend any such judgments. The President does. Therefore Bruce Moron is wrong.

22 posted on 02/08/2006 10:52:53 AM PST by MNJohnnie ("Vote Democrat-We are the party of reactionary inertia".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | 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