[Common Tator]

IT IS THE OVERRIDING ISSUE IN THIS DEBATE!!

It is with you. If your object is to convince you that you are against it.. then it is the overrriding concern.

If your object is to defeat the bill, then you will have to use reasons that will get Democrats to vote against the bill.

Name a reason more likely to get Democrats to vote against a bill, than the bill will hurt Democrats?

Do you want to defeat the bill or just say words that will let you feel sorry for yourself in defeat?

[LS]

If I thought that your "reasoning" would work, I would join you. But it won't. First of all, the Dems ain't stupid. They understand that no matter what happens in this election, with their willing accomplices in the press, this bill could PERMANENTLY cement their superiority, even when they don't have the votes.

Second, Rush made the point and I agree: the reason (so far) that the Constitution argument isn't "working" is because so far, no one but Rush has even MADE it in a public forum in a regular way. You can't have hit and run attacks---it has to be a sustained offensive, with good examples about other groups (non-conservative) groups who will be severely damaged in their ability to speak freely.

[dittomom]

FYI - Here's a quote from today's Rush Limbaugh show that is posted at the top of his website...

"Asked point-blank on This Week, on January 23rd, 2000, if he would veto McCain-Feingold or Shays-Meehan, Bush said that he would. Will he? He's an honest man." - Rush Limbaugh Radio Show, 2/20/02

Let's hold The President to this campaign promise!!!!!!!