Abdicating His Responsibility

Washington Times ^ | 3/22/02 | Washington Times

[olliemb]

Trust the man. He has said over and over--no amnesty--so why are you reading more into the bill than what the bill says? Causing trouble??

[Reagan Man]

How many democrats voted against the bill? Knowing the senate, even if they voted no they would probably vote to over ride a veto.

YEAS --- 60 Akaka Domenici Lincoln Baucus Dorgan Lugar Bayh Durbin McCain Biden Edwards Mikulski Bingaman Feingold Miller Boxer Feinstein Murray Byrd Fitzgerald Nelson (FL) Cantwell Graham Reed Carnahan Harkin Reid Carper Hollings Rockefeller Chafee Inouye Sarbanes Cleland Jeffords Schumer Clinton Johnson Snowe Cochran Kennedy Specter Collins Kerry Stabenow Conrad Kohl Thompson Corzine Landrieu Torricelli Daschle Leahy Warner Dayton Levin Wellstone Dodd Lieberman Wyden

NAYS --- 40 Allard Frist Murkowski Allen Gramm Nelson (NE) Bennett Grassley Nickles Bond Gregg Roberts Breaux Hagel Santorum Brownback Hatch Sessions Bunning Helms Shelby Burns Hutchinson Smith (NH) Campbell Hutchison Smith (OR) Craig Inhofe Stevens Crapo Kyl Thomas DeWine Lott Thurmond Ensign McConnell Voinovich Enzi

Looks like only two Dems voted against CFR. Nelson of Nebraska and Breaux of Louisiana. What's worse is the Pubs who voted for it.... Domenici, Lugar, McCain, Fitzgerald, Chafee, Snowe, Cochran, Specter, Collins, Thompson and Warner. What a bunch of losers!!!

[Texasforever]

am having trouble with eliminating contributions and you wrote done by executive order. What does that mean? Is it in CFR or not?

No it is not in the CFR. The EO was to put back into place a Supreme Court decision that allowed Union Members to withold part of their dues Clinton in effect over ruled the court with his intial EO if they did not agree with the political uses being advanced by the Union Leadership. It was called Paycheck protection. That is another plus in having this go before the courts again. The USSC does not like end runs around its decisions. The democrats have placed several poison pills in this legislation because they don't want to have CFR if it does not favor them by a 70-30 margin. They have been too cute by half. They felt Bush would veto the bill then they would have the same favorable law they had before and an issue to pound Bush and the GOP over the head with. IMO they have "outsmarted" themselves with this "throw me in the briar patch" game of chicken.

[Uncle Bill]

So lies only count if they're a campaign promise? They especially lie when they want your vote. After that, the truth usually slides on out. You folks are starting to torture yourself.

We were hoping for something a little more like this
"When I campaigned for president, and upon taking office, I made clear that if Congress passed a campaign-finance bill that violated the Constitution, I could not support it. Unfortunately, despite their own obligation to uphold the Constitution, and despite my warnings, a majority in Congress has sent me such a bill."

[zip]

Good post. I just received a telephone call from one of the national Republican fundraising groups wanting me to renew my donations for 2002. Timing is everything. I have been ranting about the Bush "bend over and grab your ankles" routine when I got this golden opportunity to "splain"it to them.

I told the caller that as soon as President Bush reversed his course and decided to uphold his oath of office (you know, where he said he would uphold the Constituton of the United States of America) I would again donate. In the meantime, I will continue to support Mr Talent in his race against Ms "I'll do anything to get reelected" Carnahan" in his battle to take the Senate seat back for decent Missourians.

I honestly cannot understand the lack of guts/nerve or whatever in our national Republican party.

[olliemb]

It depends what the definition of "is" is. Talking about lie!! Let's not go crazy with all this--Shays Meehan back then is not the same as now. Read it!!

[zip]

. Is Bush going to be on offense against the First Amendment, or is he going to defend it, as he took an oath to do?

As a Pro America, pro life, pro family values, NRA supporting Conservative, I, too, ask the question.

Waiting for the answer.

[olliemb]

Have you read any of the things Biden or Leahy said about judicial nominations when they were in the minority. If you are going to get your panties all bunched up about lying why not go and use your energy on those 2 guys who made statements now in 2002 so contrary to what was said by them 2000. It is their distorted views that did not allow Pickering for vote by the senate.

[Uncle Bill]

I don't wear panties. I save my energy for Kings.

[Kevin Curry]

I smell the sharp, fetid odor of Karl "legend in his own mind" Rove behind this mess. What is Rove's "brilliant" plan?

[Luis Gonzalez]

It's nice of you to remoind everyone of what Bush said about CFR over two years ago. Things happen, and minds change. Situations change too, I don't see everytime one changes his mind on an issue as being a lie.

As for 245(i)---

Main Entry: am.nes.ty
Pronunciation: 'am-n&-stE
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek amnEstia forgetfulness, from amnEstos forgotten, from a- + mnasthai to remember -- more at MIND
Date: 1580
Inflected Form(s): plural -ties
: the act of an authority (as a government) by which pardon is granted to a large group of individuals
- amnesty transitive verb

It isn't an amnesty if they have to pay a fine, and are not guaranteed a stay.

All they get is a chance.

[Buckeroo]

All you do is hold "your" political party to a nice murmur whild denouncing the "other" political party. You don't seem to understand any truth do you? You are convinced that someone that is a Republican is going to stand up for you while you denounce the Democrats.

I have information for you. All you are doing is waving a flag towards *ANYONE* government that you enjoy personal perspective upon. And I agree it is "nice" to wave our nation's flag from tme to time ............... but none of the major political parties care about that. They just keep upon the task of centralizing government; creating a slave state that ensures your over-taxed dollars goes anywhere but towards you and your family and all those around you.

Your love of political party is baseless without a serious understanding of the American way. The Republocrats have no such understanding.

[Texasforever]

As a Pro America, pro life, pro family values, NRA supporting Conservative, I, too, ask the question.

Let's take Ronald Reagan as the gold standard for a Republican president. Now according to many on this thread any president that enforces or signs a bill based on his opinion that it is unconstitutional is "violating his oath of office to "protect the constitution". Ronald Reagan did the following while in office

He signed the pre-cursors to the the Brady Bill

He ordered his DOJ to defend challenges to Roe V, Wade in the Federal courts.

His DOJ defended the CFR that was in place while he was in office

He pushed for and signed a true blanket amnesty for illegal aliens in 1986

He signed several tax increases known as "revenue enhancement" measures in his second term

Now Ronald Reagan is a great man but according to some of you here, he is as guilty as G.W. Bush in "violating his oath of office". By definition, that violation is grounds for impeachment at the very least. Now should Ronald Reagan have been impeached and should he now be labeled as a spineless RINO and drummed out of the conservative movement?

[Luis Gonzalez]

Please refute my post, or go back to the J&B and leave me alone.

[brat]

, McCain has an excuse to jump ship to the "Independant" Party........let him jump. I'd rather see a REAL Conservative in the seat. What good is a Rep who votes DIM?

[Buckeroo]

I learned .... a long time ago, not to believe in men/women of government. It takes little or no liquor to realize this simple fact.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"I learned .... a long time ago, not to believe in men/women of government. It takes little or no liquor to realize this simple fact."

Then you must be feeling pretty damned near omniscient by now.

[Buckeroo]

I have a problem with you. You have all the answers.

[Tuor]

They demand the President should NEVER think of politics on policy.

I agree that he shouldn't think of politics when it comes to policy. He should, and is required by his oath, uphold the Constitution. One of the duties given to him by the Constitution is to veto those bills which are against the Constitution.

How he plays politics is one thing, but messing with the Constitution in this matter is negligence (willful or innocent) of duty, and that should and will come back to haunt him, IMO.

Tuor

[wattsmag2]

Then you must be feeling pretty damned near omniscient by now.

...omniscient... Damn fine retort. Ole Buck envisions things no one else ever sees. And, they always come to him courtesy of the Pink Elephant Delivery Service.