Skip to comments.
Statement by the President: "... I will sign (CFR) into law."
Office of the Press Secretary ^
| March 20, 2002
| George W. Bush
Posted on 03/20/2002 4:33:41 PM PST by erk
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 581 next last
To: Lorena
WHY would he issue a statement and put it on the White House website, saying that he WILL sign it?Based on that statement I expect he will sign it. But just like the stem cell research issue, Bush found a way to approve the research and protect future unborn. Lets see if he can thread this needle. BB's postings led me to relealize that there are other ways to win this even if the bill is law. Bush is the one to enforce the laws and he can simply state that those parts that are not constitutional will not be enforced.
To: 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub
Yeah, right after the overturn the Brady Bill. Don't forget that upon Ashcroft's first visit to Meet the Press post-confirmation he made quite clear that the overturning of Roe was not on this administration's agenda.
Maybe someday when we're not busy fighting Moral Wars we can clean house here at home where our Culture of Death and abrogation of the Constitution are concerned.
The War on Terrorism's going to end, right?
82
posted on
03/20/2002 5:08:47 PM PST
by
Askel5
To: erk
Well... he's a one-termer. Its official now. He just signed his own death warrent. We conservatives wont forgive him.
But still, he beats the heck out of Gore. I still dont think I could bring myself to vote libertarian... yet. If BU
83
posted on
03/20/2002 5:08:47 PM PST
by
jude24
To: dittomom
I haven't decided how mad I am about this yet...You're too mad.
Bush has guaranteed his re-election with this signature, since hard money limits are doubled, and Bush raised more hard money than any candidate in history in 2000.
And, for those who think most Republicans are going to vote against Bush because of CFR, think again.
Amnesty, maybe. CFR, not a chance.
Besides, there's no such thing as CFR. Lawyers are sitting in rooms right now devising ways to get around this bill.
And, that's assuming that the Supreme Court doesn't torpedo major portions of it, which is a faulty assumption.
Besides, I thought everybody on FR was going to vote third party or Democrat because of the "amnesty" (which isn't an amnesty but it doesn't matter).
84
posted on
03/20/2002 5:08:58 PM PST
by
sinkspur
To: Terriergal
Maybe they're starting with the 1st amendment and going down the list.God HELP the United States
To: linn37
and another damn thing I don't want to hear his crap about protecting the rights of the executive office if he won't protect the rights of the first amendment.That hits the nail on the head!
To: VRWC_minion
Nice idea, what happens in a few years from now when someone else is running the show?
87
posted on
03/20/2002 5:10:35 PM PST
by
FSPress
To: erk
This bill bans the right of people 17 and younger to send political contributions, even small ones. As an 18-year-old, this hits me close to home and Bush has lost my vote due to this evil law. I can't believe I am saying this, but Bush is dead to me. I hope he rots in hell.
To: erk
I have lost track of the number of issues that Pres. Bush has "lost respect & support" for on this forum! Partial stem-cell research funding, amnesty, hiring a gay, hanging out with Ted Kennedy, "homeland security", CFR, an endless list. I voted for him knowing he would disappoint me, it's inevitable. He is Pres. of all of us and compromise is the only way he can realistically govern. Now this will be taken to the courts by special-interest groups at both ends of the spectrum, & maybe finally Congress will get on to other business. This bill has dominated for months...years actually.
89
posted on
03/20/2002 5:12:47 PM PST
by
BonnieJ
To: mombonn
I'm disappointed in Bush, I held him in higher esteem.
After his reversal on federally funding stem cell research it was apparent that the man would deviate on his principles for political gain. This is just another example of his "Read my lips" genetics at work.
To: erk
UNFORGIVABLE NO OTHER WORD FOR IT.
To: mombonn
Bush's only card to play is a VETO.I too thought that as of yesterday but that isn't true. He can choose to announce he won't enforce the parts he believes are not constitutional.
To: 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub
"The reforms passed today, while flawed in some areas, still improve the current system overall, and I will sign them into law""Flawed in some areas", how about unconstitutional. I am disappointed in reading this statement by President Bush, even though I suspected that this would be the outcome.
93
posted on
03/20/2002 5:13:31 PM PST
by
deadhead
To: godisright
well, it doesn't make a difference anymore, does it? real conservatives like us are just stuck out in the wind and we're going to have to either bend to fit the status quo or die trying in desparation. either lose some of our ways by a half-conservative or just throw them all away to liberals. either way, we're damned. It's almost time for a prayer session so I'll go fade away and not bother y'all anymore.
94
posted on
03/20/2002 5:13:53 PM PST
by
roachie
To: Willie Green
I always suspected you prefer cash rather than the Constitution. I prefer that people I support WIN. The Constitutionality of this is yet to be determined.
Lots of people on this site supported the line item veto, which was also clearly unconstitutional, and was ruled as such, even though lots of Republicans voted for it.
No one promoted the line-item veto more than Ronald Reagan.
95
posted on
03/20/2002 5:14:02 PM PST
by
sinkspur
To: rwfromkansas
RW we're all angry bout this but watch your words..U don't want the Fed Gestapo coming to question you.
To: rwfromkansas
RW we're all angry bout this but watch your words..U don't want the Fed Gestapo coming to question you.
To: VRWC_minion
I agree. Bush seems to have a big picture perspective which I confess I don't often see. Of course, the perspective from which he views things
is rather unique.
He seems to be effectively accomplishing a certain amount of "incrementalism". Of course conservatives, me included, would rather things change significantly and swiftly. One of the things I always thought about Clinton was that the legislation he was signing was not as devastating as the work being done by the everyday appointees he had put in place. I trust that this is being duly accomplished in the other direction, as I am familiar with a very high level appointee of one of the largest cabinet departments.
Having said all that, I don't like the legislation, think it is an attack on the 1st Amendment and still hope he doesn't sign it; but like you, I'll stick around to see how the second half of the game goes.
98
posted on
03/20/2002 5:14:12 PM PST
by
erk
To: erk
Remember the Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF)'s Black Web Site campaign, when Congress threatened to crackdown on Internet content (i.e., censorship)? One could cynically ask where are they and the ACLU are when CFR actually does threaten free speech via the Internet, but let's look beyond that obvious double standard liberal free speech advocates employ to further unstated agendas.
Maybe we should instead turn our web site backgrounds to red. Red would both denote our anger about Congress attempting to legislate away our Constitutional right to free (political) speech, but also to be a not so subtle reference to the communist tactics used to usurp our capitalist marketplace for political communications. It also brings to mind the blood shed by our troops to secure our right to free speech. And of course red has a psychological effect of inducing passion and tension.
And here is our poster boy to tell 'em what they can do with CFR.
A photo of the Capital building with a red tint might be and interesting ploy too.
99
posted on
03/20/2002 5:14:13 PM PST
by
anymouse
To: FSPress
Nice idea, what happens in a few years from now when someone else is running the show?Foru years ought to be enough for Billybob to get it thru SC.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 581 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson