To: erk
"...but it does present some legitimate constitutional questions..."He's expecting the SCOTUS to sort those out and dump them in order to retain the few good items.
To: anniegetyourgun
He has to let the SCOTUS do the heavy lifting!
16 posted on
03/20/2002 4:46:03 PM PST by
FSPress
To: anniegetyourgun
He's expecting the SCOTUS to sort those out and dump them in order to retain the few good items. So he's putting his signature on a bill that he knows is unconstitutional.
If I wanted that kind of integrity, I could have voted for Gore.
25 posted on
03/20/2002 4:50:57 PM PST by
dead
To: anniegetyourgun
Just remember the the 16th amendment was suppose to be unconstitutional.
The second bush same as the first bush and clintoon.
26 posted on
03/20/2002 4:51:25 PM PST by
dts32041
To: anniegetyourgun
I'm with you there on why he is doing but, but I still dislike it intensely. This is a very bad decision. It was bad for the Congress to pass it, and bad for him to sign it. But these Repubs seem to want to go down the path of doing Demon-crat things so there are 'no issues' left. Duh, if we wanted a Democrat we could have voted for Gore.
59 posted on
03/20/2002 5:02:30 PM PST by
WOSG
To: anniegetyourgun
I agree, that is the only reason he is signing this. I still feel uneasy about using the Court for this type of politics, though, and it is a bit risky. I just don't like it.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson