Look I am not happy about CFR either, but I can understand the political implications.
This takes an issue away from the demo's and McCain, the most vile part will be thrown out(the ad ban), IMHO, and it will be dead.
But you all go ahead and moan and ignore politics and if you are looking for a non-politcal President, you will be looking for a long time.
There has never been a non-politcal President.
Statement by the President
Like many Republicans and Democrats in the Congress, I support common-sense reforms to end abuses in our campaign finance system. The reforms passed today, while flawed in some areas, still improve the current system overall, and I will sign them into law.
The legislation makes some important progress on the timeliness of disclosure, individual contribution limits, and banning soft money from corporations and labor unions, but it does present some legitimate constitutional questions. I continue to believe the best reform is full and timely disclosure of campaign contributions.
Could you or someone else please list the severable portions of this bill?
An issue that has no resonance in the polls. What's the point?
I'm still holding out hope that Bush will figure out a way to do the right thing and veto this puppy. Even if he takes a hit in the press, he earns respect from those who can see past the spin. A veto wouldn't make much of a dent in his 80% popularity.
But you all go ahead and moan and ignore politics and if you are looking for a non-politcal President, you will be looking for a long time. There has never been a non-politcal President.
Help me out here, somebody. Isn't this just another way of saying, "You can't trust a politician"?? I'm just totally amazed that the crowd of people who decried Clinton's "lack of character" now resort to this kind of reasoning when "our guy" shows himself weak. (and I'm not saying I know Dane railed on Clinton, but his comment is representative of many that I KNOW spoke out against Clinton's character and who are now saying something just like what Dane has voiced here)
Now it's asking too much to ask your representative to rise above the average, spineless, prevaricating, lawless, politician and simply DO what he said he was going to do?? What's different between this and something Clinton would do?
The thing that is so aggravating is that to even question this is to risk having one's conservative credentials yanked (and your home foreclosed and your dog kicked, etc., etc.) because you dared to question the brilliant "strategery". Doesn't the adage run thusly, "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em", and not, "If you want to beat 'em, join 'em"?
Start over. They have forgotten who put them there.
It is just politics. OK, let's politic 'em.