Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Ms. AntiFeminazi
I don't care about CFR or the political game he's playing. I really don't.

I hear you.

You don't care.

Okay.

Well, whether you like it or not, politics is the name of the game. Now that Congress has given Bush that portion of CFR legislation he can support, the next step would be for the USSC to overrule those portions of it that are unconstitutional. If that happens, Bush wins all around.

I don't believe Bush and his people want him to veto CFR and then be trashed by the Democrats and the liberal media. Handing the loyal opposition CFR, as an issue to exploit, could explode in the administrations face. From my point of view, such action is irrational and illogical and would only damage Bush's overall agenda.

57 posted on 03/21/2002 8:33:09 AM PST by Reagan Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]


To: Reagan Man
Please see my post 48. Then read ALL of my previous posts on this thread. Then stop "spinning" my words. Then define "Bush's people". Keep in mind you know very little about me personally.

Then come back and explain away his statement yesterday publicly acknowledging that he will sign what he defines as an unconstitutional bill.

61 posted on 03/21/2002 8:38:33 AM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies ]

To: Reagan Man
I disagree with your premise that playing the political game and defending the Constitution are at odds.

Bush has the political capital saved and had laid the rhetorical groundwork to say something like the following:

"I put my hand on the Bible and said that I would defend and uphold the Constitution, so help me God. I am charged with this duty. While I am confident that the Supreme Court would strike down this bill, my job is to prevent unconstitutional bills from becoming law in the first place. I am charged with that duty; it is my charge to keep. And America, when I said a promise made is a promise kept, I meant it."
He could then have re-iterated the principles for reform that he sent Lott, including that the bill must protect the first amendment, and that the bill be non-severable. He could have said that he is for reform, but not for this particular reform.

But he didn't. He played politics, when he did not have to, over the Constitution itself, after specifically saying that he would veto it.

80 posted on 03/21/2002 8:53:05 AM PST by Dales
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies ]

To: Reagan Man
"I don't believe Bush and his people want him to veto CFR and then be trashed by the Democrats and the liberal media."

The 'RATs and the liberal media will trash and have trashed Bush in any case. Doing what your opposition wants, because you fear what they'll say is being p*ss*wh*pp*d. Actually, that's a form of spiritual terrorism that Hitler used and he learned it from the Socialists of his day. See William Shirer's "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich".

199 posted on 03/21/2002 6:08:49 PM PST by Kermit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson