WE DON'T KNOW FOR A FACT THAT THE SCOTUS WILL KILL THIS BILL. GOT IT?
Posted on 03/28/2002 8:04:49 AM PST by sheltonmac
SSSHHHHH. You will give it all away!
Screw the media.
I have read all of Farrand's notes, de Toqueville, massive selections of Locke, Hobbes, and Hume.
You just don't like the fact that Law of Unintended Consequences continually betrays your expedient preferences. It's typical of those who don't look for options, once their lust for power blinds them to the true range of options. Faith in the power of following God's Commandments opens one to options beyond the closed set. A rather famous Republican once referred to that as Providence.
Gorebot!
Bushbot!
Bushbasher!
Bush-hater!
You hate Laura because she's a strong woman!
Libertarian!
Disrupter!
Idiot!
Arrogant blowhard!
Doltish poof!
Limpwristed Ditchcarp!
Cordless bungee-jumpers into the abyss of expediency!
Beggars at the doorstep of principle!
.....For these free expressions of opinion, our forefathers gave their lives.....
Thats not true either!!!
I will always "respect" your right to voice your views. There is a huge difference between "respecting the right" of others to voice their opinion, and "agreeing" with those views.
Once again you have cruelly misread my words. I'm crushed!!!
:o)
Thank you for the kind wishes for our Easter. We wish you happiness during your Easter celebrations too.
FRegards!!
LOL, okay, you got me with this one.
I get this from you: "I would be surprised to learn that anyone with significant government experience would believe the Supreme Court is the only branch tasked with considering constitutional questions."
Ho-kay.... I'll check back later to see if you gave a tad more definitive explanation. Thanks in advance!
I apologize. Based on the condescending nature of your previous post, I didn't realize you expected a sincere response. As far as what each branch should have done...
The House and Senate each had a chance to vote the bill down, and didn't. They should have. The President had a chance to veto the bill, and didn't. He should have. The Supreme Court has a chance to strike the bill down, and I pray that they do so.
Simply put, each branch should have considered the constitution before acting on the legislation. Clearly they neglected that responsibility. On a more philosophical note, perhaps these folks shouldn't blame "the system" for their own corruption.
Bwahahahahaha. Live and learn. When "Winning is Everything" serves as a philosophical foundation, anything can be rationalized. That's all we're really witnessing here. It's been obvious on this forum since before the 2000 election. I don't understand why so many are just now noticing it.
No limits on our rights are necessary. Agree!
370 posted on 3/28/02 10:09 AM Hawaii-Aleutian by colorado tanker
You need a reality check!
I specifically said "some FReepers." Apparently, "some FReepers" put their support of Bush ahead of grass-roots conservatism and are quick to reprimand those who dare to question things like Bush's signing of CFR.
Watching the moral equivocating, logic bending and wild rationalization to explain away anti-Constitutional politics in the GOP brings back memories of why I renounced the democrats a decade ago.
Exactly. It doesn't help when you're trying to find common ground. I suspect that's why you like doing it.
I agree.
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.