To: OWK
Huh? So, you support the current "hard money" restriction of $1,000, believe its Constitutional, and believe the President violated his oath and the Constitution by not vetoing a bill to increase that limit to $2,000, right????
To: colorado tanker
So, you support the current "hard money" restriction of $1,000, believe its Constitutional, and believe the President violated his oath and the Constitution by not vetoing a bill to increase that limit to $2,000, right???? Bump.
248 posted on
03/28/2002 9:58:11 AM PST by
Roscoe
To: colorado tanker
Huh? So, you support the current "hard money" restriction of $1,000, believe its Constitutional, and believe the President violated his oath and the Constitution by not vetoing a bill to increase that limit to $2,000, right???? There should be no limits whatsoever.
The way to eliminate graft and corruption in government, is to eliminate the extra-constitutional influence that legislators and executive officials have to begin with. If we put the federal government back in the constitutional cage the founders crafted for it, then these bastards wouldn't have any influence to peddle (and corruption would be a thing of the past).
No limits on our rights are necessary.
268 posted on
03/28/2002 10:09:35 AM PST by
OWK
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson