Posted on 05/13/2002 3:12:19 PM PDT by TLBSHOW
That's something we can both agree on; Perot would have been a disaster for a lot of reasons. He's a fraud and a tool of the same New World Order types he was supposedly running against.
As a Libertarian and someone who is not religious I have to take your side on this issue, which may come as a surprise. I don't believe that it's possible or desirable to keep religious beliefs out of politics. In fact Christians are natural Libertarians (see the excellent post on my home page, "Is Jesus A Libertarian?") Libertarians object only to using government power to force religious beliefs on others.
May I suggest giving Larry Elder a listen? The Sage of South Central is anything but stale.
It was that nobody but the GOP is hurt by not having a GOP controlled Senate. I gave the Boy Scouts of America case as an example of something which would have gone the other way if not for Republicans. You didn't seem to think that amounted to much then asserted that the conservatives are no good on other things, like drug laws, and that they'll lock up drug users which you didn't think was a good idea. I said that drug laws are passed by the elected representatives of the people and not the courts. You in turn said that the conservative judges refuse to rule that all the drug laws are unconstitutional so they're at fault. I asserted that drug laws are not in themselves unconstitutional. You cited the Tenth Amendment and the preamble to the constitution. I asserted that the Commerce Clause of the Constitution allows the federal government to outlaw drug trafficking across state lines and that the preamble was just a general philosophical statement and doesn't have any specific application and challenged you to cite a case where it did.
So, I reiterate, cases like the Boy Scouts of America's (successful) attempt to retain their First Amendment rights of Freedom of Association and Freedom of Religion are at stake when the U.S. Senate (and White House) changes hands.
Republican president will sign CFR which will OBLITERATE First Amendment rights of Freedom of Association and Freedom of Religion... how many Republican Reps and Senators voted for CFR?
I'm a Libertarian and I'll be happy to dialogue with you.
Wasn't that decision 5-4? If so how many of those on the losing side were appointed by Republican presidents and/or confirmed by Republican Senates?
Souter was appointed by the first Pres. Bush, also when the Senate was solidly in the control of the Democrats. Souter's views on everything were kind of mysterious at the time, which was a large part of the reason Bush appointed him. He had a lot of trouble getting confirmed, ironically because most of the Democrats voted against him. He refused to say in his testimony how he'd vote on the Dem's litmus test issue, abortion. Bush's other appointee, Clarence Thomas, probably couldn't have been confirmed if he hadn't been black. As it was he had to go through hell you'll recall.
Bush has done some good things - but the Kyoto Treaty was a bit of nothing. The left did a lot of h and-wringing but it was purely for the media. There is a reason only one other nation had ratified it. It was going nowhere.
Bush is not perfect and if we all line up behind him and echo what he is doing, we will have another Clinton. We have to have the courage to tell him when he is wrong. And he is wrong on many things - immigration is the most dangerous problem we have in this country. It cannot be separated from terrorism and it is destroying this country.
He outdid the democrats on the education bill.
The farm bill is corporate welfare for the big agribusinesses who cross the palms of all politicians.
He 'out-toleranced' the Arab-American League shortly following 9/ll.
He is still allowing middle eastern men to come to this country and take flying lessons.
Didn't he back down on the arsenic in the water thing?
Remember this man works for us and he holds the future of this country and of our children in his hands. It is ludicrous to just stand back and clap our hands over everything he does.
The same could be said for conservative Republicans. Actually it was the Boy Scouts who brought the case to the Supreme Court. Originally the New Jersey courts ruled they had to accept gay scoutmasters. It was that court that put them in the crosshairs. They then appealed to the federal courts and they lost in those too until the Supreme Court.
The conservatives on the SC have been doing lots of good things like paring back the excesses of alot of laws like the Americans With Disabilities Act, which has had alot of bizarre consequences. I guess libertarians would rule the whole thing is unconstitutional but there's not likely to be a libertarian president in the foreseeable future. The Bush Justice Dept. has just advanced the argument in a major gun control decision that will come in July that the Second Amendment does not apply only to state militias but to individuals. It's the first time any administration has made that argument in a gun control case. I'll be interested in seeing how that comes out.
No, it doesn't. I really don't have anything against libertarians or Libertarians. I like Ron Paul quite a bit. Sometimes when I'm feeling really ticked at the stupidity of the GOP, I'll tell my fellow Republicans I going to bolt to the Ls. Maybe one day I even will.
Plans of salvation are in no way the government's business but all nations need a common morality if they have any hope to survive.
Jefferson and Franklin -- neither of whom believed in the Resurrection -- both vocally believed our values should be based on the teachings of Jesus. For most of our history they were.
I, of course, believe in the Resurrection but it would be an act of great evil to make this belief -- or any belief -- a requirement for citizenship.
And I would be honored -- although I don't think it would be quite the same as discoursing with Buck at 2 o'clock on a Saturday morning. :-)
Howard Phillips is a conservative giant compared to Bush. Nice to see a Texan that sees beyond the two party lines.
Now that policeman 'took a bite out of crime' with the help of the Supreme Court.
If I were a police officer, I would be ashamed to give a seat belt ticket, or a 10 miles over the limit (on a highway) speeding ticket. This is not law enforcement, it is revenue gathering. And I don't see them giving tickets to old, beat-up carloads of people who cannot, and will not pay the fine. They pick and choose their 'victims.'
Of course, that can be interpreted to mean any domestic animal. What if I choose to raise chickens, rabbits, cows, hogs, etc. for my own comsumption and do the butchering. I could be afoul (no pun intended) of the law in Florida. Now you may think Gov. Bush didn't mean that!! Well, remember, the laws are not just for the length of time Gov. Bush in in office, but forever.
I can just see a lot of havoc caused by this bill that was meant to garner the votes of all Fluffy and Fido owners.
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.