|
|
#51
06-27-2006, 04:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Line item veto?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I believe this issue came up during the Clinton administration: Supreme Court Deletes Line-Item Veto How is it different this time? [/ QUOTE ] It's different only because the recently appointed jusitices might decide differently than the retired judges did. [/ QUOTE ] Thanks for the response. That would seem to be the hope but it's a far fetched one methinks. From the article: Stevens was joined in his opinion by Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justices Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Clarence Thomas and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Justices Antonin Scalia, Sandra Day O'Connor and Stephen Breyer dissented. Scalia, who wrote the dissent, made clear his disagreement by taking the unusual step of using nine minutes in court to read from his opinion. Hard to believe that Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas or Ginsburg would change their minds. That it makes it 5-4 stating it's unconstitutional. I'm thinking this is more about political posturing than anything else. [/ QUOTE ] Probably, posturing on issues that have no hope of producing any tangible results is common, there is certainly more of a chance of getting line item delcared constitutional than there was of passing any sort of gay marriage amendment. It doesn't seem to be as clear a winning issue for Republicans as gay marriage is, though, most people don't have a clue what it is. This makes me think they believe one of those 5 might actually flip. 
|
|
#52
06-27-2006, 04:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Line item veto?
[ QUOTE ]
A strong element of control over one's own party is indicating by not needing to veto anything. Making the members of his own party in Congress look like [censored] by vetoing one of the bills a majority of them approved will do nothing to improve his own political stance. He doesn't need to win votes, he needs Republicans in Congress to win votes, undercutting them would not be productive. [/ QUOTE ] True, but doesn't that show he's holding his party's best interest over the american people's best interest?
|
|
#53
06-27-2006, 08:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Line item veto?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] A strong element of control over one's own party is indicating by not needing to veto anything. Making the members of his own party in Congress look like [censored] by vetoing one of the bills a majority of them approved will do nothing to improve his own political stance. He doesn't need to win votes, he needs Republicans in Congress to win votes, undercutting them would not be productive. [/ QUOTE ] True, but doesn't that show he's holding his party's best interest over the american people's best interest? [/ QUOTE ] Supposedly, "his" party represents the majority of american's best interest...
|
|
#54
06-27-2006, 08:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Line item veto?
[ QUOTE ]
It's a good point, and I'd love to see a President actually make a stand against pork barrel spending like that. Unfortunately I doubt will see that happen unless McCain wins in '08. It's pretty disturbing that Bush hasn't even vetoed one bill yet. [/ QUOTE ] You honestly think McCain isn't more of the same? I'd expect it to be just as bad with McCain. The only redeeming thing about Bush is that he isn't McCain.
|
|
#55
06-27-2006, 08:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Line item veto?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] It's a good point, and I'd love to see a President actually make a stand against pork barrel spending like that. Unfortunately I doubt will see that happen unless McCain wins in '08. It's pretty disturbing that Bush hasn't even vetoed one bill yet. [/ QUOTE ] You honestly think McCain isn't more of the same? I'd expect it to be just as bad with McCain. The only redeeming thing about Bush is that he isn't McCain. [/ QUOTE ] and if McCain had a chance in 2008 it would be good reason to extend the term limits. My list of anti-votes would run Shrillary, Dean, Kerry, Gore, Biden, McCain, Edwards, Feingold, Richardson.
|
|
#56
06-27-2006, 10:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Line item veto?
Yes I honestly think McCain genuinely hates all of the pork barrel spending Congress does. As much as he's spoken out about it, I would be shocked if he turned a blind eye to it after getting elected.
|
|
#57
06-27-2006, 11:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Line item veto?
[ QUOTE ]
Yes I honestly think McCain genuinely hates all of the pork barrel spending Congress does. As much as he's spoken out about it, I would be shocked if he turned a blind eye to it after getting elected. [/ QUOTE ] What do they say about something being born every second?
|
|
#58
06-27-2006, 11:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Line item veto?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Yes I honestly think McCain genuinely hates all of the pork barrel spending Congress does. As much as he's spoken out about it, I would be shocked if he turned a blind eye to it after getting elected. [/ QUOTE ] What do they say about something being born every second? [/ QUOTE ] Is that your retort? Maybe you can enlighten me as to why a man who's campaigned on fiscal responsibility would completely ignore the issue once in office? Or maybe if you don't have a coherent arguement you can just call me a sucker.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
