Nancy, Nancy, Nancy...

antichrist

Well-known member
Sep 7, 2004
8,208
0
68
Atlanta, GA
Here are a few:
June 18, 2004 ? Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee lined up Thursday to block a Democratic attempt to subpoena Bush administration legal memos on the use of torture on prisoners.

March 16, 2006
The House of Representatives narrowly defeated an amendment proposed by Rep. Martin Sabo (D-MN) that would have provided $1.25 billion in desperately needed funding for port security and disaster preparedness. The Sabo amendment included:

? $300 million to enable U.S. customs agents to inspect high-risk containers at all 140 overseas ports that ship directly to the United States. Current funding only allows U.S. customs agents to operate at 43 of these ports.

? $400 million to place radiation monitors at all U.S. ports of entry. Currently, less than half of U.S. ports have radiation monitors.

? $300 million to provide backup emergency communications equipment for the Gulf Coast.

Meanwhile, the Bush budget ? which most of the members who voted against this bill will likely support ? contains an increase of $1.7 billion for missile defense....


June 2005
Republicans successfully blocked Democrat cargo and chemical security amendments to the House homeland security authorization bill. Among the list of casualties was an amendment to reroute hazmat shipments away from high-risk terrorist targets.

And then there was all the blocking of Judicial nominees presented by Clinton.

To claim the majority doesn't try to block efforts by the minority is just plain ludicrous. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

gugubica

Well-known member
Dec 8, 2006
641
0
Middle O' Missouri
Tom, I agree, that is just how the system works. And that is fine, good actually. That is why there is a majority and a minoriny as voted by the American public. BUT, in all those examples you stated, they were defeted becuase of the majority, NOT becuase Queen Sheeba changed an operational policy in effect for 185 years in an attempt to SILENCE any opposition to what the majority wants to do! At lease in all the example you cited, the minority was allowed to make its case and vote on it. They may have lost the battle, but at least they were given a fair chance to fight.
 

antichrist

Well-known member
Sep 7, 2004
8,208
0
68
Atlanta, GA
gugubica said:
At lease in all the example you cited, the minority was allowed to make its case and vote on it. They may have lost the battle, but at least they were given a fair chance to fight.
Opps, you're right. It's actually like the republican's efforts to eliminate fillibuster.
But, it doesn't really matter, both sides do it and the other side whines..."same as it ever was"
 

vray

Well-known member
Apr 5, 2005
1,431
0
WRV, Idaho
stevenmd said:
Turned on whom? The Repubs? Yeah right. Those of us, the middle class, who will have to pay more taxes. :banghead:

And the $465 billion for the war is going to come from where? The choices are Dems 'tax and spend' or Repubs 'borrow and spend'. Third option?
 

Jake

Well-known member
Apr 20, 2004
1,994
0
64
Oklahoma City, OK
These Dems are totalitarians. Between this and the fairness doctrine crap... we are headed toward socialism, in a fashion where no real debate is allowed.....how blind this country is to the poison of collectivism. if we don't turn back soon, we are screwed.....:banghead: :(
 

vray

Well-known member
Apr 5, 2005
1,431
0
WRV, Idaho
Jake said:
These Dems are totalitarians. Between this and the fairness doctrine crap... we are headed toward socialism, in a fashion where no real debate is allowed.....how blind this country is to the poison of collectivism. if we don't turn back soon, we are screwed.....:banghead: :(

You must have missed this republican government surveillance programs, politicising of the DOJ, prisons in eastern Europe and elsewhere, torture, Gitmo, etc. Jose Padilla ring a bell? Worry about the totalitarian instincts of the government we have now.
 

Justin Kurosaki

Well-known member
Apr 21, 2004
673
0
Arizona
vray said:
politicising of the DOJ, prisons in eastern Europe and elsewhere, torture, Gitmo, etc. .

Except for the DOJ issue (with is common in BOTH parties), the rest are not party issues, but just general accountability issues with our government (and military).
 

vray

Well-known member
Apr 5, 2005
1,431
0
WRV, Idaho
Justin Kurosaki said:
Except for the DOJ issue (with is common in BOTH parties), the rest are not party issues, but just general accountability issues with our government (and military).

The DOJ issue is not common between parties. What is going on now is a first.
 

MarkP

Well-known member
Apr 23, 2004
6,672
0
Colorado
cmoore207 said:
Janet Reno was a shining beacon of truth and justice. :banghead:

DOJ protecting the executive branch from investigations of foriegn government corruption of the Democrat Party?


Never happened.
 

vray

Well-known member
Apr 5, 2005
1,431
0
WRV, Idaho
MarkP said:
DOJ protecting the executive branch from investigations of foriegn government corruption of the Democrat Party?


Never happened.

You obviously are not following the DoJ story.
 

MarkP

Well-known member
Apr 23, 2004
6,672
0
Colorado
vray said:
You obviously are not following the DoJ story.

You mean this one?

Making Sense of Comey

. . . This strikes me as the information that is vital to understand what likely happened. Attorney General John Ashcroft had certified, over and over, that the NSA program was legal. Suddenly, Ashcroft was taken ill. The next thing that happened, according to Comey, was that Comey notified the White House that he would not sign the certification that Ashcroft had signed some 20 times. Comey did not say--amazingly, no one asked him--whether he ever told the White House that Ashcroft had agreed with this conclusion on the very day when he was taken to the hospital. . . .​


I wonder what the LSM is reporting. Let me guess . . .
 

vray

Well-known member
Apr 5, 2005
1,431
0
WRV, Idaho
MarkP said:
You mean this one?

Making Sense of Comey

. . . This strikes me as the information that is vital to understand what likely happened. Attorney General John Ashcroft had certified, over and over, that the NSA program was legal. Suddenly, Ashcroft was taken ill. The next thing that happened, according to Comey, was that Comey notified the White House that he would not sign the certification that Ashcroft had signed some 20 times. Comey did not say--amazingly, no one asked him--whether he ever told the White House that Ashcroft had agreed with this conclusion on the very day when he was taken to the hospital. . . .​


I wonder what the LSM is reporting. Let me guess . . .
Powerline has credibility issues.
 

MarkP

Well-known member
Apr 23, 2004
6,672
0
Colorado
vray said:
Powerline has credibility issues.


Nice piece of data at the end . . .

. . . One more point: Senator Schumer made a prolonged attempt to get Comey to say that it was illegal for the administration to continue, briefly, the NSA program without DOJ certification of legality. Democrats and others on the left will undoubtedly claim that they now have proof of the program's "illegality." But Comey refused to go along with this theory. He pointed out that DOJ certification was not a legal requirement. Rather, the DOJ process was part of the procedure that President Bush established by executive order. Thus, it was perfectly legal for the program to continue in the brief absence of DOJ certification, pursuant to the order of that same executive.​

So we see here that the executive branch ADDED a DOJ review process to the program as a check, that the DOJ certification was not a legal requirement. The contraints actually went beyond what was previously in place and what was required by law.
 

vray

Well-known member
Apr 5, 2005
1,431
0
WRV, Idaho
MarkP said:
Nice piece of data at the end . . .

. . . One more point: Senator Schumer made a prolonged attempt to get Comey to say that it was illegal for the administration to continue, briefly, the NSA program without DOJ certification of legality. Democrats and others on the left will undoubtedly claim that they now have proof of the program's "illegality." But Comey refused to go along with this theory. He pointed out that DOJ certification was not a legal requirement. Rather, the DOJ process was part of the procedure that President Bush established by executive order. Thus, it was perfectly legal for the program to continue in the brief absence of DOJ certification, pursuant to the order of that same executive.​

So we see here that the executive branch ADDED a DOJ review process to the program as a check, that the DOJ certification was not a legal requirement. The contraints actually went beyond what was previously in place and what was required by law.

Legal by executive order....
 

MarkP

Well-known member
Apr 23, 2004
6,672
0
Colorado
bovw said:
What is Zell up to these days? Read a book of his once, seemed to have a level head.


Still level headed . . .


Says Zell: ...Social Security crisis, and illegal immigration all linked to abortion
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution ^ | 3/9/07 | Tom Baxter and Jim Galloway.

It hasn’t gotten widespread play yet, but former U.S. Sen. Zell Miller made a little news this week in Macon when he declared that abortion has contributed to the military’s manpower shortage, the Social Security crisis, and the flow of illegal immigrants into the United States.

“How could this great land of plenty produce too few people in the last 30 years? Here is the brutal truth that no one dares to mention: We’re too few because too many of our babies have been killed,” Miller said.

“Over 45 million since Roe v. Wade in 1973. If those 45 million children had lived, today they would be defending our country, they would be filling our jobs, they would be paying into Social Security,” the former Georgia governor said. “Still, we watch as 3,700 babies are killed every single day in America. It is unbelievable that a nation under God would allow this.” . . .​
 

vray

Well-known member
Apr 5, 2005
1,431
0
WRV, Idaho
MarkP said:
Still level headed . . .


Says Zell: ...Social Security crisis, and illegal immigration all linked to abortion
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution ^ | 3/9/07 | Tom Baxter and Jim Galloway.

It hasn?t gotten widespread play yet, but former U.S. Sen. Zell Miller made a little news this week in Macon when he declared that abortion has contributed to the military?s manpower shortage, the Social Security crisis, and the flow of illegal immigrants into the United States.

?How could this great land of plenty produce too few people in the last 30 years? Here is the brutal truth that no one dares to mention: We?re too few because too many of our babies have been killed,? Miller said.

?Over 45 million since Roe v. Wade in 1973. If those 45 million children had lived, today they would be defending our country, they would be filling our jobs, they would be paying into Social Security,? the former Georgia governor said. ?Still, we watch as 3,700 babies are killed every single day in America. It is unbelievable that a nation under God would allow this.? . . .​

Level headed? :banghead: