http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-cheney23jun23,1,2991960.story?track=crosspromo&page=1&coll=la-headlines-nation&ctrack=1&cset=true
Last I checked we were supposed to have three branches of Government and please someone correct me if I'm wrong they were supposed to be The Executive Branch, The Legislative Branch and the Judicial Branch. According to Bush not anymore.
He seems to think that himself and Cheney are above all that and that they are not, according to them, part of the executive branch and they are not subject to things like laws. NOthing applies to them they can do whatever they want and not expect to have any oversite and have free reign over the world.
Last I checked we are not a dictatorship we are a democracy and we are supposed to have checks and balances and not have a sick psychopath run the country unchecked like we do now. If this isn't a cause for impeachment I don't know what is. This whole administration is section 8.
And I would like to ask anyone who wishes to respond to this question: When the right was in charge of The Congress and The Senate Bill Clinton could fart and there would be an investigation. Why are you so silent now? This is so much worse then anything Bill Clinton was ever accused of and because of Bush so many lives are ruined when no one was under President Clinton.
9 comments:
I agree with you. Bush and Cheney are not above the law and certainly not above the Constitution. They should not be allowed exemption from oversight committees.
While were on the subject of duties of the Executive branch and the Constitution, I want to point out the federal government equally has no business in health care, education, or stem cell research.
Spoken like a true conservative. I mean let's take a look at how Bush's faith based education has done. I saw a story on Fox where included was a question from a teacher to a student asking how old the earth was and sticking to the strict, proven wrong so many times Christian Way, saying the earth was 6000 years old. The teacher instead of saying the student was wrong said the student was right. The problem is without public education we are only going to get the Christian point of view instead of scientifically proven facts.
Stem Cells has to be funded. The possible breakthroughs that could be found are too risky not to as far as heathcare really depends on what will eventually happen. The actual proposal cause right now is none so I can't say whether I will approve or disapprove of it.
Keep in mind no one has EXPANDED government more then REPUBLICAN George W. Bush.
I'll start with the last thing you wrote:
"Keep in mind no one has EXPANDED government more then REPUBLICAN George W. Bush."
That's right. This is why I don't consider Bush a conservative. He represents what the Republican party has deteriorated into. That's why I'm no longer a Republican.
"Stem Cells has to be funded..."
Fine, good for you. I suggest you donate time and money to organizations that can help serve this purpose. Rally others to do so too. It's just wrong to rely on the Federal Government for things like this. Keep in mind that not everyone feels as you do. Or are you saying that what you feel is important has to be thrust on all of us?
"The problem is without public education we are only going to get the Christian point of view instead of scientifically proven facts."
That makes no sense. First of all, you are WRONG in trying to say that the Christian way is to debunk science. Most Christians believe in science. Secondly, I must have missed the memo that only Bible-thumping Christians can teach outside of public school.
Robert should the Government tell us how to live our private, personal sex lives? Your side seems to think they should by telling us who should marry who should adopt and things like that. That should be the first place to start.
As usual, you don't address my points and just start making more of your own. You might notice that I don't do that.
"Robert should the Government tell us how to live our private, personal sex lives?"
Where is that happening?
"Your side seems to think they should by telling us who should marry who should adopt and things like that."
Personally, I believe that the word "marriage" describes the union of a man and a woman. Yes, this is a very Christian thing as it is a blessed Sacrament defined by Jesus Christ. If two people of the same sex want to be legally bound, it should be called a civil union, not a marriage.
HOWEVER! My personal beliefs aren't the point. What is the point is that this shouldn't be decided by the federal government, more specifically, the Suprememe Court. Matters such as this should be up to individual states. That also goes for laws regarding adoptions as well.
Where is that happening?
In the Senate where they try to kill things like gay marriage (republicans did anyway)
In the White House where Bush has said he wants gay marriage banned.
No place important.
You said the government is out to control how we "live our personal, private sex lives".
As far as I know, not mine, yours or anyone else's, straight or gay. As any married person will tell you, marriage is not about sex so being against gay marriage is not affecting anyone's sex life.
Post a Comment