Ted Kennedy in action.......

Discussion in 'Politics' started by DQuixote, Jul 14, 2007.

?

What should Bush do?

  1. Should Bush veto the military budget bill?

    9 vote(s)
    90.0%
  2. Should Bush sign the MBB plus the repugnant amendment into law?

    1 vote(s)
    10.0%
  1. DQuixote

    DQuixote
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2006
    Messages:
    704
    Likes Received:
    0
    ........will attach a homosexual amendment in the Senate to the military budget bill ~~ Bush will veto? The amendment endorses the idea that to criticize a homosexual is hate speech, an assault; to actually physically harm one is a hate crime. The Christian argument against it is that pastors could be punished for preaching against homosexuality; the implication is that their "hate speech" might encourage someone to physically harm a homosexual. Sort of like if I legally sell you a gun and you shoot someone, I can be charged with a crime.

    p.s. The "hate crimes" bill was passed in the House in May 2007. Bush vowed to veto it then.
     
    #1 DQuixote, Jul 14, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 14, 2007
  2. bobbyd

    bobbyd
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2004
    Messages:
    1,468
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is why there needs to be a Line Item Veto.
     
  3. hillclimber1

    hillclimber1
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    2,447
    Likes Received:
    0
    Doesn't he have that option?
     
  4. DQuixote

    DQuixote
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2006
    Messages:
    704
    Likes Received:
    0
    Unfortunately, Congress has never codified a line item veto into law. It's all or nothing. Lots of presidents have asked for it (and governors) but no president has received that authority.

    :1_grouphug: <---- praying for line-item veto authority.
     
  5. 2 Timothy2:1-4

    2 Timothy2:1-4
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,879
    Likes Received:
    0
    We should not be able to attach amendments unrelated to the original bill itself. This is how things get done against the will of the people. It is sneaky, underhanded and evil.
     
  6. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Is there a link available to the text of the amendment?
     
  7. DQuixote

    DQuixote
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2006
    Messages:
    704
    Likes Received:
    0
    Believe it or not, the number keeps changing! Here's the latest........

    Senators Edward Kennedy and Gordon Smith have docketed their hate crimes bill for Tuesday. It was passed back in May in the House, but without Kennedy-Smith's homosexual rider. The amendment is currently designated SA 2067. It will amend the federal defense spending bill.

    You still have time to call or E-Mail your Senator and send a short, courteous E-Mail to [email protected].

    96. S.AMDT.2067 to H.R.1585 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
    Sponsor: Sen Kennedy, Edward M. [MA] (introduced 7/11/2007) Cosponsors (1)
    Latest Major Action: 7/11/2007 Senate amendment submitted
     
    #7 DQuixote, Jul 15, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 15, 2007
  8. TomVols

    TomVols
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually, didn't congress give Clinton a line-item veto in his second term, but SCOTUS ruled it unconstitutional?

    The Constitution needs to be amended so that this can occur. The only other alternative is that both houses should adopt rules prohibiting the practice of attaching amendments that are not germane (yeah, right).
     
  9. TomVols

    TomVols
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'd like to see that, too
     
  10. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,897
    Likes Received:
    294
    I believe you are correct. A Republican congress believed it was such a needed tool that they granted the power to a democrat president.

    I don't believe democrats would ever grant it to a sitting Republican.
     
  11. DQuixote

    DQuixote
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2006
    Messages:
    704
    Likes Received:
    0
    Text...........

    http://tinyurl.com/ytnotg

    S.AMDT.2067
    Amends: H.R.1585
    Sponsor: Sen Kennedy, Edward M. [MA] (submitted 7/11/2007)

    AMENDMENT PURPOSE: Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
    TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: See Tiny URL
    COSPONSORS(15):
    This hate crimes category is giving Christian pastors, churches, and organizations reason to propose its defeat:

    (iii) is motivated by prejudice based on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim, or is a violation of the State, local, or Tribal hate crime laws.
     
    #11 DQuixote, Jul 16, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 16, 2007
  12. DQuixote

    DQuixote
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2006
    Messages:
    704
    Likes Received:
    0
    Senate backers of 'hate crimes' bill criticized for 'sneaky' tactics
    A spokesman for Concerned Women for America (CWA) accuses Senate proponents of the so-called "hate crimes" bill of using "underhanded" tactics to ram the legislation through. Matt Barber is denouncing Senators Ted Kennedy and Gordon Smith for attaching the legislation to the Defense Authorization bill.

    The top three Democratic presidential candidates -- Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards -- plan to take part in a one-hour debate August 9 devoted solely to "gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender" (GLBT) issues. The debate will be televised live from Los Angeles on the Viacom-owned homosexual television network "LOGO."
     
  13. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks, DQuixote. :thumbs:

    I don't like any "hate" crimes bill or law. A real crime is a crime - regardless of motivation.
     
  14. JustChristian

    JustChristian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    0
    When I think about the line item veto wouldn't it allow a President to veto the part of the bill that caused most Congressmen to vote for it and leave the unsupported part? Let's say in this case to veto military funding and pass the Hate Crimes adder. Or was the line item veto only for adders to a bill?
     
  15. DQuixote

    DQuixote
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2006
    Messages:
    704
    Likes Received:
    0
    If line-item-veto existed, it would enable the President to go through the legislation line-by-line, using his veto only on certain items. If Bush had line item veto authority, he could sign the military budget and veto the hate crimes legislation. It is sickening that something like hate crimes can be added to the budget for our military. But it is done all the time. Make a law about combating crime and someone will add an amendment to build a bridge in his congressional district, or an amendment to study the life of ducks passing through his state. No one actually reads the legislation, folks. They vote "aye" on one bill in order to get some other congressperson to vote "aye" on their pet bill. The other guy or gal never reads what he/she is voting for. "If you'll vote for the hate crimes bill I'll vote for resurfacing your highway 33 from Podunk to Smallton." It is sickening.
     

Share This Page

Loading...