Bob

ok let me get this straight….flying the flag at half mast is “gesture of pointless symbolism” but trying to restrict what people do to thier own personal property is somethign that helps somebody? who exactly is being “helped” by a law prohibiting flag burning?

The same number of people who are helped by a flag lowering bill.
The things that need fkn explaining here.

(If I were cynical, I’d say the only people it helps are politicans deparate for a wedge issue because they have no substantive legislation to pursue)

Wedge issue ? This is bipartisan wankery
The bill passed 408-4

american flag panties with the stars and stripes wedged between two @sscheeks, right? Or should we ban that, too?

Apparently it depends on whether Bush opposed it or not.

oh, and you want to talk about “gestures of pointless sybolism”, how about YOUR congress issuing a subpeana for a brain dead women
Comment by Knappy Headed Ho — May 17, 2007 @ 5:43 pm

No, that was your congress not mine.
Lowered or not, my flag doesn’t have red and white stripes.

ok let me get this straight….flying the flag at half mast is “gesture of pointless symbolism” but trying to restrict what people do to thier own personal property is somethign that helps somebody? who exactly is being “helped” by a law prohibiting flag burning? (If I were cynical, I’d say the only people it helps are politicans deparate for a wedge issue because they have no substantive legislation to pursue) let me guess….the bill would “help” the people who might get thier poor feelings hurt at seeing one of the oh so common flag burnings that go on in this country today. But you don’t mind if women walk around in american flag panties with the stars and stripes wedged between two @sscheeks, right? Or should we ban that, too? How far should we go to “help” people not be offended by the acts of others? Part of what makes this country great is the right to disrepect it as long as you dont do so violently.

oh, and you want to talk about “gestures of pointless sybolism”, how about YOUR congress issuing a subpeana for a brain dead women to come “testify” in front of congress purely to make a spectacle? that wouldnt qualify as a “gesture of pointless sybolism” in your mind, woudl it?

and let not forget the pedophile foley.

BM12 , would you like to do a comprehensive comparison of the criminal acts of our side vs your side regarding those in power since 2000 ?

and how about military records, want to compare those also? care to tell us some of the highlights of your side? McCain…. anyone else on your side (that doesn’t strongly disagree with the current leadership?,, ie I hope your not relying on Hagel or Powell to show us how tough you side is)

It is interesting to note that Prescott’s father was already in the war-profiteering business.

“In the spring of 1918, Bush became chief of the Ordnance, Small Arms, and Ammunition Section of the War Industries Board of Bernard Baruch – a close associate of E.H. Harriman and Clarence Dillon – with national responsibility for government assistance to and relations with weapons companies including Remington (which was at the time controlled by Percy Rockefeller who, along with Averill Harriman, was involved in arranging for Harriman’s and Bush’s sons Bunny Harriman and Prescott Bush to be admitted to Yale University’s Skull and Bones in 1916.) Remington dominance of ammunition and small arms contracts during World War I continued during Bush’s government service and many years beyond.”

http://www.answers.com/topic/samuel-p-bush

Sort of the Halliburton of the day.

Well let’s not be too hasty. Does his bill protect the half-lowered flags from being burned ?
If not it’s only a half-empty gesture of pointless symbolism which helps nobody.

What a difference control of congress makes eh ?

…stop lying you racist biii*ch…

“This is the only instance in American history where a Federal official was first tried by a criminal court and, after being acquitted, was then impeached by the U.S. Congress for the same crime.”

http://law.jrank.org/pages/3376/Alcee-Hastings-Trial-Impeachment-1983-1989.html

…as fory our criminal, mass murdering, war profiteering, TREASONOUS god…

…BUSH…

…stay tuned…

…it ain’t over ’til it’s over…

And in corner 1 we have a professional apologist….tell me, who controlled the House of Representatives in 1988?

Oh right, it was the minority GOP’s fault for somehow ’shoving it down their throats’.

I like your thinking though.

Hastings, who was impeached, convicted (and could have been barred from seeking public office had the Senate done so), and acquiited was set up and is completely innocent.

Bush, who has not been impeached and not been charged with a single thing, is a guilty CRIMINAL moron.

You beg to differ? Funny, a UNANIMOUS Supreme Court felt differently.

Funny thing. The 110th list is packed with “pending or failed”!

Comment by m12″

You can’t seriously be trying to compare the results of the *completed* 109th session to the 110th session that’s not even out of it’s fourth month.

That’s simply intellectually dishonest.

I didn’t say they did nothing, merely pointed out that they compared unfavorably to the famously unaccomplished 80th Congress under Truman.

In 2006, the second session of the 109th Congress set the all-time record for fewest days worked by a U.S. Congress: ninety-three. This compares to 162 days a year in the ’60s and ’70s, and 139 days a year in the ’80s and ’90s.

The 109th Congress beat the record set by the “Do-Nothing” 80th Congress (which met for a combined 252 days between the House and the Senate) by meeting for a total of 218 days, just over half a year, between the House and the Senate combined.

The point being: they were extremely lazy.

The “accomplishments” you cite aren’t necessarily anything to be too proud of (e.g. the Torture bill?). You forgot to include the wonderful Theresa Marie Schiavo law in your list.

You also don’t mention that the 109th abdicated its oversight responsibilities, fostered government intrusion into the home life of private citizens, eliminated habeus corpus, and helped spend the government into a $300 billion dollar hole–while lining their own pockets through influence peddling.

The point being: their “accomplishments” have been nothing to write home about.

Is not participating in an unprovoked attack on a sovereign nation, a crime against humanity, like it was back when Hitler attacked Poland for control of its oil?

Oh yeah I forgot, HYPOCRITES are alright with murderers when it is their family and friends doing the murdering!

By the same token, Iraq should fly its flag at half mast whenever an Iraqi fighting an America troop dies, right?

I’m not suggesting ANYTHING…

…I’m saying that Hasting’s ouster on bribery and corruption charges…

…was spearheaded and shoved down the throats of Congresspersons like Pelosi and Conyers…

…by right wing RACIST al Ceeracker conservative Repulsivescum and their political machine…

…which threatened the Democrats with use of a dissenting vote against them come re-election time…

…and Pelosi, Conyers and others went along because they KNOW how RACIST (and STUPID) the voting public is (generally speaking)…

…how else do you explain 8 YEARS of a fu*king CRIMINAL moron?

…and I beg to differ on the ACQUITTAL thing, it means that the Black judge was set up by the al Ceerackers…

…now…

…what about that m-16 thing…

…it could do YOU a lot of good…

…it really would clear your head…

You suggested that RACIST, al Ceeracker conned’selfservative Congresscum were responsible for the impeachment. So I guess you are implying Pelosi, Conyers, and Hoyer are all RACIST, al Ceeracker conned’selfservative Congresscum?

He was acquitted in criminal court, yeah. However, that has no relevance to impeachment proceedings in Congress. You know that separation of powers thing.

http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/91-740.ZS.html

Actually, they did a fair amount. They confirmed 2 Supreme Court judges, reaffirmed the Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act, and reformed Bankruptcy abuse. You might not like or agree with it, but its false to say they did “nothing”.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/109th_United_States_Congress
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/110th_United_States_Congress

Funny thing. The 110th list is packed with “pending or failed”!

Absolutely true. But clearly, with such huge bipartisan support for the *bill*, there seems to be widespread support even in his party for the issue, so why not take the high road and get some positive press for himself and members of the republic party (when, lord knows, they need it)?

But if you’re saying he just chose not to sign it because he didn’t feel like it–I can certainly see why that might very well be true; after all, we know how he acts when anyone tries to tell him do anything. He is The Decider, after all.

“Coming, eh? It’s been nearly 5 months and they still can’t get it done, with control of both houses of Congress! I guess they’re taking their time.

Comment by m12″

When it comes to priorities, I’ll let them focus on getting funding for the troops in iraq, and doing what they need to do to follow the will of the American people in spite of the president.

If control of both houses of congress is the standard they’re being judged against, it certainly doesn’t say much for the last session of (republic party controlled) congress, which accomplished less than Truman’s “do-nothings”, lost the majority of both houses, and managed to have many of their members indicted and/or sent to prison.

Comment by m12 #66

…and?

…what about that ACQUITTAL thing?

…and the m-16 round…

…it really would clear your head…

If you say so. Included in that ‘plenty’ is the Dimocrats whining about Executive Orders. So, he decided not to do it.

It’s not Bart Stupak’s place to tell the President what to do and what not to do.

It’s coming, overwhelmingly approved by congress. Where have you been?

Coming, eh? It’s been nearly 5 months and they still can’t get it done, with control of both houses of Congress! I guess they’re taking their time.

Hmm? No, Alcee Hastings was impeached on a 413-3 vote. Pelosi, Conyers, and Steny Hoyer all voted to toss him out! The Democrats controlled the House in 1988.

There’s plenty to whine about when it comes to the actions and crimes of this president.

“Even if they asked for it, that doesn’t mean a whole lot. Democrats voted in favor of Patriot Acts I and II and yet whined about those anyway.”

This comment doesn’t seem to have a point. The point of the original question was: Why didn’t he issue an executive order when it was requested? And this hasn’t been answered.

“Yeah, where’s that minimum wage hike anyway?”

It’s coming, overwhelmingly approved by congress. Where have you been?

“Tom Delay has not been convicted of a crime. Pelosi, on the other hand, wanted to put an impeached judge in charge of House Intelligence!”

Another non-sequitur; delay is getting fitted for his stripes, but I’ll agree he hasn’t had them issued yet.

BTW, Pelosi did *not* put forth Alcee Hastings name for the position of head of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

On the other hand:

–hastert, boehner and other republic party leaders kept pedophile mark foley around even after they knew he was a danger to congressional pages.

–Jack Abramoff found fertile ground among members of the republic party for influence peddling, with the following individuals pleading guilty: J. Steven Griles, Adam Kidan, Bob Ney, Tony Rudy, Michael Scanlon, Roger Stillwell, William Heaton, Neil Volz, Mark Zachares;

and David Safavian getting convicted;

and many other republic party candidates losing their bids for reelection based on their direct association wiht the scandal.