Hopefully " six months " will evolve into an indefinite, "no sunset clause" timeframe.
Right on, GWB. Make it indefinite on Executive orders next time. Fine with me.
14 posted on
12/21/2005 6:17:23 PM PST by
IntheHillsGolden
(You pass through places ...and places pass through you.........)
To: IntheHillsGolden
Hopefully " six months " will evolve into an indefinite, "no sunset clause" timeframe.Why stop there? After all, government grants the rights of citizens correct?
46 posted on
12/21/2005 6:26:17 PM PST by
billbears
(Deo Vindice)
To: IntheHillsGolden
Hopefully " six months " will evolve into an indefinite, "no sunset clause" timeframe. Right on, GWB. Make it indefinite on Executive orders next time. Fine with me.What you want is called an 'enabling act'.
To: IntheHillsGolden
Right on, GWB. Make it indefinite on Executive orders next time. Fine with me.Why bother with Congress anyway? Or the Supreme Court--let them enforce their orders. The President has the military and the FBI, so why should he let some other bothersome bureaucrats get in the way of protecting the country?
To: IntheHillsGolden
Well, before this happened the WH said he would veto any temporary extension. Guess they changed their mind when that threat didn't have the desired effect...
668 posted on
12/22/2005 2:48:15 PM PST by
lugsoul
("Try not to be sad." - Laura Bush)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson