Skip to comments.The party of “No” vs. the party of “Hell No!”
Posted on 10/05/2013 4:27:03 PM PDT by impactplayer
The difference is dramatic it all depends upon the ground you're standing on. The founders had it right. Their biggest problem was taxation, and who and how it could be done. So that put that authority solely in the hands of the House of Representative. Because the house had to face the people every two years and reflected a balanced view of the population, they would be the best barometer of the peoples current feelings. And hundreds of years later they still are. So when the Republicans in the house say, no, theres no need to shoot. They stand on the very foundations of our republic. Nothing can be funded without their explicit OK. But in the Senate there they have only their rhetoric. So they must shout, scare, bully, and say, Hell No!, because no simply will not do. They are standing on quicksand, and there is no constitutional foundation for their ranting. Just keep saying it, house. A simple No is really all that is required.
Not quite right. The founders made H of R lead in taxes, but the Senate and President must agree for a tax to become law.
Not a bad first vanity.
Agree. And great tagline, Jacquerie.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.