dainielost Congress has the right to impose restrictions on how money is spent. They have EVERY Right to say after a date no more money can be spent to support combat operations in Iraq. I believe they should continue to send Bush the SAME BILL and if Bush veto's these bills it will be Bush that cuts off the funding. C
Why are we trying to disarm everyone? Isn't the foundation of our second amendment our "right" to bear arms, as the government can. The second ammendment was founded on the people's distrust of the government, not their right to hunt buck in the mountains. Our forefathers and our NRA cardmembers preach that the onl
all of those links you provided lead to web pages that explain the amendment they do not show the actual amendment WRONG! His very "first" link is quoting from the bill of rights. There was "no" explanation on that link.
And i'll still detest assault weapons. Define "assualt weapon".
NONSENSE! guess what pal. the military isn't the big ol mystery you think it is. but if you want to take that pompous position, feel free. lies are lies. your notion of defending them as something noble is laughable. it is you who doesn't understand. as a member of the military, you are part of the government. you work for us. and as your employer, i expect honesty. <
NEWS FLASH The Cuts in our military that took place during the Clinton Administration started and were planned by Bush 41 with Cheney as sec of defense. Better look back at the facts! YOU better look at the facts... <TABLE cellpadding=8 width="95%" align=center bgColor=#FFF394 class="mb-
The use of a presidential VETO only shows what the president opposes It does NOT say a law is just. The Courts fill that task! We weren't talking about whether or not a law is just. Just who makes them...and it AIN'T the courts! And even THEY can't say if it's just or not. Only if it's constitutional or
CORN ethanol , at least as technology currently stands, is next to a waste of time in the respect that politicians are pushing it to be the next wonder fuel. all the points you make are certainly valid on that. what brazil has done isn't about corn ethanol but sugar ethanol, which is much cheaper and efficient in it's production
5) not really convinced on this point as the problem with energy is often the conversion from one type into another, and the transport. I don't care if ethanol would cost a massive amount of energy, if that is free energy. So, if you are using gas-based energy centrales to produce ethanol, you are right, but if you are using hydr
This is incorrect. I refer you to the link in reply #15. All congress can do is put a hopeful law in front of the president and hope he signs it. The final power lies with him. Apparently you've never heard of a veto override? Sorry, drmiler, but as you and I know the president generally has the final say because an o
But he has a Book that is recommended By who? Anyone with a brain?
Bush was handed a report on 6 August 2001 that warned of the 9/11 attack. As did Clinton. IE: Did nothing. Clinton KNEW the spit was going to hit the fan and there is documented proof of that. And "still" did nothing. <TD class="mb-Body-Quo
It is a matter of policy that he would not be told until he was out of the war zone. it wasn't him being lied to in a war zone that is at issue. EVERYONE was lied to and the tillman's were stonewalled from the truth till the inspector general and family pressure became too much and they were able to bring their case be
Face it col. America has not lied to it's military. But on the other hand "you" have lied to us, over and over again.
What ever lies Clinton told did not result in the death of our troops like the lies Bush and Cheney told!!! That's BS and you KNOW it!
Apparently you've never heard of a veto override? Sorry, drmiler, but as you and I know the president generally has the final say because an override is difficult to pass. But it CAN be done. Quite the contrary! I know very well what it is. It "requires" a 2/3 majority vote. Think that's gonna happen any time soon?
it is the congress that passes the laws This is incorrect. I refer you to the link in reply #15. All congress can do is put a hopeful law in front of the president and hope he signs it. The final power lies with him.
drmiler The results on the ground prove the fact we are NOT winning. Look at what CENCOM Commander and Sec. Def. said: Today Adm. Fallon, CENCOM Commander said things are not going well in Iraq. Sec of Defense Gates told the Iraqi leaders the U.S, is running out of patience with the lack of progress in controlling the violence in Iraq. There were over 200 kil
I wonder when Gen. Petraeus will begin telling the truth about the surge? You mean the truth as "you" see it!
drmiler NO I am CORRECT. YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT! Giving up on the arguement col? Wassa matta....you chicken?
drmiler NO I am CORRECT. YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT! Giving up on the arguement col? Wassa matta....you chicken?
drmiler NO I am CORRECT. YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT! Giving up on the arguement col? Wassa matta....you chicken?
drmiler WE ARE NOT WINNING THE CIVIL WAR IN IRAQ! I "really" don't care what you think! Harry Reid is a BIG BAG OF HOT AIR, as are you.
drmiler WE ARE NOT WINNING THE CIVIL WAR IN IRAQ!!!!!!!!!!!!! WE HAVE NO BUSINESS TO HAVE OUR MILITARY IN A CIVIL WAR IN IRAQ! CONGRESS NEVER APPROVED THE UNITED STATES TO FIGHT A CIVIL WAR IN IRAQ! BUSH IS THE REASON WE ARE IN THIS CIVIL WAR WITH NO END IN SIGHT!BUSH and CHENEY NEED TO BE IMPEACHED NOW!!!!! IMPEACHMENT ISN'T GOING TO
My point is no matter when we leave the fight to control Iraq will take place between the factions in Iraq. I agree the fighting will most likely increase when we leave but that will be the case if we leave in 6 months or two years. The only difference is the additional casualties, injured and money it will cost the longer we sta
JoeUser Forums