Still Hating America.

[Adder]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I don't support bush on this topic, but a bill described as:

• The bill Bush opposes, sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (news, bio, voting record), D-Nev., would lift the president's 2001 ban on federal funding for any new embryonic stem cell studies.

was brought up solely for political benefit. Harry Reid sponsoring a bill to "lift" something the President put in place is a move calculated to make you angry, not a move intended to get a ban lifted.

Really? Appropriations are dedicated to the executive branch now?

[Adder]

Originally posted by Diane_Keaton
Better yet, why hasn't someone in the Dem party proposed a candidate strong enough on foreign policy so we wouldn't have to deal with infringements like these and others?

So you'll be voting for Hillary then?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Adder
Really? Appropriations are dedicated to the executive branch now?

huh? I know I'll regret this, but could you explain what you mean? I know you mean something snide, and I know it's likely confused and misguided, but would you please elaborate?

[Shape Shifter]

Is that when Gonzalez resigns?

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Is that when Gonzalez resigns?

Although I thought it would happen two fridays ago, I think he has to do the hearing now, before he resigns. I suspect, however, if it goes badly he's out by Friday next week.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Apropos of the folks who got upset about the feminist implications of Speaker Pelosi (and the First Lady, etc.) wearing a veil, what to make of fact that women in Iraq now feel much more compelled to wear a veil than they did under Hussein? It's hard to escape the idea that we've paved the way for a giant leap backwards for Iraqi women (qua women).

[SlaveNoMore]

taxwonk
Because he IS AN ASSHOLE!!!!

Democrats: Raising the level of political discourse since 2000.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Apropos of the folks who got upset about the feminist implications of Speaker Pelosi (and the First Lady, etc.) wearing a veil, what to make of fact that women in Iraq now feel much more compelled to wear a veil than they did under Hussein? It's hard to escape the idea that we've paved the way for a giant leap backwards for Iraqi women (qua women).

do you mean backwards for Shia women too? they couldn't even worship under Hussein.

[Adder]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
huh? I know I'll regret this, but could you explain what you mean? I know you mean something snide, and I know it's likely confused and misguided, but would you please elaborate?

You said:

"Harry Reid sponsoring a bill to "lift" something the President put in place is a move calculated to make you angry, not a move intended to get a ban lifted.

In this instance, what was to be "lifted" was a presidential ban on how federal moneys are to be spent. Something you suggest was futile and merely a political show.

Apparently, your view is that Bush gets to decide how federal funds are spent, regardless of congressional appropriations.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Adder
In this instance, what was to be "lifted" was a presidential ban on how federal moneys are to be spent. Something you suggest was futile and merely a political show.

Apparently, your view is that Bush gets to decide how federal funds are spent, regardless of congressional appropriations.

how can he ban something if he can't ban it? who signs those appropriation bils?

[Adder]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
how can he ban something if he can't ban it? who signs those appropriation bils?

If his "ban" was merely a matter of a veto, then there would be no reason for you to be skeptical of Reid's attempt to overturn the ban through legislation (veto override as a possibility and all).

I don't care enough to find out, but I was assuming here we were talking about a ban that was by executive order, which would make you right to be skeptical about the Reid bill, but could raise constitutional question about executive impoundment of congressional appropriations.

Eta: If were not making the same assumption, then apparently your point about Reid was even more meaningless than I took it to be.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
do you mean backwards for Shia women too? they couldn't even worship under Hussein.

That's an overstatement, but your point is taken, which is why I added the "qua women" (as opposed to "qua Shi'a," etc.).

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Diane_Keaton
Better yet, why hasn't someone in the Dem party proposed a candidate strong enough on foreign policy so we wouldn't have to deal with infringements like these and others?

I knew if I resisted the impulse to put you on ignore, sooner or later you'd say something I agree with.

From your mouth to God's ear.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Democrats: Raising the level of political discourse since 2000.

That wasn't political discourse. That was just me calling an asshole an asshole.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by taxwonk
That wasn't political discourse. That was just me calling an asshole an asshole.

I disagree. As I said before, he's a motherfucker.