LAME DUCKS ........... Do the Right Thing ? (32)
Funny thought, though.------ This thread is Archived ------
------ This thread is Archived ------
------ This thread is Archived ------
jvaski: Being an animal rights activist , I was thinking we should do the right thing and IMPEACH BUSH and CHENEY RIGHT NOW !
Wounded animals sometimes panic at the end - and can do alot of damage to others..........
Just a thought .............. Nothing Personal ........................
Wounded animals sometimes panic at the end - and can do alot of damage to others..........
Just a thought .............. Nothing Personal ........................
If McCain wins...Bush is not a lame duck. He is still in office, under a new name. But I would be happy to see Cheney impeached, anyway. Too late in the process, though.
------ This thread is Archived ------
jvaski: Being an animal rights activist , I was thinking we should do the right thing and IMPEACH BUSH and CHENEY RIGHT NOW !
Wounded animals sometimes panic at the end - and can do alot of damage to others..........
Just a thought .............. Nothing Personal ........................
Wounded animals sometimes panic at the end - and can do alot of damage to others..........
Just a thought .............. Nothing Personal ........................
I think its a bit too late for that
------ This thread is Archived ------
waiting4u: I think its a bit too late for that
It never too late to do the right thing ............
------ This thread is Archived ------
jvaski: Being an animal rights activist , I was thinking we should do the right thing and IMPEACH BUSH and CHENEY RIGHT NOW !
Wounded animals sometimes panic at the end - and can do alot of damage to others..........
Just a thought .............. Nothing Personal ........................
Wounded animals sometimes panic at the end - and can do alot of damage to others..........
Just a thought .............. Nothing Personal ........................
Just alittle late and I doubt if it could've been done anyhow.
------ This thread is Archived ------
I was reading this the other day and cant remember if it was in here or reuters - apologies if its in sombodies thread and im repeating it.......
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - As the U.S. presidential candidates sprint toward the finish line, the Bush administration is also sprinting to enact environmental policy changes before leaving power.
Whether it's getting wolves off the Endangered Species List, allowing power plants to operate near national parks, loosening regulations for factory farm waste or making it easier for mountaintop coal-mining operations, these proposed changes have found little favor with environmental groups.
The one change most environmentalists want, a mandatory program to cut climate-warming greenhouse gas emissions, is not among these so-called "midnight regulations."
Bureaucratic calendars make it virtually impossible that any U.S. across-the-board action will be taken to curb global warming in this administration, though both Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama have promised to address it if they win Tuesday's U.S. presidential election.
Even some free-market organizations have joined conservation groups to urge a moratorium on last-minute rules proposed by the Interior Department and the Environmental Protection Agency, among others.
"The Bush administration has had eight years in office and has issued more regulations than any administration in history," said Eli Lehrer of the Competitive Enterprise Institute. "At this point, in the current economic climate, it would be especially harmful to push through ill-considered regulations in the final days of the administration."
John Kostyack of the National Wildlife Federation, which joined Lehrer's group to call for a ban on these last-minute rules, said citizens are cut out of the process, allowing changes in U.S. law that the public opposes, such as rolling back protections under the Endangered Species Act.
WHAT'S THE RUSH?
The Bush team has urged that these regulations be issued no later than Saturday, so they can be put in effect by the time President George W. Bush leaves office on January 20.
If they are in effect then, it will be hard for the next administration to undo them, and in any case, this may not be the top priority for a new president, said Matt Madia of OMB Watch, which monitors the White House Office of Management and Budget, through which these proposed regulations must pass.
"This is typical," Madia said of the administration's welter of eleventh-hour rules. "It's a natural reaction to knowing that you're almost out of power."
Industry is likely to benefit if Bush's rules on the environment become effective, Madia said.
"Whether it's the electricity industry or the mining industry or the agriculture industry, this is going to remove government restrictions on their activity and in turn they're going to be allowed to pollute more and that ends up harming the public," Madia said in a telephone interview.
What is unusual is the speedy trip some of these environmental measures are taking through the process.
For example, one Interior Department rule that would erode protections for endangered species in favor of mining interests drew more than 300,000 comments from the public, which officials said they planned to review in a week, a pace that Madia called "pretty ludicrous."
contd
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - As the U.S. presidential candidates sprint toward the finish line, the Bush administration is also sprinting to enact environmental policy changes before leaving power.
Whether it's getting wolves off the Endangered Species List, allowing power plants to operate near national parks, loosening regulations for factory farm waste or making it easier for mountaintop coal-mining operations, these proposed changes have found little favor with environmental groups.
The one change most environmentalists want, a mandatory program to cut climate-warming greenhouse gas emissions, is not among these so-called "midnight regulations."
Bureaucratic calendars make it virtually impossible that any U.S. across-the-board action will be taken to curb global warming in this administration, though both Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama have promised to address it if they win Tuesday's U.S. presidential election.
Even some free-market organizations have joined conservation groups to urge a moratorium on last-minute rules proposed by the Interior Department and the Environmental Protection Agency, among others.
"The Bush administration has had eight years in office and has issued more regulations than any administration in history," said Eli Lehrer of the Competitive Enterprise Institute. "At this point, in the current economic climate, it would be especially harmful to push through ill-considered regulations in the final days of the administration."
John Kostyack of the National Wildlife Federation, which joined Lehrer's group to call for a ban on these last-minute rules, said citizens are cut out of the process, allowing changes in U.S. law that the public opposes, such as rolling back protections under the Endangered Species Act.
WHAT'S THE RUSH?
The Bush team has urged that these regulations be issued no later than Saturday, so they can be put in effect by the time President George W. Bush leaves office on January 20.
If they are in effect then, it will be hard for the next administration to undo them, and in any case, this may not be the top priority for a new president, said Matt Madia of OMB Watch, which monitors the White House Office of Management and Budget, through which these proposed regulations must pass.
"This is typical," Madia said of the administration's welter of eleventh-hour rules. "It's a natural reaction to knowing that you're almost out of power."
Industry is likely to benefit if Bush's rules on the environment become effective, Madia said.
"Whether it's the electricity industry or the mining industry or the agriculture industry, this is going to remove government restrictions on their activity and in turn they're going to be allowed to pollute more and that ends up harming the public," Madia said in a telephone interview.
What is unusual is the speedy trip some of these environmental measures are taking through the process.
For example, one Interior Department rule that would erode protections for endangered species in favor of mining interests drew more than 300,000 comments from the public, which officials said they planned to review in a week, a pace that Madia called "pretty ludicrous."
contd
------ This thread is Archived ------
Why the rush? Because rules only go into effect 30 to 60 days after they are finalized, and if they are not in effect when the next president takes office, that chief executive can decline to put them into practice -- as Bush did with many rules finalized at the end of the Clinton administration.
White House spokesman Tony Fratto denied the Bush team was cramming these regulations through in a hasty push.
Fratto discounted reports "that we're trying to weaken regulations that have a business interest," telling White House reporters last week the goal was to avoid the flood of last-minute rules left over from the Clinton team.
There is at least one Bush administration environmental proposal that conservation groups welcome: a plan to create what would be the world's largest marine wildlife sanctuary in the Pacific Ocean. That could go into effect January 20.
White House spokesman Tony Fratto denied the Bush team was cramming these regulations through in a hasty push.
Fratto discounted reports "that we're trying to weaken regulations that have a business interest," telling White House reporters last week the goal was to avoid the flood of last-minute rules left over from the Clinton team.
There is at least one Bush administration environmental proposal that conservation groups welcome: a plan to create what would be the world's largest marine wildlife sanctuary in the Pacific Ocean. That could go into effect January 20.
------ This thread is Archived ------
I say get rid of him sooner than January if at all possible - heres more;
Even in its last throes, the Bush administration continues its uninterrupted lawlessness. As two recent stories by Charlie Savage of the New York Times revealed, President Bush ignored Congressional statutes requiring privacy disclosures by his Department of Homeland Security and non-discrimination in hiring by faith-based groups receiving federal funds. In twice turning his back on the rule of law, Bush again resorted to his favorite executive power-grabbing tools, the signing statement and "interpretation" by the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel.
Savage, who won a Pulitzer Prize for his 2006 expose of Bush's unprecedented use of signing statements, revealed last Friday that the President is at again. The White House informed Congress that it is bypassing a law passed as part of the package of recommendation from the 9/11 Commission. Designed to prevent political interference with the Department of Homeland Security:
The August 2007 law requires the agency’s chief privacy officer to report each year about Homeland Security activities that affect privacy, and requires that the reports be submitted directly to Congress “without any prior comment or amendment” by superiors at the department or the White House.
But in a move ranking the Republican on Senate Judiciary Committee Arlen Specter (R-PA) deemed "unconstitutional" and "dictatorial," DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff told Congress the administration would not "apply this provision strictly" because it infringed on the president’s powers. And as Savage detailed, President Bush used a signing statement to thwart the will of Congress - and the law of the land:
The Bush administration defended the decision not to obey the statute. Erik Ablin, a Justice Department spokesman, said its legal view was consistent with what presidents of both parties had long maintained.
Mr. Ablin also said the administration had told Congress that the provision would be unconstitutional, but Congress passed the legislation - which enacted recommendations of the 9/11 Commission - without making the requested change. So the administration decided to sign the bill and fix what Mr. Ablin called its "defects" later.
In condoning illegal discrimination in hiring by religious charities receiving funds from American taxpayers, President Bush turned to his Office of Legal Counsel.
Once led by John Yoo (whose infamous memo defined torture as "equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death"), the OLC in 2007 produced a memorandum claiming "the Bush administration says it can bypass laws that forbid giving taxpayer money to religious groups that hire only staff members who share their faith."
As Savage detailed on October 17th, the jaw-dropping Justice Department document makes patently illegal hiring practices the policy of the Bush administration:
The document signed off on a $1.5 million grant to World Vision, a group that hires only Christians, for salaries of staff members running a program that helps "at-risk youth" avoid gangs. The grant was from a Justice Department program created by a statute that forbids discriminatory hiring for the positions it is financing.
contd;
Even in its last throes, the Bush administration continues its uninterrupted lawlessness. As two recent stories by Charlie Savage of the New York Times revealed, President Bush ignored Congressional statutes requiring privacy disclosures by his Department of Homeland Security and non-discrimination in hiring by faith-based groups receiving federal funds. In twice turning his back on the rule of law, Bush again resorted to his favorite executive power-grabbing tools, the signing statement and "interpretation" by the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel.
Savage, who won a Pulitzer Prize for his 2006 expose of Bush's unprecedented use of signing statements, revealed last Friday that the President is at again. The White House informed Congress that it is bypassing a law passed as part of the package of recommendation from the 9/11 Commission. Designed to prevent political interference with the Department of Homeland Security:
The August 2007 law requires the agency’s chief privacy officer to report each year about Homeland Security activities that affect privacy, and requires that the reports be submitted directly to Congress “without any prior comment or amendment” by superiors at the department or the White House.
But in a move ranking the Republican on Senate Judiciary Committee Arlen Specter (R-PA) deemed "unconstitutional" and "dictatorial," DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff told Congress the administration would not "apply this provision strictly" because it infringed on the president’s powers. And as Savage detailed, President Bush used a signing statement to thwart the will of Congress - and the law of the land:
The Bush administration defended the decision not to obey the statute. Erik Ablin, a Justice Department spokesman, said its legal view was consistent with what presidents of both parties had long maintained.
Mr. Ablin also said the administration had told Congress that the provision would be unconstitutional, but Congress passed the legislation - which enacted recommendations of the 9/11 Commission - without making the requested change. So the administration decided to sign the bill and fix what Mr. Ablin called its "defects" later.
In condoning illegal discrimination in hiring by religious charities receiving funds from American taxpayers, President Bush turned to his Office of Legal Counsel.
Once led by John Yoo (whose infamous memo defined torture as "equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death"), the OLC in 2007 produced a memorandum claiming "the Bush administration says it can bypass laws that forbid giving taxpayer money to religious groups that hire only staff members who share their faith."
As Savage detailed on October 17th, the jaw-dropping Justice Department document makes patently illegal hiring practices the policy of the Bush administration:
The document signed off on a $1.5 million grant to World Vision, a group that hires only Christians, for salaries of staff members running a program that helps "at-risk youth" avoid gangs. The grant was from a Justice Department program created by a statute that forbids discriminatory hiring for the positions it is financing.
contd;
------ This thread is Archived ------
But the memorandum said the government could bypass those provisions because of the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act. It sometimes permits exceptions to a federal law if obeying it would impose a “substantial burden” on people’s ability to freely exercise their religion. The opinion concluded that requiring World Vision to hire non-Christians as a condition of the grant would create such a burden.
Citing the plain language of the text and Supreme Court precedent, legal scholars like George Washington University's Ira C. Lupu deemed the DOJ's policy "a very big stretch." The ACLU's Christopher Anders aptly summed up President Bush's green light for religious discrimination, "It’s really the church-state equivalent of the torture memos."
As George W. Bush prepares to leave the White House to "replenish the ol' coffers," that statement will be just another grim chapter in his dark legacy of law-breaking.
Citing the plain language of the text and Supreme Court precedent, legal scholars like George Washington University's Ira C. Lupu deemed the DOJ's policy "a very big stretch." The ACLU's Christopher Anders aptly summed up President Bush's green light for religious discrimination, "It’s really the church-state equivalent of the torture memos."
As George W. Bush prepares to leave the White House to "replenish the ol' coffers," that statement will be just another grim chapter in his dark legacy of law-breaking.
------ This thread is Archived ------
jvaski: It never too late to do the right thing ............
If you do it in time. But if you are too late...? I have a great experience about that. 40 years. Otherwise, this is just a bad and hypocritic excuse that serves to cover a damage that some kriminals have done to put money in their pockets. And, that is the true. My friend. Cann't put emoticon because there is none with middle finger up!!!
------ This thread is Archived ------
------ This thread is Archived ------
jvaski: It never too late to do the right thing ............
If McCain wins I'll go out and slaughter a moose and dress it out for ya. May even post pics.
------ This thread is Archived ------
trish123: I say get rid of him sooner than January if at all possible - heres more;
Even in its last throes, the Bush administration continues its uninterrupted lawlessness. As two recent stories by Charlie Savage of the New York Times revealed, President Bush ignored Congressional statutes requiring privacy disclosures by his Department of Homeland Security and non-discrimination in hiring by faith-based groups receiving federal funds. In twice turning his back on the rule of law, Bush again resorted to his favorite executive power-grabbing tools, the signing statement and "interpretation" by the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel.
Savage, who won a Pulitzer Prize for his 2006 expose of Bush's unprecedented use of signing statements, revealed last Friday that the President is at again. The White House informed Congress that it is bypassing a law passed as part of the package of recommendation from the 9/11 Commission. Designed to prevent political interference with the Department of Homeland Security:
The August 2007 law requires the agency’s chief privacy officer to report each year about Homeland Security activities that affect privacy, and requires that the reports be submitted directly to Congress “without any prior comment or amendment” by superiors at the department or the White House.
But in a move ranking the Republican on Senate Judiciary Committee Arlen Specter (R-PA) deemed "unconstitutional" and "dictatorial," DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff told Congress the administration would not "apply this provision strictly" because it infringed on the president’s powers. And as Savage detailed, President Bush used a signing statement to thwart the will of Congress - and the law of the land:
The Bush administration defended the decision not to obey the statute. Erik Ablin, a Justice Department spokesman, said its legal view was consistent with what presidents of both parties had long maintained.
Mr. Ablin also said the administration had told Congress that the provision would be unconstitutional, but Congress passed the legislation - which enacted recommendations of the 9/11 Commission - without making the requested change. So the administration decided to sign the bill and fix what Mr. Ablin called its "defects" later.
In condoning illegal discrimination in hiring by religious charities receiving funds from American taxpayers, President Bush turned to his Office of Legal Counsel.
Once led by John Yoo (whose infamous memo defined torture as "equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death"), the OLC in 2007 produced a memorandum claiming "the Bush administration says it can bypass laws that forbid giving taxpayer money to religious groups that hire only staff members who share their faith."
As Savage detailed on October 17th, the jaw-dropping Justice Department document makes patently illegal hiring practices the policy of the Bush administration:
The document signed off on a $1.5 million grant to World Vision, a group that hires only Christians, for salaries of staff members running a program that helps "at-risk youth" avoid gangs. The grant was from a Justice Department program created by a statute that forbids discriminatory hiring for the positions it is financing.
contd;
Even in its last throes, the Bush administration continues its uninterrupted lawlessness. As two recent stories by Charlie Savage of the New York Times revealed, President Bush ignored Congressional statutes requiring privacy disclosures by his Department of Homeland Security and non-discrimination in hiring by faith-based groups receiving federal funds. In twice turning his back on the rule of law, Bush again resorted to his favorite executive power-grabbing tools, the signing statement and "interpretation" by the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel.
Savage, who won a Pulitzer Prize for his 2006 expose of Bush's unprecedented use of signing statements, revealed last Friday that the President is at again. The White House informed Congress that it is bypassing a law passed as part of the package of recommendation from the 9/11 Commission. Designed to prevent political interference with the Department of Homeland Security:
The August 2007 law requires the agency’s chief privacy officer to report each year about Homeland Security activities that affect privacy, and requires that the reports be submitted directly to Congress “without any prior comment or amendment” by superiors at the department or the White House.
But in a move ranking the Republican on Senate Judiciary Committee Arlen Specter (R-PA) deemed "unconstitutional" and "dictatorial," DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff told Congress the administration would not "apply this provision strictly" because it infringed on the president’s powers. And as Savage detailed, President Bush used a signing statement to thwart the will of Congress - and the law of the land:
The Bush administration defended the decision not to obey the statute. Erik Ablin, a Justice Department spokesman, said its legal view was consistent with what presidents of both parties had long maintained.
Mr. Ablin also said the administration had told Congress that the provision would be unconstitutional, but Congress passed the legislation - which enacted recommendations of the 9/11 Commission - without making the requested change. So the administration decided to sign the bill and fix what Mr. Ablin called its "defects" later.
In condoning illegal discrimination in hiring by religious charities receiving funds from American taxpayers, President Bush turned to his Office of Legal Counsel.
Once led by John Yoo (whose infamous memo defined torture as "equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death"), the OLC in 2007 produced a memorandum claiming "the Bush administration says it can bypass laws that forbid giving taxpayer money to religious groups that hire only staff members who share their faith."
As Savage detailed on October 17th, the jaw-dropping Justice Department document makes patently illegal hiring practices the policy of the Bush administration:
The document signed off on a $1.5 million grant to World Vision, a group that hires only Christians, for salaries of staff members running a program that helps "at-risk youth" avoid gangs. The grant was from a Justice Department program created by a statute that forbids discriminatory hiring for the positions it is financing.
contd;
Sorry, but I stopped reading when I saw NY Times.
------ This thread is Archived ------
jvaski: Being an animal rights activist , I was thinking we should do the right thing and IMPEACH BUSH and CHENEY RIGHT NOW !
Wounded animals sometimes panic at the end - and can do alot of damage to others..........
Just a thought .............. Nothing Personal ........................
Why now,your Buddy Pelosi had the Chance,but needed to save her Own Skin!Wounded animals sometimes panic at the end - and can do alot of damage to others..........
Just a thought .............. Nothing Personal ........................
------ This thread is Archived ------
Indyfella: If McCain wins I'll go out and slaughter a moose and dress it out for ya. May even post pics.
And Indy I'll help you do it.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Indyfella: If McCain wins I'll go out and slaughter a moose and dress it out for ya. May even post pics.
How about a couple of roasts? And the recipes as I have never had moose..
------ This thread is Archived ------
Conrad73: Why now,your Buddy Pelosi had the Chance,but needed to save her Own Skin!
Maybe "business as usual" had something to do with it..
------ This thread is Archived ------
This Thread is Archived
This Thread is archived, so you will no longer be able to post to it. Threads get archived automatically when they are older than 3 months.
« Go back to All Threads
« Go back to All Threads
More Threads
Feel Good Music
Would you hire this guy - for any job?
Unions support Democrats!
Ladies
the way you look
More Proof The GOP is a Criminal Organization
Sleepy Don!
The weird and the random facts around the world
The Best of the GOP
men's perspective towards women
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
Stats for this Thread
872 Views
31 Comments
Created: Nov 2008
Last Viewed: Apr 21
Last Commented: Nov 2008
0 Likes
Wounded animals sometimes panic at the end - and can do alot of damage to others..........
Just a thought .............. Nothing Personal ........................