US Congress crushes down on the flamewars!

[neriana]

Nightmare, you're comparing apples and oranges. Natural and human-made laws are two entirely different things.

 

Nothing happens in the Republican party nationally that the Bush/Cheny/Rove cabal does not want to happen -- almost nothing, that is. McCain's their loose cannon, and one who can actually push things that the president opposes and then is forced to accept. But Arlen Specter is not a liberal or something. And if Bush did not want this law, he would have vetoed it. It's not like it's a popular one, the veto would have stuck.

 

I also submit that approving of something that is morally wrong is a stance that is tantamount to practicing it. Approving or disapproving of something is an action. And I'm talking here about human actions. I am stricter about good than bad moral stances -- one can approve of saving the wetlands, but until one DOES something about it, one's stance is somewhat pointless. I would however be friends with an inactive lazy person with the correct moral compass (one person can't save the entire world, anyway), but not with anyone who approved of torture.

 

Anyway, the president of the United States has responsibility for everything that passes his desk, whether he controls all of it or not. He is the leader of not only his party, but the entire country. We don't have a parliamentary system, and our president is of quite extraordinary importance. You want the big chair, you get everything that goes with it, though this particular president is great at passing the buck. Rather pathetic, especially for someone who does all that He-Man posturing.

[NiGHTMARE]

But Arlen Specter is not a liberal or something.

 

Actually, yes he is, and is in fact a former member of the Democrats. You might want to read this article.

 

And if Bush did not want this law, he would have vetoed it.

 

He may not neccessarily have even seen it, especially if it was tacked on to another bill which had absolutely nothing to do with it - as this one was. Even if he did see it, he may well have just glanced at the titled, thought "yup", and signed it without even bothering to discover the content. Don't forget that Bush is an utter moron.

 

It's not like it's a popular one, the veto would have stuck.

 

This law was attached to a "must pass" bill, so there wasn't anything anyone could have even done about it (even if they actually noticed or cared that it was there).

 

Anyway, the president of the United States has responsibility for everything that passes his desk, whether he controls all of it or not.

 

A new law still has to get through the senate. If approving of something is practically the same as practicing it, as you say, then this law was originally "Arlen Specter's law", if Bush actually read the entire document and signed it, it was then "George Bush's law", but it is now "the senate's law". If - and that's a big if - a judge ever sentences someone because of this law, it will become "Judge Whateverhisnameis' law". Personally, I just think it's much easier to say that it's the law of the person who wrote it .

[Drew]

Historically, when a president vetoes a "must pass" bill, the offending items generally get removed from the bill. Clinton went so far as to close down the government for a short period in order to force a compromise on the budget. It worked. If you think that this is not something that the Bush administration would want passed into law then you must not have been following american politics for the last 5 years......

[NiGHTMARE]

I never claimed this was not something that the Bush administration wanted passed into law, just that Bush could easily have personally had absolutely nothing to do with the law. His "advisors" may very well have ensured the law was passed, but that isn't the same thing. I highly doubt Bush is even intelligent enough to understand what the law is about ("duhh... teh interweb? Whut's dat den?")

[seanas]

i hate to agree with NiGHTMARE or anything, but on the naming of the bill in question, he's correct: the convention in the US is to name a bill after its sponsor(s), so in this case, it's the Specter Act (assuming it was Arlen Specter who sponsored it).

 

by way of example, check the Sarbanes/Oxley Act.

 

as for whether residents of the US need to be concerned about their pseudonymous flames, two opinions from the Volokh Conspiracy, one saying of course not, one saying probably not too much.

 

it's probably worth noting that the Volokh Conspiracy is a conservative blog; but none of my favourite leftist or liberal blog have even mentioned this act, so a: Volokh is the best i can do; and b: we can take the Act's efficacy with a grain of salt.

[Drew]

Um......no one here was arguing that the bill should be named after Bush. We were arguing that Bush had a hand in passing the bill and so it can, to some degree, be attributed to Bush. What NIGHTMARE did was hang up a straw man (ie an argument that was never made) and start beating it with a stick.

[NiGHTMARE]

Actually, I just idly commented that it wasn't "President Bush's law" (as TheWizard had called it); the argument was begun by you.

[drake127]

Sorry my little fellows but I am realllly glad I do not live in US. I have already broken too many US laws .

[TheWizard]

And now I am sorry for ever referring to the law as Bush's Law. 1000 lashes with a camel's hair to my backside.

 

Although, after going through this thread, it is pretty obvious that some people simply didn't understand the humor of the law (whoever's law it is), or my original post, for that matter. I'm not trying to be facetious right now, but I do feel bad for you that you cannot chuckle over this matter.

[Grunker]

Sorry my little fellows but I am realllly glad I do not live in US. I have already broken too many US laws .

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Cheer's to that! (In the beer that it's been legal for me to drink since I was 15).

 

The war in Iraq - crazy if you ask me, but discussable from a conservative point of view.

 

Being too late to rescue people in New Orleans - Everyone makes mistakes, even grave ones like these.

 

But this - this is crazy to the point of of utter sillyness.

 

When do the people who vote for that guy, learn?