>Ah, but the President only nominates to the Court.  Congress elects them
 >in.  Congress can force the Presidents hand by refusing to elect the
 >type of nominees the President comes up with.  Look at what happened to
 >Bush and his nominees.
How true!!
 >TO>Also: every time one of his
 >TO>pet bills is passed into law he can veto the repeal of such bills
 >TO>until he is ousted from office.
 >
 >Yes and no.  His pet bill can't become law if it never comes across his
 >desk.  Congress is the one that puts it on his desk to sign in the first
 >place.  And if the President wants to play veto, Congress can do a 2/3
 >override.  Congress is really where the power is according to the
 >Constitution.  But we the people have placed it in the executive branch,
 >making the President into a King.  Re, the horrid line item veto.
I don't agree with the example but you are right in the statement, we the 
american people have given the presidency the wrong -air- if you will. 
Remember he is a -figure of state- not a -state figure-. The power is in the 
people ans has always been. Some have sirked that responsibility for years. 
One of my biggest pet peavs: 10 minutes of politcal statement by a persona 
followed by the statement "I don't vote anymore as it doesn't do any good" 
ARRRRRRGGGGGGGG!!
 >TO>The "assault weapons ban" is just a lot of BS, but we dare
Here is were we will probably disagree again ... the AW ban I think is kinda 
a good thing if the language was a -lot- better. Supply and demand, make them 
harder to get and more expensive and less -crazed- people will get ahold of 
them, and who the hell needs AW!! Face it if -Uncle Sam- wanted to take over 
they have much bigger weopons than anyone of use own or could hope to own!! 
But the Brady Law ... lets not even go there ... that law makes a bayonet 
illegal ... geeze my Grampa only brought about 10 of them home from his tour 
of duty. I also don't have a problem with a waiting period (I know I am gonna 
pay for this one!!) as it does -help- with lifer's getting weapons -easily-, 
but I also realize they will still get them.
 >Perhaps you don't see "BS" as being serious.  I do.  I also don't think
 >things like the assault weapons ban and the terrorism law are not
 >serious or BS.  Their here, their real, and their are incredibly anti-
 >Constitution.  Bob Dole pushes and supports them every bit as much as
 >Bill Clinton.  Well, maybe not quite as much, but very nearly.
Hummm ... don't know if I should go here at all ...  ... I don't think our 
forefathers had AW in mind ... however ... I definitly think we have a right 
to own, and conceal our ownership of same from everyone if we desire 
including -uncle sam-. I think our forfathers invisioned us, the poeple, 
always being able to defend this country, block by block or house by house if 
needed, and I for one will defend my block and my home.
 >I'd like that.  Don't think it'll happen, but I'm putting in my two
 >cents to say to the power(s) that be today I'm sick of you both, and
 >want you both out.  And if I ever get the chance, I'll do it.  So here's
 >your heads up.  I'll probably be switching parties soon too, with a
 >nasty letter telling them why I'm leaving the BillyBob party.
What a year ... vote for the independant that doesn't stand a chance against
-mainstream- america or vote for Billy or Bobby, whats the difference one's 
got his head up somthing and the other is the somthing. Boy ... what a year 
... what year ... But unlike some 40% of the eligable voting public I will 
VOTE!!!!
--- SLMAIL v4.5a  (#2948)
---------------