Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Primary sources
PRIMARY SOURCES: That includes all claims of “he voted for/against such and such legislation” since the legislation process is just not that simple. Attach any kind of pork to any bill and that could be good reason to vote “no.” Until the candidates themselves justify their reasons for a particular vote, I have to be a neutral judge. Furthermore, I know from experience that the internet is CHOCK FULL of blatant lies about many subjects. This goes to the issue of “how on earth do I know who is telling the truth and who is not?” Again, experience says that with so much power at stake, both candidates will engage in half-truths. I will make my judgments based upon what the candidates themselves actually say. Only I can decide if I agree or disagree with the principle behind the statements.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
If the lawmakers want to make A law, made A law! Don't throw in extras for your friends. That bugs me. It might be a good law, but you have to vote no because of the extras, if you are even aware of them! I say abolish this practice of "tack-ons".
Julie
That makes too much sense for a politician to agree.
The republicans who are supposed to champion smaller government were the worst abusers in history for "earmarks"--- funds attached to a bill that circumvent the budget hearing process. I have no respect for either party. McCain is the only politian I know of who never attached an "earmark" for his state... Amazing in this day of crooked politians!
Post a Comment