Saturday, November 20, 2004

Aid the Boxer Rebellion

Senator Barbara Boxer of California has stated in today's
New York Times that she is willing to filibuster in order to prevent passage of the omnibus spending bill that has anti-reproductive rights provisions hidden within it.

Take a minute and please send her a note of support.
Senator Boxer

4 comments:

Sheryl said...

That is so sneaky the way they have been inserting BS into positive bills these days. And then when election comes around they'll hang her out to dry for killing a bill that included money for child care or something. And they'll send everyone to some neutral site like Vote Smart or factfinder to prove she voted against things she actually supported. :-(

lorraine said...

I'd like them just to be honest. Are they supporters of the Constitutional principle of privacy, or are they not? Quit hiding behind sneaky little amendments and come out into the open where we can see you.

jo said...

Fortunately, I have a California address and phone number I can use when writing to the only senator with any balls.Senator Boxer,

I write to express my gratitude for your courageous and principled actions in the Senate -- in particular, your willingness to filibuster in order to prevent passage of the omnibus spending bill that has anti-reproductive rights provisions hidden within it.

I hope other Democrats will be emboldened by your actions and join you in standing up to the rampage of the right.

Very truly yours,
DJ Miller

Bart said...

Given an honest Administration (yes, I note the oxymoron) a line-item veto authority vested in the President would work wonders here.

Too bad, of course, that in my lifetime, we have never had an honest, principled, Administration. Not once.

Likely, not ever.

The difficulty lies in continual acceptance, as necessary, by all branches of government and thus the people themselves, of miserably fucked up compromises. We "must," have a spending bill...so of course we "must," accept spending turds, social engineering feces, and frankly omnibus shit balls scattered throughout often-times well-reasoned and reasonable legislation.

I question whether such lumps, irrelevant to the main body of in this case a spending bill, should even be constitutionally acceptable.

Its time for a line-item veto!