Admin
Verse of the Day
The Newsroom
Recent Posts
- I Haven’t Deserted You
- Can You Relate?
- Tis Better To Give Than To Receive
- Commander-In-Chief
- Got A Minute?
Recent Comments
- ~J~ on Can You Relate?
- ~J~ on Happy Thanksgiving
- Piano Girl on Does Our President Have to Go to Church to Prove He’s Christian?
- ~J~ on Does Our President Have to Go to Church to Prove He’s Christian?
- David M. on Does Our President Have to Go to Church to Prove He’s Christian?
- ~J~ on Those Wonderful Church Bulletin Bloopers
- David M. on Those Wonderful Church Bulletin Bloopers
- ~J~ on Bar-B-Que
- ~J~ on Taking The Charity Out Of The Church
- ~J~ on Back In The Swing Of Things Soon..I Hope
Blogroll
Newspaper Rack
Categories
The purpose of this post is to get the reader to put on his thinking cap and take off his partisan hat.
If we could remove certain Senators from office, or if they were not in the Senate, which Senator(s) would you choose that, if they were no longer in the Senate, would make the Senate a more civil and more productive organization?
Remember, party doesn’t matter and you must give a valid reason and not something along the lines of he does or doesn’t support illegal immigration.
This is not about the president so any comments that bring the president into it will be deleted as off-topic.
If we get a good response to this we will ask about the House at a later date.
So, put your thinking caps on and give us good reasons for what you are advocating.
Written by ~J~
Sue Says:
June 14th, 2007 at 2:47 pmVisit Sue
My first choice is rather easy as he is the Senator from my home state.
The day the Senator Specter cited Dutch Law as his reason for a no vote on legislation I felt he should be removed from the Senate. Senators should craft their votes and legislation based on American law.
This Senator never anwers correspondence and at his web site or when you phone his office if you ask a difficult question you will get what might as well be a taped reply.
I believe all elected members are answerable to the electorate and if they will not communicate at least with their constituents, they should not have a seat in the US Senate.
MFG Says:
June 14th, 2007 at 5:26 pmVisit MFG
Harry Reid - he functions with no
other purpose than to embarrass the
president.
He LITERALLY does nothing with the
intention of passing legislation.
The goal is solely to embarrass the
President.
The Senate would profit if he would
go back home to Nevada
Ayschlay Says:
June 14th, 2007 at 5:49 pmVisit Ayschlay
Sue, what incident does your “Dutch Law” incident refer to?
Sue Says:
June 14th, 2007 at 6:36 pmVisit Sue
Ayschlay:
With apologies it was Scottish law:
Impeachment trial of Bill Clinton
In 1998 and 1999 Specter criticized his own party for its impeachment of President Bill Clinton. Believing that Clinton had not received a fair trial, Specter famously cited Scottish law to render a verdict of “not proven” on President Clinton’s impeachment. However, his verdict was recorded as “not guilty” in the Senate records.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_law This is the link to the law he cited on the Senate Floor.