“Fancy meetin’ you here, my dear!”
I note, hopefully and with total concealment of my emotions, those *Democrats who voted against the interest of their base in CCR’s ACORN Vs. U.S.A.
Their votes to ban Congressional funding for ACORN were rejected as follows:
I can not find nor can I envision a connection between the Democrats “Nay” votes and lobbyists, especially lobbyists from the pharmaceutical or insurance industry. To me this raises two questions as to their motivation; were lobbyists involved and if so, who were they?
To the Democrats voting “Nay” I am mindful of the “n” word identifying people having slave mentalities doing things against their own best interests because they were told to do so.
Finally and as an aside, it was within the past few months(?) the U.S. Supreme Court had a favorable ruling in a case involving ACORN and a wing of the Republican Party. The court said a private entity could not bring forth a suite against a congressional ruling. ACORN was mandated by an act of Congress in 1994.
For some strange reason I can not find the name of the case via Google, however I did identify it in a post I wrote at the time using information I got from Dkos and, as the Indians use to say, “..a lot of water has gone under the bridge.”
Fighting for the dignity of my Ancestors,
God bless Bill Gates, WPFW, C-SPAN and the spirits of the unborn for the help,
BB
* Please see CCR's ACORN v. U.S.A. webpage more information on this case.
**Read more at:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/12/11/813357/-Federal-judge-halts-ban-on-ACORN-funding-%28updated%29
And
(75 House Democrats who had the courage to vote against this bill.)
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2009/roll718.xml
Their votes to ban Congressional funding for ACORN were rejected as follows:
**Federal judge halts ban on ACORN funding (updated)
by desmoinesdem
Fri Dec 11, 2009 at 05:58:43 PM PST
Excerpt:
A federal judge today issued an injunction preventing the implementation of a congressional ban on funding for ACORN.
Judge Nina Gershon concluded that the ban amounted to a "bill of attainder" that unfairly singled out ACORN.
"[The plaintiffs] have been singled out by Congress for punishment that directly and immediately affects their ability to continue to obtain federal funding, in the absence of any judicial, or even administrative, process of adjudicating guilt," Gershon wrote in her decision.
Gershon said ACORN had demonstrated "irreperable harm" from the ban, while "the potential harm to the government, in granting the injunction, is less.
I can not find nor can I envision a connection between the Democrats “Nay” votes and lobbyists, especially lobbyists from the pharmaceutical or insurance industry. To me this raises two questions as to their motivation; were lobbyists involved and if so, who were they?
To the Democrats voting “Nay” I am mindful of the “n” word identifying people having slave mentalities doing things against their own best interests because they were told to do so.
Finally and as an aside, it was within the past few months(?) the U.S. Supreme Court had a favorable ruling in a case involving ACORN and a wing of the Republican Party. The court said a private entity could not bring forth a suite against a congressional ruling. ACORN was mandated by an act of Congress in 1994.
For some strange reason I can not find the name of the case via Google, however I did identify it in a post I wrote at the time using information I got from Dkos and, as the Indians use to say, “..a lot of water has gone under the bridge.”
Fighting for the dignity of my Ancestors,
God bless Bill Gates, WPFW, C-SPAN and the spirits of the unborn for the help,
BB
* Please see CCR's ACORN v. U.S.A. webpage more information on this case.
**Read more at:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/12/11/813357/-Federal-judge-halts-ban-on-ACORN-funding-%28updated%29
And
(75 House Democrats who had the courage to vote against this bill.)
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2009/roll718.xml
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home