Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • by pudge (1) on 2002.06.13 17:18 (#9536) Homepage Journal
    I don't know much about the issue, and don't really care at the moment, but I found this Congressperson's quote to be funny:

    "The administration is going against the will of Congress and the international community by allowing a small band of extremists to hamstring its foreign policy."

    Odd, I don't recall anything in the Constitution saying the President should be bound in any way -- legally, morally, or otherwise -- to the will of Congress, let alone the "international community" (even if such wills exist).
    • I thought that was funny too, particularly since trying to define the "will of Congress" would send anyone into the land of the nutty.
      • Indeed. :)

        Well, unless it is defined as what Congress votes for, such as a bill or resolution, but the President is specifically allowed to -- even encouraged to, if he feels he should -- disagree with such will of Congress.
        • Exactly. Viewing a vote on a bill as a more abstract notion of "will" is dangerous, just like using the "will of the people" to justify what you think is right. (If you think there's a "will of the people", try getting 4+ hackers to agree on where to eat :-)