SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (28916)7/9/2008 5:59:46 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (1) of 71588
 
You mention one aspect of the House version (that it clearly indicates an individual right), there isn't any specific reason to thin the battle was over that one aspect. In fact there is a much stronger reason to think it was not over that aspect, because the Senate/final version also calls for an individual right. Pointing out that fact has no connection whatsoever with the idea that "words mean nothing", your statement along those lines is just a non sequitur.

And you don't provide a single quote where anyone in the Senate was arguing against an individual right. While at the same time not quoting the house version. You don't provide a shred of evidence for your interpretation of the debate.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News