An Observation

[RetiredGySgt]

We have 2 threads about 2 different Governors that because of personal ethics or opinions made decisions.

The conservative Governor used his legally provided power to VETO a bill he disagreed with. The left is all up in arms demanding that something be done to stop him because he shouldn't have done so. No talk of ethics or personal beliefs or opinions.

The Liberal Governor refused to turn over a prisoner to Federal Authority claiming he is morally opposed to the Death Penalty. This act is illegal. The left are in that thread as well and they are insisting the Governor was just doing what he felt was right and that the US Government is wrong.

Anyone notices a problem?

 

[sparky]

Anyone notices a problem?

yes

next q is, would anyone care to explain it to you....

~S~

 

[Baruch Menachem]

The veto power should not be used for personal issues, but only in matters of constitutional importance.


He is overturning the views of a large part of the legislature

 

[ABikerSailor]

What about the conservative governor (Walker) who took the federal money that was supposed to help homeowners and put it in the state budget?

After successfully stripping Wisconsin state public employees of their collective bargaining rights, working to deny low income residents the right to vote, and attempting to fend off the damaging effects of the burgeoning illegal electioneering scandal that is enveloping his administration and threatens to suck the Governor himself into the vortex, Scott Walker has found a new project worthy of his time and intents.

Walker is directing the State of Wisconsin to keep a large chunk of the money from this week’s national settlement with five of the nation’s largest mortgage lenders —money intended to help compensate those who were victims of the illegal mortgage practices that caused so many to lose their homes and to aid in the rebuilding of stricken neighborhoods—so that the state’s budget gap can be closed and Gov. Walker can head into his recall election able to claim that he has balanced the state budget.

Gov. Scott Walker Pockets Money Intended For Wisconsin Foreclosure Victims To Make Up State Budget Shortfall - Forbes

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

We have 2 threads about 2 different Governors that because of personal ethics or opinions made decisions.

The conservative Governor used his legally provided power to VETO a bill he disagreed with. The left is all up in arms demanding that something be done to stop him because he shouldn't have done so. No talk of ethics or personal beliefs or opinions.

The Liberal Governor refused to turn over a prisoner to Federal Authority claiming he is morally opposed to the Death Penalty. This act is illegal. The left are in that thread as well and they are insisting the Governor was just doing what he felt was right and that the US Government is wrong.

Anyone notices a problem?

Yes.

Conservatives support Christie in some sort of ‘states’ rights’ context because he vetoed a measure conservatives generally oppose: same-sex marriage.

Yet they side with the Federal government against a state because its governor opposes something conservatives generally support: the death penalty.

It’s conservatives being inconsistent based on their position of a given issue per dogma, nothing new.

 

[LoneLaugher]

We have 2 threads about 2 different Governors that because of personal ethics or opinions made decisions.

The conservative Governor used his legally provided power to VETO a bill he disagreed with. The left is all up in arms demanding that something be done to stop him because he shouldn't have done so. No talk of ethics or personal beliefs or opinions.

The Liberal Governor refused to turn over a prisoner to Federal Authority claiming he is morally opposed to the Death Penalty. This act is illegal. The left are in that thread as well and they are insisting the Governor was just doing what he felt was right and that the US Government is wrong.

Anyone notices a problem?

Can you prove that "the left is all up in arms"?

 

[Missourian]

The veto power should not be used for personal issues, but only in matters of constitutional importance.


He is overturning the views of a large part of the legislature

That's an opinion, not a fact.

Candidates are elected on the basis of their views and positions.

If Christie was elected with marriage only between a man and a woman as a plank of his platform, he has a ethical imperative to veto this bill.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

We have 2 threads about 2 different Governors that because of personal ethics or opinions made decisions.

The conservative Governor used his legally provided power to VETO a bill he disagreed with. The left is all up in arms demanding that something be done to stop him because he shouldn't have done so. No talk of ethics or personal beliefs or opinions.

The Liberal Governor refused to turn over a prisoner to Federal Authority claiming he is morally opposed to the Death Penalty. This act is illegal. The left are in that thread as well and they are insisting the Governor was just doing what he felt was right and that the US Government is wrong.

Anyone notices a problem?

Can you prove that "the left is all up in arms"?

I suggest you A) read the threads and B) not worry about me proving a personal opinion.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

We have 2 threads about 2 different Governors that because of personal ethics or opinions made decisions.

The conservative Governor used his legally provided power to VETO a bill he disagreed with. The left is all up in arms demanding that something be done to stop him because he shouldn't have done so. No talk of ethics or personal beliefs or opinions.

The Liberal Governor refused to turn over a prisoner to Federal Authority claiming he is morally opposed to the Death Penalty. This act is illegal. The left are in that thread as well and they are insisting the Governor was just doing what he felt was right and that the US Government is wrong.

Anyone notices a problem?

Yes.

Conservatives support Christie in some sort of ‘states’ rights’ context because he vetoed a measure conservatives generally oppose: same-sex marriage.

Yet they side with the Federal government against a state because its governor opposes something conservatives generally support: the death penalty.

It’s conservatives being inconsistent based on their position of a given issue per dogma, nothing new.

And of course the Liberals that support violating Federal law and power are just patriots while they have only the down trodden in mind in the other case, right?

 

[Missourian]

The veto power should not be used for personal issues, but only in matters of constitutional importance.


He is overturning the views of a large part of the legislature

That's an opinion, not a fact.

Candidates are elected on the basis of their views and positions.

If Christie was elected with marriage only between a man and a woman as a plank of his platform, he has a ethical imperative to veto this bill.

And here it is, from On the Issues:

• Marriage exclusively between one man and one woman. (Jul 2009)
• Pursue civil unions in NJ, but not same-sex marriage. (Jun 2011)

Chris Christie on the Issues​

 

[Ravi]

Christie vetoed same sex marriage?

That's just so wrong.

 

[DontBeStupid]

We have 2 threads about 2 different Governors that because of personal ethics or opinions made decisions.

The conservative Governor used his legally provided power to VETO a bill he disagreed with. The left is all up in arms demanding that something be done to stop him because he shouldn't have done so. No talk of ethics or personal beliefs or opinions.

The Liberal Governor refused to turn over a prisoner to Federal Authority claiming he is morally opposed to the Death Penalty. This act is illegal. The left are in that thread as well and they are insisting the Governor was just doing what he felt was right and that the US Government is wrong.

Anyone notices a problem?

In both cases, those of us on the Left are for protecting the rights of individuals.

In both cases, those on the Right are not.

I see nothing new.