• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

DOMA: House Republicans Poised To Spend $3 Million On Legal Defense

madman

madman

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 28, 2011
Messages
10,557
Reaction score
7,951
Location
So. California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
DOMA: House Republicans Poised To Spend $3 Million On Legal Defense



This is the excuse that we'll get in this thread.
"It's only a drop in the bucket compared to what Obama has done"


conservatives, i thought you were all CUT, CUT, CUT!!! :confused:


WASHINGTON -- House Republican leaders have signed on to spend up to $3 million to keep defending the Defense of Marriage Act in court, according to a copy of their newly revised legal contract obtained by The Huffington Post.
House Republican leaders took over the legal defense of DOMA in the spring of 2011, when Attorney General Eric Holder announced the Obama administration would no longer defend it on the grounds that they found it unconstitutional. House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and other GOP leaders hired attorneys at the law firm Bancroft LLC to represent the House in court cases involving the federal ban on gay marriage -- all with taxpayer dollars.
On Jan. 4, Rep. Candice Miller (R-Mich.), who chairs the House Administration Committee, signed a revised contract with Bancroft LLC that increases the spending cap to $3 million to allow Bancroft attorneys to keep defending DOMA in various court cases. The revised contract also bears the signatures of Bancroft partner Paul Clement and Kerry Kircher, general counsel for the House of Representatives.
 
They should recognize that it violates states rights and support a repeal. Then again though I think wasting millions on pro-SSM campaigns is equally as foolish.
 
digsbe said:
They should recognize that it violates states rights and support a repeal. Then again though I think wasting millions on pro-SSM campaigns is equally as foolish.
Click to expand...

So should slavery be a states right?
Obama has not wasted any money on the pro-ssm side. In fact, he's removed $$$ for it by not supporting DOMA
 
madman said:
So should slavery be a states right?
Obama has not wasted any money on the pro-ssm side. In fact, he's removed $$$ for it by not supporting DOMA
Click to expand...

Slavery =/= SSM. Please do not make such an illogical straw man comparison.
 
madman said:
So should slavery be a states right?
Obama has not wasted any money on the pro-ssm side. In fact, he's removed $$$ for it by not supporting DOMA
Click to expand...

So by not supporting DOMA he has taken money from SSM? Weird if that is true.

It is a dumb law, but Congress has the right to defend itself before the Courts and to do so with public money.
 
Were are the fiscal conservatives?? I mean, $3million is such a waste, right?
 
madman said:
So should slavery be a states right?
Obama has not wasted any money on the pro-ssm side. In fact, he's removed $$$ for it by not supporting DOMA
Click to expand...

The argument against DOMA revolves around states rights. It is the right of a state to decide who is married. The federal government should not, as DOMA does, say that it will not recognize certain marriages that the states perform. It is a separate issue as to whether specifically denying SSM is constitutional.
 
Even more evidence of how out of touch conservatives and Tea Party Occupied Congress is.

They don't want to spend money on birth control, but they want to spend millions on denying gay people rights. Was there ever a more intellectual bankrupt ideology than modern conservatism.
 
I support States rights when it comes to other issues but the matter of civil rights is fairly universal. How can a civil right be green lighted in one state and not in another? There should be one decision to bind all states.

digsbe said:
Slavery =/= SSM. Please do not make such an illogical straw man comparison.
Click to expand...

It's comparable in that how can a black person be free in one state and a slave in another? That was the whole premise of the civil war.

States have economic and political rights that trump the Fed but I think when it comes to human rights it's another story, as will surely be argued.
 
Northern Light said:
I support States rights when it comes to other issues but the matter of civil rights is fairly universal. How can a civil right be green lighted in one state and not in another? There should be one decision to bind all states.



It's comparable in that how can a black person be free in one state and a slave in another? That was the whole premise of the civil war.

States have economic and political rights that trump the Fed but I think when it comes to human rights it's another story, as will surely be argued.
Click to expand...

That is not the issue with DOMA. The issue with DOMA iswhether the federal government can refuse to recognize something a state does and is traditionally states domain.
 
madman said:
Were are the fiscal conservatives?? I mean, $3million is such a waste, right?
Click to expand...
W(h)ere are the compassionate liberals when Pres Obama orders drone strikes? We could play this game all day long.
 
MarineTpartier said:
W(h)ere are the compassionate liberals when Pres Obama orders drone strikes? We could play this game all day long.
Click to expand...

Except yours is off topic and madman's post goes to the heart of the matter. Conservatism is intellectually bankrupt and hypocritical.
 
MarineTpartier said:
W(h)ere are the compassionate liberals when Pres Obama orders drone strikes? We could play this game all day long.
Click to expand...

Where were those damn liburals from California when I had a flat tire ion Kansas... Apples to Oranges
 
head of joaquin said:
Except yours is off topic and madman's post goes to the heart of the matter. Conservatism is intellectually bankrupt and hypocritical.
Click to expand...
No, Republicans are. Big difference. As are "compassionate" liberals and the whole lot of them up there on Capital Hill.
 
head of joaquin said:
Except yours is off topic and madman's post goes to the heart of the matter. Conservatism is intellectually bankrupt and hypocritical.
Click to expand...

Conservatives and Conservatism are extinct. they died out a long time ago.
 
BMCM said:
Where were those damn liburals from California when I had a flat tire ion Kansas... Apples to Oranges
Click to expand...

Not apples to oranges. A simple point to the fact that neither party sticks to their "values" as they claim to.
 
head of joaquin said:
Even more evidence of how out of touch conservatives and Tea Party Occupied Congress is.

They don't want to spend money on birth control, but they want to spend millions on denying gay people rights. Was there ever a more intellectual bankrupt ideology than modern conservatism.
Click to expand...

Yes, modern liberalism. Next!~
 
head of joaquin said:
Except yours is off topic and madman's post goes to the heart of the matter. Conservatism is intellectually bankrupt and hypocritical.
Click to expand...

Liberalism is intellectually bankrupt and hypocritical. Next!~
 
MarineTpartier said:
No, Republicans are. Big difference. As are "compassionate" liberals and the whole lot of them up there on Capital Hill.
Click to expand...

The No True Scotsman rears his ugly head.

Meanwhile, conservative policies keep failing and keep demonstrating the intellectual bankruptcy of this woebegotten movement. And the OP lists another one.
 
Like it or not DOMA is the law of the land. Congress has a duty to defend or change that law.
 
madman said:
DOMA: House Republicans Poised To Spend $3 Million On Legal Defense



This is the excuse that we'll get in this thread.
"It's only a drop in the bucket compared to what Obama has done"


conservatives, i thought you were all CUT, CUT, CUT!!! :confused:


WASHINGTON -- House Republican leaders have signed on to spend up to $3 million to keep defending the Defense of Marriage Act in court, according to a copy of their newly revised legal contract obtained by The Huffington Post.
House Republican leaders took over the legal defense of DOMA in the spring of 2011, when Attorney General Eric Holder announced the Obama administration would no longer defend it on the grounds that they found it unconstitutional. House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and other GOP leaders hired attorneys at the law firm Bancroft LLC to represent the House in court cases involving the federal ban on gay marriage -- all with taxpayer dollars.
On Jan. 4, Rep. Candice Miller (R-Mich.), who chairs the House Administration Committee, signed a revised contract with Bancroft LLC that increases the spending cap to $3 million to allow Bancroft attorneys to keep defending DOMA in various court cases. The revised contract also bears the signatures of Bancroft partner Paul Clement and Kerry Kircher, general counsel for the House of Representatives.
Click to expand...

Well neither "liberal" nor "conservative" is interested in proper spending nor proper government, so not surprised. What I do find surprising is essentially DOMA amended the Full Faith and Credit clause of the Constitution without actually amending the Constitution and there seems to be very few who care.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom