Did I say I was upset? nope. never did. I only pointed out that it will be impossible to do the job while under constant investigation. Am I wrong? On 11/9/06, Booth Martin <booth@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Why are you upset about Congress finally committing to do the job of oversight that they are required by the US Constitution to do? As to what you said: Are you suggesting that the investigations will become long and protracted because you expect a long trail of incriminating evidence to be uncovered? If there's no evidence, the investigations will dry up real fast. The Democrats have far too many important items on their program to waste time on fruitless searches like Ken Starr's. rick baird wrote: > what do these questions have anything to do with the truth of what I said? > > On 11/9/06, Booth Martin <booth@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Do you believe that Congress should perform oversight? Do you believe >> Congress has provided oversight during the last 6 years? Or so you >> believe the President should have free rein, with no responsibility or >> accountability? >> -- --------------------------------- Booth Martin http://www.Martinvt.com --------------------------------- -- This is the Open discussion among iSeries Users (CPF0000) mailing list To post a message email: CPF0000@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options, visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/cpf0000 or email: CPF0000-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/cpf0000.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2013 by MIDRANGE dot COM and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available here. If you have questions about this, please contact