I think if you begin with the notion that producing a perfect legislation is
impossible, I would tend to say that imperfect laws are better than no laws
assuming that imperfect laws at least partially address the issue.
The Bonn treaty was interesting because it ended up with the rest of the
world agreeing to a watered down Kyoto Protocol which who knows, maybe
that's what Bush wanted all along, something different to present to
Congress? I don't think he's the smartest guy on the planet but I think he
does have some political savvy. If that was his intention, he seriously
needs to improve his image in Europe where it seems all the media is dissing
him in a big way. Even Putin who on the face of it appeared to be on Bush's
side at their recent press conference, turned face as soon as he got home.
We'll see....
Compassionativily yours,
Kevster
;-)
-----Original Message-----
From: Ang�l Stewart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 2:51 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Hiyas! :)
Is it better to have bad laws..or no laws at all...
Well now that IS a rather intriguing notion.
But I'm listening to that song again rightnow so I'll devote some thought to
it in a little bit.
"
Why baby why baby why...
Why you took my sunshine!
Awaa-aaayy!!"
*bobs and grooves at desk*
-Gel
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
The way I read the CNN article, the US and the EU both had problems with the
accord, but they chose to go in different directions. It's the age-old
question regarding legislation: is it better to have bad laws or none at
all?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
