Democrats Send Bush a BIG Message

[Hackman]

The spotlight on Pelosi is not a good thing.
She is a shallow ninny, and it might be hard to hide. One on one, Hilary will eat her alive.

Disclaimer: I like neither of them.

Pelosi is such a left wing, limp wrist, I think Bhillery could whack her with one of those nasty cankles and she'd be done. 😉

Pelosi is third in line for the presidency.... makes me want to start on my concrete bomb shelter 30 feet down asap. 😛h34r:

The thought of Pelosi speaker and Bhillery as president.....might as well set a table at the White House and a green light at the US border for the rag heads right now. :down:

 

[Garfield1966]

Geez you are such a drama queen.

If I can survive 12 years of Gingrich, DeLay and Hassert, I am sure you will manage as well.

 

[Hackman]

Geez you are such a drama queen.

If I can survive 12 years of Gingrich, DeLay and Hassert, I am sure you will manage as well.

Speaking of queens, are you from San Freakisco like Nancy?

I don't expect much from the limp wrist liberals, like I didn't expect much from the right wing either. I'm sure I won't be disappointed.

The point of stating that any of the rich fat cats on capital hill are on the side of the beleaguered working class is one sad "John Kerry" type joke.

 

[cybercat]

Dems vs Repubs. it makes no difference. It's all deal-making and pocket-lining and favor-garnering. Neither party is more pristine or law-abiding than the other -- if you're a professional politician, you're a crook and if you're not a crook, you won't be a professional politician for more than one term. JMHO

 

[lpbrian]

2 years of gridlock sure beats the past 6 years of destroying our country.

Our country is doing just fine. It's you left coast weenies brains are destroyed...

 

[rjh]

"limp wrist liberals"?
"San freakcisco"?
"left coast weenie brains"?


wow ..gotta love the level of intelligent debate going on here.

 

[Garfield1966]

Dems vs Repubs. it makes no difference. It's all deal-making and pocket-lining and favor-garnering. Neither party is more pristine or law-abiding than the other -- if you're a professional politician, you're a crook and if you're not a crook, you won't be a professional politician for more than one term. JMHO

While that is quite true, my biggest concern was the stacking of the courts with right wing activist judges. At least now any nominations will have to be more centrist to even get out of committee for the next two years.

 

[Ch. 12]

Our country is doing just fine. It's you left coast weenies brains are destroyed...

Apparently you don't live in the US. We are less secure, the middle class is worse off, wages have gone down signficantly (oh yeah...except for the top 5%), we are seriously lagging the world in science...an atrocity for where we had been in the late 20th century, we have lost respect of most of the world community (which...and this is where GOP ignorance stumps me...is a horrible thing since we are now in a period of globalization where nationalism doesn't work any more and we must think on a larger scale...no matter how many more brain cells that may take), the world economy is beating us down, etc. What country are you from, lpbrian?

 

[700IAM]

It is now time to put the screws to corporate America

Spoken like a big buffoon

 

[Seatacus]

It is now time to put the screws to corporate America

Please go easy on them........I work for a corporation.

 

[delldude]

Your title is misleading...it should read "Republicans send Bush A BIG message
". 😉

 

[PITbull]

I have just one word to remind you of, Bears:

VETO

Here's another one:

GRIDLOCK

The Dems need 287 seats in the House and 66 seats in the Senate to overrule a veto. Bush has little to lose, and Cheney has no hope of being a serious contender in 2008, so I expect the veto pen to be out in force for the next two years, meaning that while the Dems have great ambition and did a better PR job than the Reps did, Congress will be gridlocked.

Still, it will be interesting to see if the Dems are actually able to accomplish anything aside from criticizing Bush, since they won't be able to use him as a rallying cry during the next election.

Bush can VETO all he wants, that will only send the BILL BACK TO THE SENATE...where it has another opportunity to pass!!!

I am so sure...as sure as I'm sitting here...that what the Bush Vetos will be splashed all over the media ad nauseum...which will only HURT the next Republican contenders in 2008!

Obviously, there is a mandate for CHANGE from the American Voters...LOUD AND CLEAR, no one can deny that. If Bush spends his next two years using his vetoing power to "get smart" with the elected Dems...he'll only go down in history as the biggest arrogant loser president U.S. ever elected twice!

 

[eolesen]

Better go check your Civics textbook... A presidential veto can be overridden only by a two-thirds vote in both the Senate and the House.

Obviously, there is a mandate for CHANGE for the American Voters...LOUD AND CLEAR. If Bush spends his next two years using his vetoing power to "get smart" with the elected Dems...he'll only go down in history as the biggest arrogant loser president U.S. ever elected twice!

Uh, 51% is what the concessionary agreement votes were in 2003, and I didn't see anyone calling those elections a mandate.

Of the states that had a change in control for a Senate seat, Bob Casey's victory over Rick Santorum is the only race where I'd say a mandate was given, with 59% of the vote going to Casey. There were two House races that exceeded 60% (one each in Indiana and Ohio).

 

[Gilding the Lily]

Bush can VETO all he wants, that will only send the BILL BACK TO THE SENATE...where it has another opportunity to pass!!!

I am so sure...as sure as I'm sitting here...that what the Bush Vetos will be splashed all over the media ad nauseum...which will only HURT the next Republican contenders in 2008!

Obviously, there is a mandate for CHANGE for the American Voters...LOUD AND CLEAR. If Bush spends his next two years using his vetoing power to "get smart" with the elected Dems...he'll only go down in history as the biggest arrogant loser president U.S. ever elected twice!

PitBull,

Please tell me that you are not suggesting that only the Senate needs to vote in order to override a Presidential Veto???

If so, next time please do a little research before you post; because you are absolutely wrong!

After a veto (not pocket-veto), the bill is sent back to the house of which it was originated (either House or Senate). However, a 2/3 vote must be achieved by both houses. If one house cannot achieve the requisite votes, then the other house will not attempt to vote on the bill because it would be useless.

I hope I just misunderstood your post. This is basic information that is learned in 6th grade Civics courses. And if you did not know, it was still easily obtained information by "using the google."

http://www.rules.house.gov/archives/RS21750.pdf

 

[PITbull]

Better go check your Civics textbook... A presidential veto can be overridden only by a two-thirds vote in both the Senate and the House.
Uh, 51% is what the concessionary agreement votes were in 2003, and I didn't see anyone calling those elections a mandate.

Of the states that had a change in control for a Senate seat, Bob Casey's victory over Rick Santorum is the only race where I'd say a mandate was given, with 59% of the vote going to Casey. There were two House races that exceeded 60% (one each in Indiana and Ohio).

If there had been more Republicans senate and house seats up for grabs, the gap would have been much wider, my friend.

Just wait in two years...you Repub. will be so far behind, will take you guys a couple of decades to change the tide. Keep in mind, the youth are becoming voters and they ARE NOT HARD CORE RELIGIOUS fanatics with ultra conservative ideologies...my way or the highway mentality.

PitBull,

Please tell me that you are not suggesting that only the Senate needs to vote in order to override a Presidential Veto???

If so, next time please do a little research before you post; because you are absolutely wrong!

After a veto (not pocket-veto), the bill is sent back to the house of which it was originated (either House or Senate). However, a 2/3 vote must be achieved by both houses. If one house cannot achieve the requisite votes, then the other house will not attempt to vote on the bill because it would be useless.

I hope I just misunderstood your post. This is basic information that is learned in 6th grade Civics courses. And if you did not know, it was still easily obtained information by "using the google."

http://www.rules.house.gov/archives/RS21750.pdf

Hey Lily of the fields...

Please tell me that you are not suggesting that the HOUSE and SENATE are powerless with a presidential veto????

I think you need to review events that occured earlier this week, BOTH THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE HAVE A MAJORITY THAT ARE DEMS. My crystal ball sees the Republicans going against the Pres on many issues. If the Republican incumbants continue not to listen to their constituants and follow the Lame quack pres, they will be voted out of office in 2008(giving up even more seats) along with any Republican presidential candidate!!!!

You following the bouncing ball???? 🙄