Senate Defies Veto Threat

[Shogun]

666

 

[Edward]

Someone should buy you a subscription to NetFlix or something...

We could take up a donation but she won't be able to spend as much time here annoying everyone who has lived in the real world instead as Queen of Trolldom...

 

[Edward]

or...


dare I suggest....


getting a life outside of usmessageboard.com?


stay away from the belltower, Kath...

 

[Annie]

do edward or his ilk think they bother me? Grow a pair. Whoops, roomy already suggested such, but acknowledge it's impossible. Trolls.

 

[Shogun]

666

 

[boedicca]

It's rather transparent when someone joins a board and immediately starts attacking one of the longtime members.

Just sayin'.

 

[Annie]

It's rather transparent when someone joins a board and immediately starts attacking one of the longtime members.

Just sayin'.

Thank you, I hope I can return the favor.

 

[Vintij]

cant we all just get along? Lets us pray

 

[Shogun]

666

 

[Little-Acorn]

Would I lose rep points if I dared to change the subject of this Let's-discuss-how-Edward-treats-Kathianne-and-how-Kathianne-treats-Jasendorf-and-how-jasendorf-treats-shogun-and-how-shogun-treats-boedicca thread, and ventured to mention a recent Senate vote on a troop funding bill with a poison pill attached? Hopefully I won't violate board rules about hijacking threads TOO badly.

If the Senate Democrats passed a bill approving funds for the troops, and attached an amendment saying Bush also had to set off a nuclear bomb over New York City if the bill passed, would it be Bush who is "defunding the troops" when he vetos it?

Of course not. Nor is it in this case, when the Dems have attached another, almost as repugnant proviso to it.

The only real question here is, will the Dems find enough Useful Idiots among their constitutents to believe it wasn't their own act that defunded the troops, or not.

Repeat a big enough lie, often enough, and people will believe it. So said the liberals' apparent mentor, Josef Goebbels. And he was right. But the Dems are going to have to repeat this one, a LOT. They'd better get moving.

Last November, we voted majorities of these people into both houses of Congress. As a direct result of OUR vote, we are now starting to get the government we deserve. We have no one to blame but ourselves.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled purse fight and yes-you-did-no-i-didn't "discussion".

.

 

[Shogun]

I apoligize for participating in a thread hijack, lil acorn.


I will delete my posts.

 

[Vintij]

Shogun, alot of people have negative reps but they dont get respect which is unfair, alot of people have a ridiculess about of rep and get all the respect which is unfair. Sometimes the best way to be heard has nothing to do with rep points, they dont buy anything. But if you Start a thread with your own opinions and positions on certain issues, you may start getting respect and even rep points from those that disagree with you for at least putting your ideas out there, if not.....well then i guess your just not striking a chord on the piano of semi-intellectual debate. At least I, like to consider this an intellectual community sometimes. At the least, a classy community.

 

[Annie]

Would I lose rep points if I dared to change the subject of this Let's-discuss-how-Edward-treats-Kathianne-and-how-Kathianne-treats-Jasendorf-and-how-jasendorf-treats-shogun-and-how-shogun-treats-boedicca thread, and ventured to mention a recent Senate vote on a troop funding bill with a poison pill attached? Hopefully I won't violate board rules about hijacking threads TOO badly.

If the Senate Democrats passed a bill approving funds for the troops, and attached an amendment saying Bush also had to set off a nuclear bomb over New York City if the bill passed, would it be Bush who is "defunding the troops" when he vetos it?

Of course not. Nor is it in this case, when the Dems have attached another, almost as repugnant proviso to it.

The only real question here is, will the Dems find enough Useful Idiots among their constitutents to believe it wasn't their own act that defunded the troops, or not.

Repeat a big enough lie, often enough, and people will believe it. So said the liberals' apparent mentor, Josef Goebbels. And he was right. But the Dems are going to have to repeat this one, a LOT. They'd better get moving.

Last November, we voted majorities of these people into both houses of Congress. As a direct result of OUR vote, we are now starting to get the government we deserve. We have no one to blame but ourselves.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled purse fight and yes-you-did-no-i-didn't "discussion".

.

and I'm damned curious why I end up on each of these freaking threads. Truth is, most of you are idiots, that I don't speak to online, never offline, cause you add nothing. Not to life, discussion, or board. IF you think I'm wrong, please, DO NOT PM me, go right to Scott.

 

[Avatar4321]

The President has to veto this bill. its unconstitutional.

The Democrats have demonstrated that pork is more important than the lives of the troops and winning the war.

 

[T-Bor]

Why on earth would anyone PM your old shrivled up Meat curtain ass hmmm? You add so much right? My life has been enriched 0.00% by your existence. Now please go out find a man and get laid at least ONCE in your life mmmkay ?

and I'm damned curious why I end up on each of these freaking threads. Truth is, most of you are idiots, that I don't speak to online, never offline, cause you add nothing. Not to life, discussion, or board. IF you think I'm wrong, please, DO NOT PM me, go right to Scott.

 

[Gunny]

Let's see if the President will cut off funding for our troops in Iraq now.

They'll get funded anyway, and you know it.

 

[Little-Acorn]

The President has to veto this bill. its unconstitutional.

Not unconstitutional. Merely treasonous.

 

[Gunny]

Not unconstitutional. Merely treasonous.

Yeah, unconstitutional will be when the House tried to bring Articles of Impeachment against the President for exercising his right to veto legislation he disagrees with.

 

[maineman]

Yeah, unconstitutional will be when the House tried to bring Articles of Impeachment against the President for exercising his right to veto legislation he disagrees with.

\


"high crimes and misdemeanors" is a very vague standard, as we have so recently witnessed.


Remember: it ain't unconstitutional until the supremes say it is!

 

[Bern80]

And I thought the banter between Maineman and RSR was bad. You guys are down right mean.

Anywho. For all you troop supporters I ask that you start thinking conservatively and thus realistically. There is absolutely no reason to think that the factions over there are ever going to get along. There is nothing to 'win'. I believe the war on terror is one that should be taken directly to the terrorists, but Iraq has little to do with that. This is a problem the administration created due in large part to lack of forsight. I can only thank certain members of this board for helping me see that (you know who you are).

There is no way to get out this with our hands clean, even if the dems get their way, we will still be leaving behind a qaugmire of our own creation.