Latest Breaking News

boppers

(16,588 posts)

54. LOL

Reply to Scuba (Reply #12)

Fri Feb 10, 2012, 03:03 AM

Feb 2012

Well played.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

57 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

House approves line-item veto for president [View all] maddezmom Feb 2012 OP

Some thing smells. nm rhett o rick Feb 2012 #1

That's the smell of corporate supremacist authoritarianism. Uncle Joe Feb 2012 #23

Why now, why this? for the republicons to cooperate. nm rhett o rick Feb 2012 #27

Why not? It's not a question of Republicans vs Democrats it's a question Uncle Joe Feb 2012 #43

That's what I am afraid of. But I think you got it. nm rhett o rick Feb 2012 #50

Because they are counting on a GOP Presidency. nanabugg Feb 2012 #47

No, I think post 43 has it right. nm rhett o rick Feb 2012 #51

Things have been smelling for awhile now. nt woo me with science Feb 2012 #55

I asked my forer rep many years ago rurallib Feb 2012 #2

Good for you. Ruby the Liberal Feb 2012 #7

he was defeated in 2006 by a damned good democrat rurallib Feb 2012 #42

Oh, that was beautiful! Ruby the Liberal Feb 2012 #48

he actually attacked me one day after I asked him a question rurallib Feb 2012 #52

Why now, after all this time? arcane1 Feb 2012 #3

actually, I believe that they found this unconstitutional, back in the 90s zbdent Feb 2012 #17

Yes, this held unconstitutional. amandabeech Feb 2012 #33

Clinton v. City of New York amandabeech Feb 2012 #34

I thought this was so when I heard it. mantis49 Feb 2012 #57

My understanding is Inouye isn't supportive Lone_Star_Dem Feb 2012 #4

I don't like this. Never have. Ruby the Liberal Feb 2012 #5

Hopefully kenfrequed Feb 2012 #6

I don't know if I can support this line-item veto...... Swede Atlanta Feb 2012 #8

I can support a line item veto - as long as we get there via a Constitutional amendment. Doing it 24601 Feb 2012 #13

The next question should be - what is their alterior motive? In this I do not trust them. I hope the jwirr Feb 2012 #9

And then the King said no............. Angry Dragon Feb 2012 #10

The next Bush/Cheney duo will love a line item veto. It's better than signing statements. nt jody Feb 2012 #11

They're called Rubio/McDonnell or possibly McDonnell/Rubio and they will be elected... onehandle Feb 2012 #38

He should veto it. Scuba Feb 2012 #12

Or parts of it. Orrex Feb 2012 #26

Can he line-item it to limit it to just Democratic Presidents? Scuba Feb 2012 #29

LOL boppers Feb 2012 #54

more powers for the puppet emperor, umm, president, no matter what party they be from stockholmer Feb 2012 #14

Don';t like one bit. emilyg Feb 2012 #15

they did this to clinton too tech_smythe Feb 2012 #16

I said pretty much the same thing above zbdent Feb 2012 #18

if you look at the timestamps and the posting numbers, tech_smyth's reply was before yours nilram Feb 2012 #41

said in agreement ... not as a smackdown ... zbdent Feb 2012 #45

ok, thanks, I get it now. nilram Feb 2012 #46

House wants to have its pork and eat it, too. Here is how the scam will work. McCamy Taylor Feb 2012 #19

Exactly-it makes the pres the bad guy.n/t. Scruffy1 Feb 2012 #40

spending bills only Warren Stupidity Feb 2012 #20

There does seem to be a tendency for Congress to reject its powers caraher Feb 2012 #21

The Legislative Branch abdicating their power. Old and In the Way Feb 2012 #22

i thought SCOTUS had already ruled that a no-no?? n/t NMDemDist2 Feb 2012 #24

SCOTUS can reverse itself as it did with slavery. nt jody Feb 2012 #25

Yes. Clinton v. City of New York. 6-3. nt amandabeech Feb 2012 #36

I hope the senate doesnt vote for it. cstanleytech Feb 2012 #28

So How Is This Line Item Veto Any Different DallasNE Feb 2012 #30

In this version they are trying to get around the SC objections. former9thward Feb 2012 #37

Amend the Constitution if you want a line-item veto. This is not Constitutional. NYC Liberal Feb 2012 #31

It's a bad law usrname Feb 2012 #32

Isn't this unconstitutional nineteen50 Feb 2012 #35

Line item veto WITHOUT a constitutional amendment is unconstitutional happyslug Feb 2012 #39

Yeah, What would Grimace Al Eato and Roberts have to say about the unitary executive when right now lonestarnot Feb 2012 #53

They should just amend the House rules...stop adding unrelated crap to bills as an amendment.... Evasporque Feb 2012 #44

"The House bill, offered by Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis..." RUMMYisFROSTED Feb 2012 #49

Timing is everything Highway61 Feb 2012 #56