[Miss Marple]

If I remember correctly, there was a veto-proof majority for this in the Senate. So a veto wouldn't have stopped this. McCain and the media had built up too much public pressure for the Senate to stand against it.

Now, the question is how to work under these new rules, whatever they are. The first test of this will be the Rat primaries. How are they going to compete with each other without attack ads? It should be a fascinating spectacle.

[MEG33]

Is it that you can run any ad you want if you don't mention a candidate's name?

[Dane]

The first test of this will be the Rat primaries. How are they going to compete with each other without attack ads? It should be a fascinating spectacle.

You're correct as usual. Will this affect the Iowa "caucus" since I beleive the law said 30 days before a "primary".

[PhiKapMom]

You have it right -- you deal with the hand you are dealt and work around the law! People are going off the deep-end once again without thinking!

Plans are in place so people just need to take a deep breath and chill out!

If Pres Bush had vetoed this bill the outcry would have far exceeded any possible gain. Too many glass half full people commenting all the time! You can now give $2000 instead of a $1000 so that was a plus, but guess that doesn't matter.

[GeronL]

If I remember correctly, there was a veto-proof majority for this in the Senate. So a veto wouldn't have stopped this. McCain and the media had built up too much public pressure for the Senate to stand against it.

A veto would have been upheld by the House.

that would have been the end.

[Mo1]

If I remember correctly, there was a veto-proof majority for this in the Senate. So a veto wouldn't have stopped this. McCain and the media had built up too much public pressure for the Senate to stand against it.

You are correct ..