Yikes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-36 next last
To: Daisyjane69
2 posted on
12/21/2009 9:29:44 PM PST by
erman
To: Daisyjane69
Well, then I guess this is one law that I won’t heed.
3 posted on
12/21/2009 9:30:27 PM PST by
oblomov
To: Daisyjane69
4 posted on
12/21/2009 9:31:16 PM PST by
big bad easter bunny
(A lie can get half way around the world before the truth gets it's boots on!-Mark Twain)
To: Daisyjane69
6 posted on
12/21/2009 9:31:53 PM PST by
delacoert
To: Daisyjane69
Actually, Reid is wrong.
Any Congress can overturn the actions of a previous Congress.
This only shows that Reid is stupid.
7 posted on
12/21/2009 9:32:04 PM PST by
Kansas58
To: Daisyjane69
ANYTHING can be repealed.
8 posted on
12/21/2009 9:33:49 PM PST by
Clock King
(There's no way to fix D.C.)
To: Daisyjane69
Unconstitutional!
Could they be deliberately sabotaging the bill?
The whole thing is bizarre.
10 posted on
12/21/2009 9:35:35 PM PST by
tsomer
To: Daisyjane69
While they’re at it, maybe they can extend their terms of office. They’ve ignored other parts of the Constitution.
11 posted on
12/21/2009 9:35:50 PM PST by
Maurice Tift
(You can't stop the signal, Mal. You can never stop the signal.)
To: Daisyjane69
What a bunch of BS!
Reid needs to retire in Searchlite! Now!
17 posted on
12/21/2009 9:38:39 PM PST by
Balata
To: Daisyjane69; nutmeg; Jeff Head; bamahead
18 posted on
12/21/2009 9:39:01 PM PST by
EdReform
To: Daisyjane69
All righty then, we’ll just have to elect 67 conservative senators. Like eating an elephant, “one bite at a time”.
19 posted on
12/21/2009 9:39:10 PM PST by
rfp1234
(R.I.P. Scotty 7/2007-11/2009.)
To: Daisyjane69
Sure it can, Harry. That’s what the Bill of Rights was for. Particularly Number Two.
To: Daisyjane69
PI$$ on Reid. WE THE PEOPLE can do anything we want. IT’S OUR GOVERNMENT. Turdboy Reid is one of OUR employees.
22 posted on
12/21/2009 9:43:47 PM PST by
FlingWingFlyer
(Remember in November! Throw all of the bums out!)
To: Daisyjane69
this goes to the fundamental purpose of senate rules: to prevent a tyrannical majority from trampling the rights of the minority or of future co congresses. To which Obama will respond: "We Won"
23 posted on
12/21/2009 9:45:09 PM PST by
Neverforget01
(Never, ever, ever, ever, ever....)
To: Daisyjane69
Hmmmm....calling for the REVOLUTION, eh, Reid?
24 posted on
12/21/2009 9:48:05 PM PST by
goodnesswins
(Become a Precinct Committee Person/Officer....in the GOP...or do NOT complain.)
To: Daisyjane69
I have yet to see any document labeled as “irrevocable”
that wasn’t, in fact, “revocable.”
25 posted on
12/21/2009 9:50:07 PM PST by
BP2
(I think, therefore I'm a conservative)
To: Daisyjane69
From the article:
Update II: My friend, the smartest lawyer I know, writes: "And yes. It is unconstitutional."
I hope so.
To: Daisyjane69
Actually, the more unconstitutional goobers this contains, the better. Our only hope now is unending litigation.
31 posted on
12/21/2009 9:55:46 PM PST by
FastCoyote
(I am intolerant of the intolerable.)
To: Daisyjane69
Our Congress is a real-life version of Calvinball
"It's pretty simple: you make up the rules as you go."
32 posted on
12/21/2009 9:56:15 PM PST by
lapsus calami
(What's that stink? Code Pink ! ! And their buddy Murtha, too!)
To: Daisyjane69
Anything can be repealed if it isn’t funded!! LOL
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-36 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
