60-40 Senate Votes to Stomp out Freedom of Speech

[toenail]

In direct and wanton violation of their oaths of office, sixty U.S. Senators just voted to squash the First Amendment to the Constitution.

[Gritty]

BUSH #42: "Read my lips. NO NEW TAXES!"

Result: One term and 8 years of Bill Clinton...

BUSH #44: "Today, I am signing this Campaign Finance Bill because the American People want action, NOW!"

Result: One term and 8 years of Hillary Clinton....

[maxwellp]

I don't know why any Republican would vote for CFR. But, after I see which Republicans did so, I won't vote for them ever again. Will I vote for a Democrat? No. I simply won't vote. What they did to our beloved Constitution and freedom of speech is beyond reprehensible. It's beyond belief!

[DoughtyOne]

[RoseofTexas]

My apologies to Mr. Billybob and you I can't seem to find it. I'm sorry, I probably misread an earlier post. I'm so upset and surfing from post to post that perhaps I misunderstood or got the posts confused. SSSSOOOORRRY! I need to keep a cool head :)!

[maxwellp]

Listening to Rush today, he thinks Bush will sign it. I don't know, but I'd really like to WHY Bush would sign it.

[Congressman Billybob]

You state the problem correctly. There IS a solution, however. I hope Bush uses it.

Billybob

[RFP]

Now that you've enlarged that picture Doughty, we can all see clearly that McBane is just centering the knife in Daschle's back for us. All we need now is for Bush to act upon Congressman Billibob's plan and push it in...DEEP!

[gov_bean_ counter]

McCain can't keep from stabbing people in the back.

[RFP]

You just KNOW someone's gonna PhotoShop that picture and place a nice big dagger in McCaniac's left hand.

[cynwoody]

Arizona, remember this day.

Has Charlie Keating opined on the CFR bill yet?

[RFP]

I'm thinking of something along Mad Magazine's old "Spy vs. Spy" with the both of them stabbing each other in the back.

[DoughtyOne]

viva el veto

Velveta for short!

[Congressman Billybob]

Congress does NOT have the votes, to override a veto. If that were the only problem, the President would veto and that would be the end of that. The problem is more difficult than that.

Billybob

[AmishDude]

He's probably talking "line-item veto". In which case, it will be in USSC immediately. The only other option Bush has other than signing will be "pocket veto". But, that would be the same (in this day and age of media) as vetoing it outright.

[Uncle Bill]

"Bush has not said whether he would sign the bill. But he has told Republican leaders in Congress, who oppose it, not to count on his veto."

ABC News’s This Week - January 23, 2000

GEORGE WILL: In which case, would you veto the McCain-Feingold bill, or the Shays-Meehan bill?

GEORGE BUSH: That’s an interesting question. I — I — "yes I would."

---

"A Betrayal" - Bush on campaign-finance reform legislation

Republicans Cave on Campaign Finance

SHOW BUSH THE DOOR IN 2004

[RoseofTexas]

So, are you saying there will NOT be a veto?!

[muawiyah]

Why is it Senator McCain wants so bad to go down in history as the vile monster who destroyed free speech in America?

[AmishDude]

You seem to be hinting at the line-item veto. (You don't have to say it, let me bring it up as a hypothetical.) IIRC, it is an open question as to whether or not the president has such power already. If he decides to veto only the unconstitutional provisions, it does a number of wonderful things:

1. Without the unconstitutional spending restrictions, it's a great bill for Republicans -- raises the personal donation limit and other nice things.
2. Bush can both support CFR in principle, but support the Constitution as well.
3. The Senate has to oppose his action because the use of the line-item veto in the future will strip Congress of its power.
4. The Dems will have to be in the position of supporting blatantly unconstitutional provisions.
5. Bush can say he wants to test a principle in court -- both CFR and the line-item veto.

If Bush does this, it's a win-win. Probably a win-win-win, actually.

[Dengar01]

I want Pat O'Malley to run against Peter Fitzgerald in 2 years.

[okiedust]

"The Problem" which is more difficult I suppose, is the media backlash no matter what he does. In that case, why not stand on principle and veto? McCain will have a meltdown which will just make him more irrelevant, and the media will resurrect the entire Enron thing which has been relatively quiescent of late, but so what? The public, does not really care about this issue, IMHO, so go ahead and do the right thing. Maybe I am missing something, but I am not sure the public will care one way or the other, unless the President undermines his own stated principles.

Granted Bush needs the Congress on board for the war issues, but do you think they(Congress) would dare to compromise the country's perceived security as payback and that it would play with the public? I'm not sure what you are hinting at, but maybe you are on to something I just can't understand.

regards