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.

[hchutch]

McConnell. People need to sit tight. There is a plan afoot that Congressman Billybob has mentioned. I just hope Bush has the guts to go with it.

[Wphile]

Okay, thanks. I'm depressed. Time for a walk.

[Sangamon Kid]

Fitzgerald is my bleeeping Senator.

I had to watch O'Malley get whipped last night, and now this?
Someone get me a beer to cry in.

[dittomom]

Thanks, RG!!! I hope the White House is flooded with calls!

[AppyPappy]

If he signs it, it will be "read my lips" all over again. The Democrats will have played him for a sucker.

[Wphile]

When do you think this plan will be unveiled? Hope he does it sooner rather than later.

[freeeee]

Truly, it is a shame that unscrupulous Enron executives will no longer be able to donate millions of units of free speech to our corrupt politicians.

Hey genius, it also means that if you try to team up with fellow citizens to finance an ad that mentions a politicians name before an election, YOU'LL GO TO JAIL.

Meanwhile media outlets are given a free pass to say whatever they like. In fact, they'll have the market cornered on political speech before an election.

So, your representative passed a law you don't like? Want to tell people about it so they'll vote him out? TOUGH!!! Do so and you'll see the inside of a cell.

This ought to be called the "Non-Accountability Act".

[ken5050]

No....normally a case gets filed in the federal court, then the court of appeals, then the SC..but there's a procedure in exigent circumstances whereby the plaintiff can apply directly to the Supremes to take the case before the lower courts evern get it.....re your point, there were several excellent articles in NRO a few days ago discussing if the president had an obligation to veto a bill on unconstitutional grounds.....that is, should that be the rational for the president's veto, or should he leave it to the SC to make the determination...

[dittomom]

He's more likely to go through with it if he knows there are ALOT of people out there who are infuriated about the Constitution being trashed. We need to call the WHITE HOUSE!

[freeeee]

I am a libertarian. Re-read my post.

[Brimack34]

They passed this stupid bill and nobody cares about it. Only ABC radio news had one line. I am waiting were is all the cheering. These idiot's are so full of themselve's they do not have a clue.

[skcomp]

You have got to be kidding... He knows that the congress have enough votes to overide his veto and for this very same LAME reason, he will not veto...

[KC_Conspirator]

Very good point. Not only that, but couple with blanket amnesty for illegals, and not fighting for Pickering, I would have to say that Bush has had a very, very bad month.

[NittanyLion]

discussing if the president had an obligation to veto a bill on unconstitutional grounds.....that is, should that be the rational for the president's veto, or should he leave it to the SC to make the determination...

Any consensus? In my mind, it's clearly the responsibility of all lawmakers to be certain laws are constitutional - not just the courts. Of course, I'm not naive enough to think more than 2% of lawmakers give a damn about that document.

[Credo]

Does the Congress go out of session soon? Would a Pocket Veto be possible? That way Bush could quielty can this.

[LarryLied]

Hey, don't forget that if libertarians hadn't spoiled two senatorial races, we'd get to have two more republican senators voting yes for CFR

Let me clarify my comment above. Liberatarians knocked Ensign out in 1998. Harry Reid won. Reid voted for this. Ensign won a Senate seat in 2000 and he did not vote for this. Gorton would not have either. We very well could have 3 (not just the two knocked out by the LP) more conservative Senators had it not been for the Libertarian party.

[Wphile]

I takes 2/3 in both chambers to override a veto. 60 doesn't do it.

[AppyPappy]

That's what I thought. Bush has to veto. If he doesn't, we are sunk in 2002 and 2004.

[NittanyLion]

He knows that the congress have enough votes to overide his veto and for this very same LAME reason, he will not veto...

60 only breaks a filibuster, it doesn't override a veto.