House passes Iraq Accountability Act.
The House of Representatives just voted 221-205 in favor of legislation “that would make continued funding of the war in Iraq dependent on a July progress report from the administration. President Bush has threatened to veto the bill.” Watch Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) floor speech:
The Gavel has more videos of Reps. John Murtha (D-PA), Rahm Emanuel (D-IL), and David Obey (D-WI).
UPDATE: Roll call is HERE.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
Reports
In depth studies on select topics
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Beck
Big Oil
Bolton
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Economy
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
GI Bill
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Hagee
Health Care
Immigration
Iran
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
McCain
McClellan
Media
Military
O'Hanlon
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Politics
Race
Radical Right
RNC Convention
Rove
Surveillance
Terrorism
Third Bush Term
Torture
Veterans
Wiretapping
Women's Rights
ArchivesBlog Roll
Keep it up, Bush, and thank you for destroying the republican party.
May 10th, 2007 at 8:23 pmShut ya face, you old coot.
May 10th, 2007 at 8:25 pmGo ahead and veto. Hopefully the Dems will stop trying to appease you and that’ll be that.
May 10th, 2007 at 8:26 pm#2…I agree that Bush is an old coot.
May 10th, 2007 at 8:26 pmShut ya face, you old coot.
Comment by Mr. President
Looking in a mirror…?
May 10th, 2007 at 8:28 pmWhy do right wing nutballs hate our troops? Any answers valiantthemetherpes?
http://msnbcmedia2.msn.com/ j/ msnbc/ Components/ Photos/ 060329/ 060329_phelps_hmed_5p.h2.jpg
May 10th, 2007 at 8:29 pmNailed It!
May 10th, 2007 at 8:31 pm#6 — Nooooo, not Fred Phelps! Disgusting!
May 10th, 2007 at 8:32 pmGood to see the Dems finally found their balls.
May 10th, 2007 at 8:36 pmSpeaker Pelosi has impressive and I commend her and Harry Reid for doggedly pressuring the maladministration on Iraq at the behest of the vast majority of the citizenry. Thank you Nancy Pelosi. This dirty rotten war must end and the criminals responsible for it must be held legally accountable for the Supreme International crime that it is. Anything short of that is unjust.
May 10th, 2007 at 8:36 pmYESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!
May 10th, 2007 at 8:37 pmEvery time Chimpy vetoes, send him something even tougher.
Time for Democrats and real Republicans to bitch slap the Chimp
May 10th, 2007 at 8:39 pmSo, when Bush uses his third veto here, and inevitably his fourth and fifth on the subsequent bills, what exactly will happen when the money really does run out? No more war?
I say that they push him that far.
This is excellent news.
May 10th, 2007 at 8:43 pmGive Bushiva a-dollar-fifty and a damn good meal…
…then run his (and his TREASONOUS family and cronies) a*ses out of the country…
…AFTER we take our money back from them…
May 10th, 2007 at 8:45 pmShut ya face, you old coot.
Comment by Mr. President
Did you skip the Lott thread?
May 10th, 2007 at 8:47 pmsilly troll
Your Hero Lott said you Republicans need to keep your mouths shut.
So go away and shut the f*ck up
Is there any place in this world that money are spent without ‘accountability’?!!
Bush for years, has been asking and getting hundreds of billions of dollars for this war.
The previous Congress never asked any question.
This Congress now wants to see results,something Bush is threatening to Veto.
May 10th, 2007 at 8:55 pmWhat happened to ‘accountability’..?!!
It is the power of the Congress to control the ‘purse’.
Yet another veto, and yet another failure by the do-nothing 110th Congress.
May 10th, 2007 at 9:00 pmGreat, nothing like slow-motion capitulation to unfettered occupation and killing Iraqis and our own troops.
May 10th, 2007 at 9:00 pm#9… and this bill shows the Dems found their balls how exactly?
This is simply kicking the can down the road by 3 months.
May 10th, 2007 at 9:02 pmThere is an insidious evil occupying the White House…
…an “EXORCISM” is in order…
…YOUR Repulsivescum Bushite:
family members
neighbors
friends
co-workers
and acquaintences
…must be compelled to PRESSURE THEIR representatives and senators…
…to IMPEACH and PROSECUTE Bushiva and L’il Dick…
…declare war against them…
…because THEY are the enemy…
May 10th, 2007 at 9:03 pm#12 except in this case, it is sending him exactly what he wants only in smaller slices.
May 10th, 2007 at 9:03 pmYet another veto, and yet another failure by the do-nothing 110th Congress. Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 9:00 pm
Congress is doing plenty. It’s the do-nothing president that keeps destroying their efforts. Then again, what RepubliCON has ever done anything useful, and not f*cked it up? Certainly not you - loser!
May 10th, 2007 at 9:05 pm#9… and this bill shows the Dems found their balls how exactly?
This is simply kicking the can down the road by 3 months.
Comment by lestatdelc — May 10, 2007 @ 9:02 pm
Not true. This puts the fence sitting Republicans that made Bush aware of their discontent in a position where they feel like they’ve given him “sufficient” time to pull the rug. This is an incrementing up of the pressure. Something that the “surge” was supposed to do in Iraq, but that Nancy is doing in Reality in Congress.
May 10th, 2007 at 9:07 pmDoing plenty? They’re passing the same garbage over and over again.
You know that 100 hour agenda? Still dead on arrival in the Senate!
May 10th, 2007 at 9:08 pm#12 except in this case, it is sending him exactly what he wants only in smaller slices. Comment by lestatdelc — May 10, 2007 @ 9:03 pm
It’s not *exactly* what he wants, because it makes it clear that additional funding requires results. In a Congressional setting, compromise and incremental efforts are often required to create a sufficient volume of support. Nancy is doing a great job of doing exactly that. There are plenty of vulnerable Republicans that are sick of being put out in to twist in the wind by Bush’s f*ckups.
May 10th, 2007 at 9:10 pmDoing plenty? They’re passing the same garbage over and over again. Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 9:08 pm
Doing more than Bush, who keeps using the same garbage excuses to thwart the will of the People and Congress. He’s not the King or the Fuhrer you dum bass Nazi.
You know that 100 hour agenda? Still dead on arrival in the Senate! Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 9:08 pm
Yeah, that happens when wingnuts that don’t want the agenda of the American People get involved. Why are you wingnuts so anti-democratic anyway? What’s wrong, don’t trust the voters to decide what’s best for the country?
May 10th, 2007 at 9:11 pmIt will never pass the Senate, but the House keeps at it — wearing them down. Bush is just stalling for time, so a Democratic president can preside over the final withdrawal of the troops.
May 10th, 2007 at 9:16 pmI think the House is doing the best it can as it represents the people, but the Senate is populated by a lot of stubborn, rich white guys - kind of like Bush - and birds of a feather…
Still dead on arrival…!
Comment by m12 #24
…a condition that YOU personally will hopefully become all too familiar with…
…in the hopefully not too distant future…
May 10th, 2007 at 9:17 pm#25 sorry, I don’t buy that argument. It gives unaccountable funding between now and July to get more troops and Iraqis killed. It simply kicks the can down the road another three months and we are right back to where we were this morning, only with more troops killed, more Iraqis killed, more money flushed down the toilet and more long-term damage to the position of the United States in the world community.
Do you honestly think there will be a different dynamic that will result in ending this occupation in July?
DO you think that enough support for continuing funding this disaster will have eroded that their will be enough votes in the House to de-fund military operations in Iraq to even get out of the House to the Senate, let alone with a veto-proof majority?
Explain to me precisely how this is suppose to work (i..e ending this cluster-fuck were in stuck in called Iraq) both from a legal, political and public opinion level.
May 10th, 2007 at 9:18 pm#24 Every element of the 100 hour agenda was passed (before the 100 hours of being in session).
The 100 hour agenda was a House thing, not the Senate.
May 10th, 2007 at 9:20 pmYeah, that happens when wingnuts that don’t want the agenda of the American People get involved. Why are you wingnuts so anti-democratic anyway? What’s wrong, don’t trust the voters to decide what’s best for the country?
So all 49 elected GOP senators (and Lieberman) are now wingnuts?
Don’t trust the voters in those states to decide what’s best for the country?
May 10th, 2007 at 9:24 pm#29
So I’ve heard. What exactly is the point in passing the House and not the Senate/President’s veto?
May 10th, 2007 at 9:24 pm>So all 49 elected GOP senators (and Lieberman) are now wingnuts?
2 of them came to thier senses and signed onto a bill (along with 49 dems) that bush vetoed. so much for majority rules, huh?
May 10th, 2007 at 9:30 pmAnd how will the MSM report this?
May 10th, 2007 at 9:30 pmWill they say, “Dems pass bill to support troops”? or will they say “Dems pass bill for accountability”?
or will they say “Dems attempted to pass two bills today and both failed”? or will they say “Loyally obstinate Repugs refuse Dem bill that supports troops and demands accountability, saving Bush from another veto”?
2 of them came to thier senses and signed onto a bill (along with 49 dems) that bush vetoed. so much for majority rules, huh?
Are you suggesting abolishing the veto and the filibuster?
May 10th, 2007 at 9:33 pmm12,
are you suggesting destroying America?
Exemplified core values!
May 10th, 2007 at 9:48 pmYou know, there’s one bill the House can pass that the President cannot veto:
A BILL OF IMPEACHMENT!!!
May 10th, 2007 at 9:57 pmSo all 49 elected GOP senators (and Lieberman) are now wingnuts? Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 9:24 pm
Most are… They’re mostly from wingnut red states - most likely like you?
Don’t trust the voters in those states to decide what’s best for the country? Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 9:24 pm
Those 49 GOP senators reflect a *minority* of Americans. They have every right to *derail* the democratic process, according to the Constitution. That doesn’t make it the fault of the American people, it makes it their fault…
The majority of American people disagree with those 49 senators, as the 2006 election showed, and as 2008 will continue to show. You can be obstructionists at your own risk, and I encourage you to continue to show what f*ckers you are…
May 10th, 2007 at 10:50 pmSo I’ve heard. What exactly is the point in passing the House and not the Senate/President’s veto? Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 9:24 pm
So I’ve heard. What exactly is the point of vetoing legislation that the Majority of Americans want?
May 10th, 2007 at 10:50 pmAre you suggesting abolishing the veto and the filibuster?
Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 9:33 pm
Hey, it’s Bush’s right to veto. It’s also the right of Congress to impeach him for the high crimes he created in sending us to war on lies. Eventually enough of your fellow Republicans with decide that the veto is detrimental to their re-election as Bush continues to piss off the majority of voters. Keep up the *ssh*le behaviors - that’s my advice to you RepubliCONs.
And you wingnuts are the ones that have whined for the last 6 years about how the filibuster is *wrong* - want the quotes - junior? In fact, your wingnut Senators even threatened to do away with the filibuster, and came close to doing so…
May 10th, 2007 at 10:53 pmThose 49 GOP senators reflect a *minority* of Americans. They have every right to *derail* the democratic process, according to the Constitution. That doesn’t make it the fault of the American people, it makes it their fault…
So democratically elected Senators, democratically voted their conscience, are *derailing* the democratic process?
I’m well aware of the gang of 14 filibuster pact. So kindly explain why you supposed the obviously UNdemocratic filibuster of Justice Alito.
May 10th, 2007 at 11:02 pmSo I’ve heard. What exactly is the point of vetoing legislation that the Majority of Americans want?
Who decide what a “Majority of Americans” wants? You?
May 10th, 2007 at 11:02 pmWho decide what a “Majority of Americans†wants? You?
Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:02 pm
The “Majority of Americans” decides - or have you been asleep with the countless polls that show their will lately?
Your values are about as popular as a turd in prom punch, little boy.
May 10th, 2007 at 11:05 pmSo democratically elected Senators, democratically voted their conscience, are *derailing* the democratic process? Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:02 pm
Yes, just ask George Bush. After he was elected in 2000 by a *minority*, he claimed a mandate that congress should simply do what he said. Or had you forgotten that… Actually the Senators aren’t *derailing* democracy, they’re just delaying it. In 2008 you’ll pay the price for ignoring the will of Americans…
I’m well aware of the gang of 14 filibuster pact. So kindly explain why you supposed the obviously UNdemocratic filibuster of Justice Alito. Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:02 pm
Yet you just said the filibuster was democratic - make up your mind dum bass.
May 10th, 2007 at 11:07 pmYour values are about as popular as a turd in prom punch, little boy.
Considering only 29% of Americans want an immediate Iraq pullout, I’d say some of yours are too.
May 10th, 2007 at 11:09 pmYes, just ask George Bush. After he was elected in 2000 by a *minority*, he claimed a mandate that congress should simply do what he said. Or had you forgotten that… Actually the Senators aren’t *derailing* democracy, they’re just delaying it. In 2008 you’ll pay the price for ignoring the will of Americans…
I’ll ask Clinton first. In neither term did he get 50% of the majority vote.
I never said the filibuster was democratic, just the opposite in fact. I supported the GOP’s position abolishing it. But you didn’t answer the question.
May 10th, 2007 at 11:13 pmConsidering only 29% of Americans want an immediate Iraq pullout, I’d say some of yours are too. Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:09 pm
How do you know what *my* values are - Jake*ss? Considering 56% didn’t want to bush to veto this bill, I’d say you’re an idiot.
May 10th, 2007 at 11:15 pmI’ll ask Clinton first. In neither term did he get 50% of the majority vote. Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:13 pm
Yeah, but he got more vote than the guys who didn’t become president - something Bush can’t claim in 2000! So much for a *democracy*, right?
I never said the filibuster was democratic, just the opposite in fact. I supported the GOP’s position abolishing it. But you didn’t answer the question. Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:13 pm
Ironic, considering you now support GOP delay tactics in passing Democratic legislation, and bush Vetoing what the majority of Americans want.
May 10th, 2007 at 11:17 pmYeah, but he got more vote than the guys who didn’t become president - something Bush can’t claim in 2000! So much for a *democracy*, right?
And? A majority of Americans still wanted someone other than Clinton in office.
The most ironic part of this is you still are dodging the question about Alito.
May 10th, 2007 at 11:22 pmConsidering only 29% of Americans want an immediate Iraq pullout, I’d say some of yours are too. Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:09 pm
You forgot the other 30% that said within a year. Meaning that 6 in 10 Americans WANT A TIMELINE. Wonder why they’re pissed at Bush’s veto.
Do us all a favor, make sure Bush campaigns for the Senators, and the Republican choice for the whitehouse!
May 10th, 2007 at 11:23 pmShe might have mentioned in there that some of the men and women now being sent to Iraq were in Jr. High when the invasion was launched. seriously.
May 10th, 2007 at 11:28 pmYou forgot the other 30% that said within a year. Meaning that 6 in 10 Americans WANT A TIMELINE. Wonder why they’re pissed at Bush’s veto.
If you say so. Those values were not reflected in the democratically elected House of Representatives just a few months back.
It’s got to piss you off. All these bad *wingnuts* using the democratic process to elect *wingnuts* who vote like *wingnuts*. No wonder your side tries to stifle it. Had to have pissed you off when a majority of Americans elected Reagan twice, Bush Sr once, and Bush Jr. in 2004.
May 10th, 2007 at 11:30 pmAnd? A majority of Americans still wanted someone other than Clinton in office. Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:22 pm
And a majority of Americans still wanted someone other than the other people in office as well - your point is? The candidate with the MOST VOTES still won to elect Clinton - something Bush can’t say. Not to mention that Clinton left office with the MAJORITY of Americans still approving of him, his actions and his presidency. Maybe that’s why Gore got more votes than Bush, even with GOP operatives funding Nader’s campaign…
The most ironic part of this is you still are dodging the question about Alito. Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:22 pm
You mean the Supreme Court justice that the Democrats permitted to become a Justice, despite his conflicts of interests and unsuitability? Yeah, like I said. You wingnuts hate America, and American values… No wonder you have so hard of a time getting elected without electioneering and Supreme Court riggings.
May 10th, 2007 at 11:32 pmYou mean the Supreme Court justice that the Democrats permitted to become a Justice, despite his conflicts of interests and unsuitability?
Well, that’s an interesting bit of revisionist history, as John Kerry tried his best to unDemocratically block him, fueled by support from Dailykos and the rest of the moonbats.
I guess the fact that a majority of the Senate supported him was too much to bear.
May 10th, 2007 at 11:36 pmIf you say so. Those values were not reflected in the democratically elected House of Representatives just a few months back. Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:30 pm
BAHAHAHAHA, you mean the house where not a single Democrat lost their seat, and where a resounding majority of Democrats were put in place? That house?
It’s got to piss you off. Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:30 pm
How undemocratic you are - sure it does. But I trust the American people, and you don’t…
All these bad *wingnuts* using the democratic process to elect *wingnuts* who vote like *wingnuts*. Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:30 pm
Nah, I don’t mind when you *use* the democratic process, only when you *subvert* it… What you typically try to do. But just as in 2006, the American people wise up eventually and hand your your exit papers.
No wonder your side tries to stifle it. Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:30 pm
Stifle *what* exactly? Your undemocratic methods?
Had to have pissed you off when a majority of Americans elected Reagan twice, Bush Sr once, and Bush Jr. in 2004.
Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:30 pm
Considering that RayGun sold America out to Iranian Crazies to get elected - yeah, that was despicable.
As for Bush Sr., it helped that RayGun had undone the fairness in media act to allow Bush to smear his opponent.
As for Bush Jr., that’s somewhat expected that he might get re-elected, because the majority of Americans didn’t realize exactly how badly he’d f*cked up Iraq, and domestically at that point - and during a *war* and with incumbents you have an advantage. Yet despite that, two Ohio Election officials have now GONE TO JAIL for rigging the recount. Imagine that!
Considering this post, it must really *hurt* you to have Bush lose to “Al Gore”, and Clinton kick your RepubliCON *sses in two elections!
The best thing you RepubliCONs could do was to have complete government control for 6 years. This country is so SICK of you, I can’t wait for 2008! Good riddance *ssh*les!
May 10th, 2007 at 11:39 pmSeems to me like you are implying that the 25 Senators who tried to filibuster Alito do not care what majorities think.
May 10th, 2007 at 11:40 pmUnderstand that the Iraq agenda diverts discussion from economic issues.
Iraq is a means of defining the domestic agenda, and both parties are playing into it.
A one-party system is clearly in operation. This system operates only to give the appearance of pluralisitc legitimacy and public process.
The domestic agenda is being choked with the Iraq debate.
Cut the funding for the Iraq war. A veto will have the same effect, and will end this charade.
May 10th, 2007 at 11:42 pmwhy do progress reports hate our troops???
this is soooooo fun!
May 10th, 2007 at 11:42 pmWell, that’s an interesting bit of revisionist history, as John Kerry tried his best to unDemocratically block him, fueled by support from Dailykos and the rest of the moonbats. Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:36 pm
Tell me, how did America feel about him? Did he reflect the *majority* of Americans’ values? In poll after poll, the Majority of Americans said they would oppose him if he would overturn abortion rights - and lookie now! That’s *exactly* what’s happened.
You RepubliCONs don’t trust democracy, and you don’t give a d*mn about what most Americans want. That’s why you pull the “Compassionate Conservative” Big Lies to get elected…
I guess the fact that a majority of the Senate supported him was too much to bear. Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:36 pm
Too much to bear? A little dramatic, aren’t you child? Are you another one of those “Log Cabin Theater types”?
Actually, I found it a disgrace that the Senators had so little regard for the will of Americans - but hey, that’s what you RepubliCONs do. Ignore the will of the people.
May 10th, 2007 at 11:43 pmSeems to me like you are implying that the 25 Senators who tried to filibuster Alito do not care what majorities think. Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:40 pm
BAHAHAHA, Project much? Idiot?
May 10th, 2007 at 11:43 pm#54
So first you claim that you trust the American people. Then you say you don’t mind *using* the democratic process.
Then you call the democratically chosen Ronald Reagan’s election despicable.
Seems like you *do* mind, and that you *don’t* trust the American people.
May 10th, 2007 at 11:46 pmTell me, how did America feel about him? Did he reflect the *majority* of Americans’ values? In poll after poll, the Majority of Americans said they would oppose him if he would overturn abortion rights - and lookie now! That’s *exactly* what’s happened.
53% of Americans said Alito should be confirmed. 25% of the Senate tried to override that. I wonder why you lefties didn’t give a d*mn about that.
A democratically elected Senate votes on and democratically confirms a nominee. I thought you supported the democratic process?
May 10th, 2007 at 11:52 pm“Had to have pissed you off when a majority of Americans elected Reagan twice, Bush Sr once, and Bush Jr. in 2004.”
Comment by m12
Not as much as it pissed me off that Bush Jr stole two elections…I don’t buy those results for a second, and anyone who’s been paying attention who doesn’t drink the Kool-Aid you’re obviously swillin doesn’t buy it either.
May 10th, 2007 at 11:52 pmSo first you claim that you trust the American people. Then you say you don’t mind *using* the democratic process. Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:46 pm
I do trust the American people, you don’t. I do trust the democratic process to eventually correct itself.
Then you call the democratically chosen Ronald Reagan’s election despicable. Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:46 pm
Actually I said his *subversion* of that process was despicable.
Seems like you *do* mind, and that you *don’t* trust the American people. Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:46 pm
Sounds like you’re an idiot that can’t (or won’t) read, because you’re a partisan hack. I do trust the American people, they eventually figure out what criminal hacks you are, and make sure your leashes are pulled back… You disgusting piece of lying sh*t.
May 10th, 2007 at 11:54 pmI do trust the American people, they eventually figure out what criminal hacks you are, and make sure your leashes are pulled back
Such as when the American people tossed Jimmy Carter out like a used condom?
This should be good. How did Ronald Reagan subvert the democratic process?
May 10th, 2007 at 11:58 pm53% of Americans said Alito should be confirmed. 25% of the Senate tried to override that. I wonder why you lefties didn’t give a d*mn about that. Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:52 pm
Within the margin of error, even after Alito tried to claim he wouldn’t undermine Roe v. Wade (what we now know was a lie). By the way, the Fox News poll said 53% said he shouldn’t be confirmed, so you can’t claim the majority was in favor of an anti-Abortion Alito - what Dailykos predicted, and what’s come to fruition.
http://www.pollingreport.com/Court.htm
A democratically elected Senate votes on and democratically confirms a nominee. I thought you supported the democratic process? Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:52 pm
Against the will of the people that democratically elected them. Because Alito lied - a subversion of that democracy. Which is what you RepubliCONs always do to *avoid* democracy.
Don’t worry though, Americans figure things out, and that’s why you’re so unpopular now. The country will correct your st*pidity in 2008.
Just keep ignoring what Americans want - you only help progressives. You’re such a “useful idiot”.
May 11th, 2007 at 12:08 amSuch as when the American people tossed Jimmy Carter out like a used condom? Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:58 pm
Yeah, thanks to RayGun secretly negotiating with the Mullahs… An act of Treason.
This should be good. How did Ronald Reagan subvert the democratic process? Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:58 pm
You really are completely ignorant aren’t you.
May 11th, 2007 at 12:09 amHow did Ronald Reagan subvert the democratic process?
Comment by m12 — May 10, 2007 @ 11:58 pm
This is where the term “October Surprise” comes from - Jake*ss.
http://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/ October_surprise_conspiracy
Ronald Reagan even let it slip in 1991, but said things were “classified”.
Don’t you remember Iran Contra? Were you under a rock? Or were you not born yet?
Lurn yer Heestury, Jake*ss.
May 11th, 2007 at 12:13 amSo you don’t trust the American people to figure out an October surprise?
May 11th, 2007 at 12:19 amThis should be good. How did Ronald Reagan subvert the democratic process?
Subversion of the LAW called the Boland Amendment.
Iran/Contra violated that law.
The only reason Reagan got saved is that Bush 41 pardoned all the CRIMINALS to save his and MORON TRAITOR Reagan’s azzes.
Then Bush 43 uses 9/11 to stop release of these records, which would SHOW what TRAITORS Bush and Reagan were…
Thanks for asking, and I’LL see YOU in hell M12 (cause I’LL be THERE),
May 11th, 2007 at 12:28 amMr. Bush
MURDEROUS WAR CRIMINAL
COWARDLY TRAITOR TO THE USA (TM–BushCrimeCo, Inc.)
Against the will of the people that democratically elected them. Because Alito lied - a subversion of that democracy. Which is what you RepubliCONs always do to *avoid* democracy.
Where is the evidence that a majority of Americans opposed Alito at the time of confirmation? It’s not in your link.
CNN gallup: 54% support 30% oppose
May 11th, 2007 at 12:29 amNBC: 44% support 25% oppose
WashP: 53% support 37% oppose
Fox: 47% support 32% oppose
#71 Yes, M12, and THATS how TRAITOR Reagan subverted the Democratic process.
By the way, if Alito had revealed his writings and thoughts to Congress (which he refused to do, as did Abu Gonzales),
he would have NEVER been confirmed.
It’s all OMERTA for these BushCriminals (TM–BushCrimeCo, Inc)
Impeachment, conviction and JAIL FOR THE REST OF THE LIVES of these CRIMINALS…
May 11th, 2007 at 12:48 amBy the way, if Alito had revealed his writings and thoughts to Congress (which he refused to do, as did Abu Gonzales),
If you say so. For the first 100 years of our nation SCOTUS nominees didn’t even have hearings, so I don’t see why that matters.
May 11th, 2007 at 1:05 amIf you say so. For the first 100 years of our nation SCOTUS nominees didn’t even have hearings, so I don’t see why that matters.
You are RIGHT. The right-wing TRAITORS rubber-stamped TRAITOR Bush’s choices.
When Gonzo goes to jail, whoever TRAITOR Bush tries to put in WILL have a HEARING and SCRUTINY.
Provided Bush and Cheney aren’t in their OWN impeachment trials…
God Bless the PATRIOTIC Democratic party, giving hell to the Rapeublican TRAITORS!!!
By the way, I notice that you didn’t dispute anyone’s correct response to you that TRAITOR Reagan subverted the Democratic
process in Iran/Contra.
Shows that you might be growing up, little one…
See YOU in hell M12 (cause I’LL be THERE),
Mr. Bush
May 11th, 2007 at 1:10 amMURDEROUS WAR CRIMINAL
COWARDLY TRAITOR TO THE USA (TM–BushCrimeCo)
#40 “So democratically elected Senators, democratically voted their conscience, are *derailing* the democratic process?”
Since when do you righties give one little sh!t about democratically elected officials? You hate half of the democratically elected leaders in South America and would love to see the CIA help destroy them. Don’t BS us about democracy.
May 11th, 2007 at 1:49 amBush, Cheney and their minions won’t listen to reason. Why are they still there. IMPEACH and prosecute.
May 11th, 2007 at 6:43 amthe GOP are telling Bush he is ruining the party with the Iraq debacle… yet… they keep voting to keep the thing going? their “yea” votes could put a veto-proof bill in front of Bush…
May 11th, 2007 at 9:11 amAll he’s trying his dam*edest to do is ‘externalize’ his illegal invasion.
To make sure that yet another one of their complete aggressive greedy horrendous failures becomes someone els’ responsibility.
It’s really their only way out.
Again and above all . . . they will accept no accountability and have none put upon them by anyone else.
IMPEACH the SOBs and show the entire world, and them, that they WILL be held accountable by the laws of our country.
May 11th, 2007 at 9:36 am“Yet another veto, and yet another failure by the do-nothing 110th Congress.”
Actually it is yet another failure by the obstructionist Republics. Just wait until 2009 when the Democrats have the ball. Then you will see some real changes. Hopefully it won’t be too late to repair the damage that Bush and the Republics have done to this country.
May 11th, 2007 at 9:51 amActually it is yet another failure by the obstructionist Republics. Just wait until 2009 when the Democrats have the ball. Then you will see some real changes. Hopefully it won’t be too late to repair the damage that Bush and the Republics have done to this country
Well, that’s funny. Looks like they succeeded with their obstruction, if that is what you want to call it.
May 11th, 2007 at 12:07 pmI can’t wait until President Hillary Clinton rescinds executive order 13233, and opens the records of TRAITORS Reagan and Bush 41.
Which will show what WAR CRIMINAL bastards and TRAITORS to the USA they are/were.
See YOU in hell M12 (cause I’LL be THERE along with RONNIE),
May 11th, 2007 at 12:15 pmMr. Bush
MURDEROUS WAR CRIMINAL
COWARDLY TRAITOR TO THE USA (TM–BushCrimeCo, Inc.)