Have they passed anything since they took power?? What a Do Nothing Congress!
Pray for W and Our Troops
Dangerous ground ahead.
In effect, if this works, it nullifies two branches of government and makes the courts supreme rulers of the land.
And Bush could just take her little plane away from her since it is a military asset.
.
NEVER FORGET
.
A post-WATERGATE Democrat Congress’ cut-off of funding for a then Free South Vietnam’s fight to save its own Freedom during the Vietnam War =
Pictures of a vietnamse Re-Education (SLAVE LABOR) Camp
http://www.Freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1308949/posts
..”JOURNEY from the FALL”.. MoviePremieres = Fall of Saigon CLARITY..
http://www.Freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1806248/posts
What Price to pay now
by the still Free, I wonder,
in a new time of war
in a new century
with our own Freedom
now directly at stake
...right here at home..?
12 Million suddenly missing Iraqi purple voting fingers, for starters..?
.
NEVER FORGET
.
Uh, No Mz Pelosi, you cannot.
A sitting president may not be sued while in office for actions related to the exercise of his duties, PERIOD.
Any judge that didn’t immediately throw this case out would be disbarred inside a week.
This woman has drank something thinking she is more important than the POTUS????
Lets get her out of office!!!
Should we start calling her Nancy “Sue” Pelosi?
Amazing...just amazing....
The level to which these Rats stoop for their political agenda....why oh why were they voted into office???
Are people really that naive to think they help this country? /rhetorical question
Good luck with that, Pelosi. ::Snicker::
Demand of your U.S. Rep. that she be CENSURED.
SSG: Thul is blogging about the Appeal for Courage petition here:
http://foreign-and-domestic.blogspot.com/
Aw, Nancy, shaddup and go get another botox injection.
Get the wench a padded room!
DEMOCRACY IN ACTION: NOW NANCY’S GONNA SUE THE PRESIDENT!
And over all things — President Bush’s signing statements.
Hey, Nancy, it’s just not all that unusual for presidents to write signing statements when they veto congressional bills. Like the most recent War Spending Package that you guys sent to him that was chock full of little piggy barrel projects for your pet (big donors) constituents.
So, since you’re so vested in freedom of speech as an American virtue, you intend to censor the president and commander-in-chief?
Courts traditionally don’t even hear such nonsensical garbage suits. And what a waste of the taxpayers’ money! In fact, in an article in today’s The Hill written by Jonathan E. Kaplan and Elana Schor, we are reminded that “the courts ruled that dissident lawmakers could not sue solely to obtain outcomes they could not secure in Congress.” The authors were referring to a ruling way back in the 1970s when Congress tried to force President Nixon to stop the bombing in Cambodia.
In other words, Ms. Nancy, if you can’t get a law passed through Congress, you aren’t going to be able to make case law through the judicial system.
Did you completely miss American Government, Social Studies and Civics classes? Since you’re about the same age as I am, Ms. Nancy, it would most likely have been Civics.
Civics is where we learned that there are three branches of the U.S. government. Each branch has certain responsibilities and are accountable to the people of the United States.
If and when Congress passes laws that the president believes are not constitutional, then, yes, he has not only the right to veto the law, but also the responsibility to do so.
If he wants to make a statement as to why he’s vetoing it, then he also has that right. Like in the most recent case, when he said in his signing statement that he was vetoing the law because it was unconstitutional.
But I will give you credit for giving high school and college students some great opportunities to see how governmental offices run and who has what obligations, power and rights.
For instance, there’s going to be one tiny little problem that’s gonna slow you down and that is a two syllable word called standing. In any court proceeding, someone has to have “standing.” That is, someone has to be the injured party who’s looking to the courts for a remedy of some sort.
Somehow, passing a law that’s not constitutional and having the president veto it while telling you why he vetoed it is not exactly an injury, you big bunch of uninjured sore losers.
Now get back to work and do what you were hired to do by the taxpayers!
Arrest her for treason.
I have read and reread this all day long at work. This woman is delusional, she is mentally unbalanced and is in dire need of medication, and/or institutionalization. She’s deranged and has no concept of the Constitution that she has sworn to uphold and protect. She is a raving lunatic. Get the Thorazine and a straight jacket, she needs help and isolation from the general population, i.e. The People.