Posted on 09/27/2008 3:08:23 PM PDT by 1-Eagle
Democrats can't override a Bush veto. Nobody can. All this talk about Sen. McCain can't bring change because he "voted 90% of the time with Bush" .. with a deadlocked congress nobody was getting anything through without a Presidential signature, so even the Democrats voted 100% with Bush.
McCain will bring change to the way Washington does business, and he will use the veto pen more than Bush ever did.
I sure hope it’s favorable.
I think the quote they have from McCain saying he has voted 90% of the time with Bush was from about May 2001. If he had consistently voted 90% of the time with Bush, he wouldn’t have had such a hard time winning the support of conservative Republicans.
The spin doctors should try this response to the 90% line:
Chimp DNA is 98% similar to human DNA, and it’s the 2% that makes the difference.
Can someone answer a question for me? It keeps being said that McCain has voted with Bush 90% of the time. How can this be? Has Bush cast one single vote for a Bill? As I understand it the President doesn’t vote for a Bill. He can either sign the Bill into Law or stamp the Bill with a Veto. If there is a tie in the Senate for a Bill the VICE President will cast the tie breaking vote but not the President.
So, again I ask how can McCain vote with Bush?
If a Democrat voted against a bill that passed anyway and was signed into law by Bush, that counts as voting with Bush?
You’re kidding, right? No, the President does not vote on bills from the Congress. Once Congress passes a bill the President signs it into law. It is very clear what bills the President does and does not support, so it easy to determine who votes “with” or “against” the President.
But that is my point. Bush doesn’t vote for Bills. In some circumstances Bush can propose a Bill, but he never votes for or against Bills. If the Bill was not proposed by Bush but Bush supports that Bill and McCain votes for that Bill is that really voting with Bush? I realize that this may be semantics, but my issue is that the Democrats want to tie McCain to Bush so strongly but falsely.
“It is far better to vote with or against someone, than to vote ‘present’ all the time like an empty suit.” - Rabidbartender.
I wish they’d make a statement like that.
I think you’re really reaching here. If Bush supports a bill, and someone votes for that bill, they are supporting Bush.
Ahh, no they aren't; they are supporting the bill. Don't fall into that logical fallacy that the media and politicians use. Remember, correlation doesn't equal coordination.
The point I was trying to make is that the Democrats have had the majority for the last two years. They have not had a veto proof majority, but a majority non-the-less. As such, they bear as much responsibility for the conditions of things as anyone. Thus, it could be said that without the Democrat leadership pushing or supporting issues, they would never see the floor for a vote and therefore everything passed in the last two years has had a strong Democrat stamp on it... 100% Democrat.
Was it as strong, as socialist an agenda as they would like? Of course not. Thats why they want to take the WH so bad.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.