democrats in congress cannot blame bu$h* for the war or for trampling the constitution

[spanone]

they have had opportunities to challenge both and have done NOTHING

this is not the democratic party i have been a part of all my life.

[99th_Monkey]

1. But thankfully, the Dems got all that "other important business" taken care of

like funding the Iraq war without condition, and shoving through Bush's FISA bill w/ telecom immunity.

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[BobRossi]

2. Hang that piece of shit traitor.

Then quarter him and feed him to the pigs.

[NRaleighLiberal]

3. But they are proud owners of the dryest powder since recorded time. What a relief......NT

[Hydra]

4. They can blame him for the stuff he did before they regained majority

But they've done a good bit since then to help the process along.

If they keep this up, most people will start saying "What's a 'constitution?'"

[ColbertWatcher]

5. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Two words: Signing statements. n/t

[spanone]

6. Controversy over George W. bu$h*s use of signing statements

George W. Bush's use of signing statements is controversial, both for the number of times employed (estimated at over 750 opinions) and for the apparent attempt to nullify legal restrictions on his actions through claims made in the statements — for example, his signing statement attached to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008. Some opponents have said that he in effect uses signing statements as a line-item veto; the Supreme Court had previously ruled such vetoes as unconstitutional in the 1998 case, Clinton v. City of New York.<11>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signing_statement