What are the chances that the Bush “administration” simply refuses to spend this money?
Posted by Paige at November 8, 2007 10:10 AMIt's a water bill, big deal.
Posted by peter at November 8, 2007 10:20 AMSo George W. Bush has, perhaps for the first time in his life, been told "no, you can't have your way". I'm sure his handlers expected the override, and one of them may have had the guts to warn George to expect it. But I bet there is some pretty salty language emanating from the Oval Office anyway. They guy can't stand to lose at anything. Yet, he's the biggest loser of all.
Posted by T2 at November 8, 2007 10:23 AMThank God some sanity at last. Maybe now that Repubs see that they can go against their leader and live they will have the courage to do more. Hope springs eternal. I am proud of the Democrats.
Posted by s hall at November 8, 2007 10:42 AMthis bill shouldn't have been vetoed in the first place and wouldn't have been prior to '06. It would have sailed through the GOP Congress and Bush would have hailed it as proof he was serious about helping after Katrina.
Posted by T2 at November 8, 2007 10:54 AMpredictable as the sun rising, pants-pissing peter thinks that Dear Leader's defeat is no big deal.
Bet Georgie is hitting the bottle. Enjoy the pretzels.
Posted by Gay Veteran at November 8, 2007 11:33 AMI'm sure Bush doesn't really care. He vetoed it because he said it was too expensive, not because he disagreed with the intent. And at this point why should he care about budgets and deficits.
Posted by snark at November 8, 2007 11:48 AMThink about the warped, sick mentality of these GOoP senators that voted to sustain this simply crazed veto of the first comprehensive water bill in 7 years. What kind of a loser backs "their [insane] prezlidenter" in such a situation?
This bill apparently helps the no tax, crap infrastructure South quite disproportionately. You can't say the Dems aren't concerned about the greater good---they'll certainly get tons more votes down there for doin' the right thing.
Posted by euzoius at November 8, 2007 01:14 PM...in 7 years? WOW 11
Posted by jj at November 8, 2007 01:15 PMSigning statement anyone? But hey, he was told 'no' in Texas many times and went on to become President...so much for your 'first'. Democrats in the Texas Legislature told him 'no' more than a few times and he got along just fine. It's the way the system works...no big deal other than it's a 'first' after six years.
What did you expect, "thank you maam, may I have another"?
He'll just wake up on Friday and go on. Next...
Posted by peter at November 8, 2007 01:22 PMSigning statement anyone?
He can't make a signing statement on a bill he's not gonna be asked to sign again.
Posted by snark at November 8, 2007 01:32 PMHe'll just wake up on Friday and go on. Next...
True, but he'll be waking up with even less credibility than he has now (which isn't much anyway.) Next....
Posted by ann at November 8, 2007 01:53 PMWell, there's a "first" for everything---I agree with peter that it's not that much of a defeat for the crazed Nero jr.
The water bill passed with veto-proof majorities in both houses---Bush must have known his ridiculous, irresponsible veto would be overridden. Yet he still insanely vetoed it.
This shows his level of absolute blind hatred of an "opposition" (ha-ha) Congress. He can't even think straight when dealing with a "Dem-anything". He had simple contempt for the Repub Congress. He has crazed hatred for the Dem Congress.
Too bad the Dem leaders can't figure this out. And Bush wastes MORE than $8 billion a month in Iraq.
Posted by euzoius at November 8, 2007 02:16 PMPeter, jj, and any other assorted trolls. I don't care whether it is his first or his 100th override veto by Congress (keeping in mind that the Congress was held by the GOP for seven years), the MF didn't get his way, finally.
Posted by Judith at November 8, 2007 03:04 PMAnn, he had "credibility" with you? And Judith, Governor Bush lost on several issues in Texas and still managed to become President. Euz, thanks, I thought we actually agreed on something else, but I surely don't remember what. Rove may have planned this one just for those GOP'ers who wanted some cover and this President was happy to do it.
He had to have one overriden, this one was cheap.
Posted by peter at November 8, 2007 03:36 PMNot much of a Reich, is it, when der Fuehrer can't do what he wants all of the time?
(Y'all still on that tip? The Bu$hitler thing and all of those secret boncentration bamps here at home being run by Halliburton?)
Posted by Toby Petzold at November 8, 2007 03:51 PMIs that all you crawled out of your cave to say Toby?
Posted by snark at November 8, 2007 04:24 PMToby's waiting for the next fundamentalist GOP candidate to get excited. Perhaps he should bone up on his Italian history-Mussolini, Benito perhaps?
Posted by Ga6thDem at November 8, 2007 05:39 PM"Not much of a Reich, is it, when der Fuehrer can't do what he wants all of the time?"
Obviously a water projects bill is just as important as torture, rendition, illegal war of aggression, etc.
the stoopid, it really burns
Posted by gay veteran at November 10, 2007 03:54 PM