Gotta love the Democrats. Gotta love the lawyers that control the Democrats.

Hey, you also gotta love the Republicans who have been in office so long they’ve forgotten how to read a bill or new law that, heh, in some cases, they sponsored.

So what’s this pocket veto all about?

A pocket veto is a president’s way of de facto vetoing a bill passed by congress by just, boom, refusing to sign the thing. If the president doesn’t sign a bill within ten days of its passing the House then it’s effectively vetoed.

But hey, you scream. It was BUSH who demanded that congress not leave town for the Christmas holiday until they pass a bill funding our troops. The Democrats, led by the fine Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco…the city that can’t keep tigers in their cages, and Harry Reid… the owner of many Nevada shopping centers, hemmed and hawed and acted like no president was going to dictate what bills they will pass although they both knew that to leave town leaving the troops in harm’s way unfounded would be a quick ticket to nowheresville with the voters.

So they passed the bill to fund the troops but heh, well they almost pulled it off.

According to the article linked above and by my own research, it would seem that the fine lawyers of our country, ambulance chasers and generally despised by the average American joe, managed to convince the Dems to stick in a provision that they, meaning the fine and peace loving lawyers, can sue the current government of Iraq for crimes committed on Americans in the days of Saddam Hussein.

Which, on the surface, might not be such a big deal except, hey, what’s this?
that it was written to revive dormant legal claims, including a $959 million judgment won by American pilots who were prisoners of war during the Persian Gulf war in 1991.

First, a nine hundred and fifty nine million dollar judgment for American pilots who were prisoners of war during the Persian Gulf war in 1991? Go with me here, while there may have been an American pilot or two held as a prisoner of war during the first Persian Gulf war…come on, it isn’t as if this were the major crime of Saddam’s reign.

Bush with a big Thumbs Up

Further, who the hell gave this judgment? Some kangaroo court in East Outer Kentucky? I mean, anyone can win a lawsuit. It’s getting the money that’s the problem. But no wait! Whoever filed that lawsuit for those aggrieved American pilots, who I have never heard of much less that some dopey court awarded them millions of dollars…for what?…figured that the new Iraqi government had money now.

So hey, why not bankrupt the new fledgling Iraqi government by making it have to pay out, count it folks…NINE HUNDRED AND FIFTY NINE MILLION BUCKS…to some American pilots that might have been inconvenienced by Saddam? It’s not like any of these pilots died or anything. As I recall but will not bother to look up, there were NO American casualties during Gulf War I. Besides, since when did enemies pay recompense to prisoners of war? Especially a NEW government that had nothing to do with the dictator with whom we fought?

This was sneaky ladies and gems, and nothing less.

Lawyers. Gotta love ‘em.

For an added smile, heh, notice just who the New York Times went to for a fine and intelligent quote. Why is none other than John Kerry, that failed presidential candidate and traitor to all Vietnam vets.

This guy is so stupid that he’s quoting his own illogical self when he said he voted for the war before he voted against it.

From the New York Times:
“Only George Bush could be for supporting the troops before he was against it,” Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, said in a statement, reworking a familiar Republican attack during his unsuccessful presidential campaign in 2004 that he supported the war in Iraq before he turned against it.

I’m just sayin’…

No comments: