We're going to "reach out " to you, the same way you guys "reached out" to us and to the Democratic minority in DC Dixie.
So don't worry. It's coming. Stock up on vaseline though.
And let us know how you like it.
Here's what Bush should do....
- Thread starter Dixie - In Memoriam
- Start date
We're going to "reach out " to you, the same way you guys "reached out" to us and to the Democratic minority in DC Dixie.
So don't worry. It's coming. Stock up on vaseline though.
And let us know how you like it.
Don't be foolish. In order for it to be a State of the Union it must be given before both houses of Congress duly opened. There are other constitutional requirements as well. Also consider all of the Amendments which set terms and meeting times, as well as joint sessions of congress.Sigh. I just wish these Republicans would learn the Constitution.
On the plus side, the obsession I developed about 2-3 years ago with the founding, the founding fathers and the federalist papers, clearly paid off. and I still remember much of it.
Read up on it, it will really help you out.
The President cannot just "declare" a State of the Union Address. It is a bit more Constitutionally restricted than that.
Don't ever call me foolish because you were WRONG. you were wrong. Get over it.
I posted the fucking constitution for you. Your blathering about nebuluos 'restrictions" does not refute the Constitution. Sorry.
At what point in time, does the Democrat party actually attempt to "reach out" across the isle and work with those who totally disagree with their viewpoint?
This is funny, given republican malfesanse in attempting to be bipartisan.
Don't you worry your pretty little head, Dixie. After this election, republican senators will be bailing out on your president, and joining the Democrats on Iraq.
If Joe Biden is correct, he's heard privately from 12 republican senators who say that after the election is over (and they are, as a result, freed from having to defend bush) they are going to join Biden and the Democrats to demand a totally different strategy for Iraq, if the bloodshed doesn't end soon.
You are wrong. As I stated, it is required to be before both houses of Congress in Open session. Later the Amendments set limits as to when the houses meet. To say that there are no limitations on a State of the Union address when I have clearly pointed out that there are doesn't make me wrong. It makes you wrong. Get over it. It has to be embarrassing after preaching on how much you read the document to have missed such restrictions, but they are there indeed. Cuss a little more, it makes you look so much like an adult!
Excuse me, find the post where I said there were "no limitations' and while you are at it list these limitations, other than the one THAT I POSTED myself about both houses having to be in session.
And then, back up your original claim, the one I am actually disputing though you are desperately trying to divert attention from that, about it being held on 'specific date"
SPECIFIC DATE damo. Back it up.
I swear to God you men, I don't know if it's that you can't say 'i'm wrong" or if you just can't bear to be wrong against a girl.
This is my post Damo:
Hmm. I don't think so. I seem to recall a passage which read 'from time to time the president shall" which grew into the state of the union address once a year. I don't think it's constitionally mandated that way. I have to check this though.
And then I posted the Constitution.
Find where I said there are 'no restrictions."
That's job one.
Job two, back up your original claim that it must be on a "specific date".
And stop lying about what I said. The posts are there for anyone to see.
Hmm. I don't think so. I seem to recall a passage which read 'from time to time the president shall" which grew into the state of the union address once a year. I don't think it's constitionally mandated that way. I have to check this though.
And then I posted the Constitution.
Find where I said there are 'no restrictions."
That's job one.
Job two, back up your original claim that it must be on a "specific date".
And stop lying about what I said. The posts are there for anyone to see.
Right, then I posted about the fact that both houses are given requirements as to when they meet in later Amendments.. But I guess you ignored that.
Also, there is the little part that the Houses direct when they meet jointly, not the President. This means that "declaring" it a SOTU Address would be impossible without the consent of the Congress.
It is true it isn't on a specific date. I misspoke on that. I didn't realize that that was the only thing you were objecting to in my post... It is only traditionally held on the same day each year.
I have never once cursed at you... nor have I even gotten angry. That was left for somebody else.
Who cares about your first paragraph, it was never in dispute, except in an argument you were having with yourself.
As to your second paragraph, you seem to have missed the part of the Constititution stating that the President has authority to call them into emergency session.
As to your third paragraph, that's what I was refuting.
So after starting an argument with yourself, one that I was never part of, you now admit that what I WAS arguing, is correct.
Thanks. And I'd hate to be your dentist.
So, you find contention in agreement? I'd hate to be your lawyer.
If what happened here is what you want to call 'agreement" go ahead.
I didn't read every post in the thread. I posted the quote of the one I was objecting to. And that was that I hadn't "read the constitution" where I made it clear that I had...
The "foolish" remark was about the "I wish Republicans would read...." remark that was clearly uncalled for and not very accurate
*sigh*
I stated, and even highlighted the part where I stated, that I misspoke on the specific date thing. However, my original post was that the President can't just "declare" it a SOTU Address, the important part was ignored for the trivia that I am willing to admit I had wrong... Highlighted that I had wrong... I then reiterated my original position that the President cannot just "declare" a SOTU Address.
Whatever.
The early presidents Washington and Adams gave speeches to Congress. But Jefferson ended that tradition before it really got started and for the next hundred years the president just sent a speech to Congress that was read by a Clerk. The first president to give a State of the the Union Speech in the modern era was Woodrow Wilson in 1913. The first president to give a televised State of the Union Speech was Harry Truman in 1947.
According to C-Span:
The President delivers his State of the Union Address before a joint session of Congress. Our first two Presidents, George Washington and John Adams, delivered the address to Congress in person. However, President Thomas Jefferson, consistent with his aversion to any practice that resembled British royal behavior, sent his State of the Union addresses to Congress in writing, and they were read to the chamber by a Clerk of the House. For over the next 100 years, Presidents continued to submit written State of the Union speeches.
President Woodrow Wilson broke with the written tradition in 1913. Since Wilson, every President except Herbert Hoover has delivered most, if not all, of his State of the Union addresses in person. The first televised State of the Union speech was President Harry Truman's in 1947. With television in mind, President Lyndon Johnson became the first President to shift the time of the State of the Union message from during the day to a prime-time evening hour.
The advent of television and radio coverage have undoubtedly influenced how Presidents choose to deliver their addresses. Although they began as fairly dry routine summaries of planned activities and past accomplishments, State of the Union addresses have evolved into more important and dramatic events. The entrance of the President into the House chamber has become almost a political rite, there are "guest stars" in the galleries symbolizing points made in the speech, and Presidents are now expected to offer new policy proposals as part of their annual State of the Union address.
C-Span History Website
Last edited:
AnyOldIron
Atheist Missionary
According to Dixie, because Bush has fucked up in Iraq, the US should throw a hissy fit and take their ball home.
Dixie, you are a man in his 30/40s, not a toddler.
Dixie, you are a man in his 30/40s, not a toddler.
DIXIE: "At what point in time, does the Democrat party actually attempt to "reach out" across the isle and work with those who totally disagree with their viewpoint?"
Examples of Dixie's "bipartisanship" and "reaching out" across the aisle (fullpolitics.com):
-DIXIE: You're Getting Bolton Dammit! Like it or not, John Bolton is going to be the new UN Ambassador! His nomination will move to the floor for a vote…. opposed to him are seeming more and more like little spoiled kids who didn't get their way. I hope and pray the Dumbocrats decide to filibuster this! GO FOR IT ASSHOLES! GO FOR IT! ------I DARE YA!
-DIXIE: There is a mechanism by which unqualified judges can be turned away... it's called "voting them down". Is "Democracy" too difficult for your Socialist ass to understand? Why is it, that after being defeated in the most recent elections, you think that 40% of Congress can run the show and call the shots? How much of a fucking majority do WE need now Care? 80% 90%... does it matter?
-DIXIE: You don't need to end the filibuster, just hold their feet to the fire, make those 40 bastards have to experience a good old fashioned filibuster, and wear their asses out. If it shuts down government for a week, we'll live. It's important that [they learn this lesson now, and stop using this rule to intimidate their will on us. This is not why we elected Republicans! Stand up to these sons of bitches or we'll find candidates with the balls to do it in 2006.
-DIXIE: Personally, I don't care if they change the rules, they have that right according to the Constitution! What I do care about, is the subverting of the rules to obstruct judicial nominees. That practice is going to stop and it's going to stop NOW!
-DIXIE: You can whine and cry about it all you like, but that is how it's going to be, and you may as well get used to it!! Whether they use the "CONSTITUTIONAL OPTION" or hold the Democrats feet to the fire and shut down government for a few weeks, this shit is going to STOP! Have I made myself clear on that?
Examples of Dixie's "bipartisanship" and "reaching out" across the aisle (fullpolitics.com):
-DIXIE: You're Getting Bolton Dammit! Like it or not, John Bolton is going to be the new UN Ambassador! His nomination will move to the floor for a vote…. opposed to him are seeming more and more like little spoiled kids who didn't get their way. I hope and pray the Dumbocrats decide to filibuster this! GO FOR IT ASSHOLES! GO FOR IT! ------I DARE YA!
-DIXIE: There is a mechanism by which unqualified judges can be turned away... it's called "voting them down". Is "Democracy" too difficult for your Socialist ass to understand? Why is it, that after being defeated in the most recent elections, you think that 40% of Congress can run the show and call the shots? How much of a fucking majority do WE need now Care? 80% 90%... does it matter?
-DIXIE: You don't need to end the filibuster, just hold their feet to the fire, make those 40 bastards have to experience a good old fashioned filibuster, and wear their asses out. If it shuts down government for a week, we'll live. It's important that [they learn this lesson now, and stop using this rule to intimidate their will on us. This is not why we elected Republicans! Stand up to these sons of bitches or we'll find candidates with the balls to do it in 2006.
-DIXIE: Personally, I don't care if they change the rules, they have that right according to the Constitution! What I do care about, is the subverting of the rules to obstruct judicial nominees. That practice is going to stop and it's going to stop NOW!
-DIXIE: You can whine and cry about it all you like, but that is how it's going to be, and you may as well get used to it!! Whether they use the "CONSTITUTIONAL OPTION" or hold the Democrats feet to the fire and shut down government for a few weeks, this shit is going to STOP! Have I made myself clear on that?