tvc184

I have no clue but I have never heard of an officer in TX being able to take money at the side if the road. If they allow that there may be some kind of arrangement like a court clerk is on hand to accept any money.

This seems to be an interesting topic on facebook and other locations. A legislator has again submitted a bill to allow cops to take fines on the side of the roadway. This has evoked a huge response with calls of it being unconstitutional, highway robbery, taking the legal judiciary out of the law, police corruption, etc.  Like usual, it seems like most of the protesters have no clue what the law is about or what it says (why read the bill, right?).    I have read the actual proposal but would like to see some responses. Do you think this is a good idea or not. Why?   This is the article from Houston that has apparently caused the uproar.    [Hidden Content]   This is the actual text of the proposed law. You will have to click on "Texts" and then "Introduced" under Bill Drafts to see the wording.   [Hidden Content]

    That is what I'm talking about.    Keep up the good work.... from a super majority to a complete loss of control and all within the term of a single anointed president. 

No big deal. As the wheels continue to come off from the Democrats wagon, they keep their heads in the sand and claim that everything is okay, there are no scandals and the Republicans are sinking.    Of course the polls show that (the same polls that some of these same liberals spit out with glee when Bush was in his waning days) the Dems are falling just like the Republicans did 6 years ago but the only one that really counts is on election day. I wonder how that worked out for them and how many times even up until election eve, the national and local Dems denied there was any problems. As more bad news keeps coming, they will continue to run around and deny everything.    I love their stance of defiance. That is the ol' American spirit, show us that you will go down with the ship. 

One doe with a bow so far.....

Other than being the daily pot stirrer, is there a good or valid reason to veto the Keystone pipeline?

As the last three elections have proven. The next one will seal the deal.

He is only partially correct. A majority of the country did not fall for it and Obamacare had a substantial negative opinion of the people. The party in power passed in the face of all the opposition from the people they were supposed to be representing.    That has caused the pounding they have received in the three subsequent elections from a super majority in both houses to the loss of both houses.    Basically the public didn't fall for it but the Dems passed it anyway. They are now paying the price.    At least he admitted that they knew it was bogus. 

  You are kidding, right? Less than one half of one percent goes to assistance programs?   Not counting Social Security more than 40% of our budget goes to assistance programs. Maybe you misread 47% and thought it was .47%.   I can see that you need to use your healthcare to purchase some reading glasses.

  No, I want to quit paying for people that won't pay for their own. 

..... at least that is what MSNBC told me to say.

  I think he mentions the problems with an anaconda proof suit. 

Why go over Niagara Falls in a barrel?

  Hmmm.... that "could be" a felony if true. 

Right. Just like the president's own press secretary said a few days before the election. His comment when ask about the upcoming wave was that the president and Democrats did not believe that the wave was coming. You appear infatuated with the word denial. That comes to mind in this situation.

The Republicans have been negotiating. Maybe some people missed representative Elijah Cummings went on camera he told the Republicans after the Democrats had taken over both houses, you lost and that's the way things work. We control the legislature now. There was no negotiations. Their negotiations was either go along with us or get out of the way.

Sure he will veto. He will be stuck with bills actually making it to his desk. Obama lost his final surrogate and will have to stand on his own record.. which is no record. By the next two years, that record will finally exist and it won't be pretty, just like last night's results.    Fortunately and just like these elections, he will bring the rest of the Democratic party with him. 

I hope he vetoes everything. That will be the fait accompli for the 2016 presidential election. Might as well make it a clear sweep and get back to business.    The Dems are about to deal with what the Republicans had to deal with after the Democrats controlled both houses during Bush's last two years. He was stuck with a non-cooperative legislature and that led to Obama's election. What caused his election is what will cause a Republican sweep in 2016.    Of course the Dems will be in denial just like in this election. It won't happen.... it won't happen.... it won't.......... okay, it happened. 

    This from the same person that scoffed at a Republican win taking back the Senate.    Realizing that it will not be repealed at first in its entirety, it will have provisions slowly removed. Then the Dems will be on their knees praying that the Obama disaster will not translate to a Republican win in the next presidential election. If so, Obamascare will go bye-bye. 

    I am sure in your disgust at the turnout (understandable) you missed the previous posts so I will quote one of mine.        A president who has not had to use veto power in 6 years because he has had his shills doing his bidding for him, will now be stuck with actually leading, maybe by veto. But the country and world will see. For 6 years the Democrats will not even allow most bills to come up for a vote. They will not allow a budget to pass. Now such things will go forward and if he feels that he can go in front of the people and tell them that it is him now stopping legislation, go for it.    As an example, let the president veto a bill to allow the Keystone pipeline to go through. Let him and the Dems go into the next election knowing that they are blocking a popular energy bill. He won't be on the ballot but many Democrats will be and when they continue to back him, their fate will likewise be sealed.    On the other hand, with a simple veto pen he will have a lot more time to improve his swing on the golf course. 

One of our frequent flyers on the Democrat's side of this forum said a few months ago said that the Republicans were a sinking ship. It looks like that sinking ship just torpedoed the USS Obama.    On the comic side, I had to turn on MSNBC and watch their late coverage and I am glad that I did not watch them during the actual counting of votes because watching them, I thought the Democrats had won. Then they had about a 20 minute discussion about raising the minimum wage and showed New Hampshire Senator Jeanne Shaheen after her "huge" 52% win as an incumbent in a liberal state and she was talking about pushing (yet again) for the higher minimum wage with her stunning 2% victory.    HUH? It kinds of reminds me of the Cpl Hudson (Bill Paxton) in the movie Aliens after they had just fought their way out of the compound against hordes of aliens and he told a guy (and I have to clean it up for this forum), "Maybe you haven't been keeping up on current events pal but we just got our butts kicked!!".    Here's a tip Jeanne, your party had a super majority in both houses that the Republicans could not stop as they did not have enough votes to even filibuster in the Senate. You also had the presidency and that two branch sweep that was unstoppable... yet you and they did nothing. Well...... they did pass Obamacare which coincidentally is likely the reason that you just got smashed on what Obama a few weeks ago called, a referendum on his policies.    The most important part of this Senate victory is not legislation per se because Obama will simply veto almost any bill sent. The huge victory is that Obama can get no treaties passed, no cabinet appointments and no federal judges including the Supreme Court without Republican consent. He has refused to compromise or even get involved legislatively. Now he is completely neutered unless he makes some kinds of concessions. It is also interesting that Harry Reid changed the long time rules and threw away the 60 votes required by Senate to bring something to a floor vote and used the so called "nuclear option" requiring only a majority vote to end any filibuster on nominations. We now he is faced with the fact that the Republicans will use the rules change to shove it right back in their face.    Oh yeah, thank you Obama for giving the Republicans the most representatives in the US House in history. Not even during the heyday of the Republicans and their contract with America did they hold as many seat as they will come January when the new Congress is sworn in.    And one last time, Jimmy Carter is so glad that Obama has proven to be the worst president at least in modern history as even Carter never lost the Senate until Ronald Reagan beat him in 1980 (he never lost the House even in losing to Reagan).    So much for that sinking ship................ 

  I believe it is by both houses, not just the Senate since both houses passed the law and both have to override a veto. 

  Nothing will change in this congress until the next election, period. Even controlling both houses, the president has veto power. He doesn't have to use it because Harry Reid is his buffer and will let nothing come up for a vote that will ever have to be vetoed.    The only changes possible will be after the next presidential election. Either the Republicans will take it back and if they can hold both houses, can get legislation pass or a Democrat that will actually be involved and try to compromise will work some bill through instead of the current stalemate.    The only thing the midterms are likely to do is to keep Obama appointments out of office such as to the Supreme Court. With the House seemingly firmly in Republican hands, no legislation can pass anyway without a compromise and those just aren't coming. The Senate however does not need congressional approval and only from that one house to confirm nominees. With Harry Reid using the nuclear option and changing the long standing rules of the Senate, if the Republicans take the Senate they will have huge power to confirm or stop any nomination in its tracks.    In effect this election is only about a complete stopping of Obama power until a new president can be put in office, not about legislation no matter who wins or keep the Senate. 

It is hard to tell about the mid-terms since there are a fair substantial percentage of people that have no clue of the names running but put the button for straight ticket.    With that said, the Dems are sweating this one out. They are behind in almost every race that is up for grabs but with only about half the people voting, it doesn't matter who is the most popular but who shows up at the polls. You can lead in true public opinion 55-45% and lose the election if the other side can round up enough people and get them to the polls.    I think the Washington Post just came out with a 96% chance the Republicans take back the Senate. 

I am hoping for a couple of does and a decent buck on the trip.