David “Idiot Liberals” Obey curses out Kucinich over Iraq spending bill

posted at 12:04 pm on May 9, 2007 by Allahpundit

You may remember him as the guy who went ballistic on that anti-war mom in the hallway outside his office a months ago. Now this.

Although it should be noted that Kucinich is, in point of fact, both an idiot and a liberal.

“He cursed at him,” said Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.). “I think Mr. Obey was unfairly harsh and disrespectful.”

What exactly was said is still in question. One source wasn’t sure and others wouldn’t repeat the language.

But everyone agrees that Obey said something that some folks found offensive. The Obey-Kucinich exchange came during a caucus meeting to discuss the Iraq supplemental spending bill.

Kucinich asked Obey about language dealing with privatization of Iraqi oil. Obey’s reply included some magic words, which prompted Rep. Diane E. Watson (D-Calif.) to declare that she was not attending the meeting to hear such vulgarity…

[A]n astute observer of Congressional behavior declared that if you haven’t had a certain part of your anatomy ripped by Dave Obey, you were not a member of Congress.

There’s simply no need for such language given that the new bill is destined for Vetoville as well. Meanwhile, Pelosi’s floating the idea of suing Bush if, when he does eventually sign, he appends a signing statement politely excusing himself from having to follow certain parts of it. InstaGlenn is contemptuous of the idea and rightly notes that Congress probably wouldn’t have standing (unless they pass a bill granting themselves standing, which is also unlikely to be vetoproof). But if the signing statement functions as a line-item veto, then it is unconstitutional under current Supreme Court precedent. The task for the Court would be to create a test for determining when and whether a statement rises to the level of a de facto veto, followed by an analysis of whether the particular statement in question fails that test.

It’d be an interesting case, but I can’t imagine the Dems would want to put it on the books with Bush on his way out and a Democratic successor possibly on his/her way in.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Meanwhile, Pelosi’s floating the idea of suing Bush…

Ah, if there’s one thing your average rank and file American loves more than politicians, it’s litigation.

By combining the two, I think the Democrats have finally come up with a truly unbeatable strategy.

Citizen Duck on May 9, 2007 at 12:12 PM

Heh, I love when they start tearing at each other.

Bad Candy on May 9, 2007 at 12:12 PM

“He cursed at him,” said Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.). “I think Mr. Obey was unfairly harsh and disrespectful.”

Yeah like she’s got any strand of moral authority

Bush a liar.

wryteacher on May 9, 2007 at 12:20 PM

Slow bleed. B*st*rds. Wouldn’t do it if THEIR family was in theatre. Because dem’s don’t consider our soldiers their brothers or sisters, they consider them tools to be used to advance their political careers. There will be a special, warm, toasty place in hell for Pelosi, Reid and Murtha.

JustTruth101 on May 9, 2007 at 12:26 PM

The signing statement threat is a bone being thrown to the netroots. Pelosi is just pushing their buttons to cover for the fact that she’s about to cave on the timetable and give the President half of what he’s asking for while getting nothing in return. They think signing statements are the same as a royal decree. Here’s a random DU’ers idea of a good signing statement:

Elect a Democrat President.

Have Congress pass a bill.

Democratic President issues a signing statement putting 6 more Justices on the Supreme Court.

rw on May 9, 2007 at 12:28 PM

and a Democratic successor possibly on his/her way in.

Bite your tongue!

harrison on May 9, 2007 at 12:33 PM

It’d be an interesting case, but I can’t imagine the Dems would want to put it on the books with Bush on his way out and a Democratic successor possibly on his/her way in.

The temptation to stick it to Bush is too great. They will likely go ahead and do it just so the headlines read “Bush gets sued for Unconstitutional actions” – knowing full-well that they probably don’t have standing.

Rick on May 9, 2007 at 12:42 PM

Any time Maxine Waters or Dennis Kucinich are in the news, the rest of the lefties run for cover.

Who votes for them?

Entelechy on May 9, 2007 at 1:46 PM

which prompted Rep. Diane E. Watson (D-Calif.) to declare that she was not attending the meeting to hear such vulgarity…

Diane Watson’s voting record…..

* Voted YES on allowing human embryonic stem cell research. (May 2005)
* Voted NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions. (Apr 2005)
* Voted NO on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime. (Feb 2004)
* Voted NO on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother’s life. (Oct 2003)
* Voted NO on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research. (Feb 2003)
* Voted NO on funding for health providers who don’t provide abortion info. (Sep 2002)
* Recommended by EMILY’s List of pro-choice women. (Apr 2001)
* Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record. (Dec 2003)

Vulgarities? This scum doesn’t know the meaning of the word!

csdeven on May 9, 2007 at 2:09 PM

Can’t the multi-tasking Grand-Mama Pelosi keep her children in line?

- The Cat

MirCat on May 9, 2007 at 2:40 PM