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.