2006-10-28 02:56:59 · 12 answers · asked by bowlingcap 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Yes, but a bill to withdraw American troops from Iraq would have a very difficult time passing even if both Houses are controlled by the democrats. In a worse case scenario, there will still be enough Republicans to filibuster any bill that manages to make it out of committee.
2006-10-28 03:03:11 · answer #1 · answered by damdawg 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No Bush or any President does not reserve the right to veto a standing vote in Congress. However, that won't stop Bush as he has demonstrated to America and the World. Bush fancies himself above the law and the Constitution, so he would simply veto the votes, grandstand with his rather large ego and thumb his nose at the law and the Constitution.
Then if Congress challanged Bush's Veto, it would be up to the Supreme Court. I have a better Idea why doesn't Congress put on their agenda to Remove Bush, Rumsfield and Dickie From office.
Dems and Cons alike in Unision saying in one voice. " GET OUT".
Oh but wait! Even if Congress were to vote in unision that the Bush, Dickie and The Donald were to be booted out of Congress, Bush WOULD VETO THAT AS WELL!
In ending, a Veto may be overideen in Congress with 2/3's of the vote. Bush has never let any of the above stop him!Which is why it should be up to the supreme Court NOT Bush to determine the Constitution and Law.
2006-10-28 04:46:01 · answer #2 · answered by JC J 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Supposedly Jim Baker's Commission on Iraq basically says to cut and run. The report won't be released until after the elections in November (big surprise) but it basically says Stay the Course is not an option. That's why Bush is saying he never said Stay the Course and talking about benchmarks for withdrawal. Bush will either Declare Victory and Go Home or if the Dems win one of the Houses of Congress will blame it on them.
2006-10-28 04:10:24 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
No he can't veto because of the War Powers Act of 1972 Congress has the power to withdraw and distribute troops as long as war is declared 30 days after President Bush Sends troops anywhere
2006-10-28 03:01:40 · answer #4 · answered by tribute_13 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
taking part in hen. The Dems wish we can blame Bush's veto for no longer investment the troops and Bush hopes we blame the Dems. $25 billion in beef, to purchase votes, has given me diarrhea. What became it Pelosi stated on taking the Speaker's gavel? the american human beings will now see the main useful and the main elementary congress in history. we can't waste taxpayer money on "hearings" and "investigations". DUHHHH! the place is Harry Truman as quickly as we want him? He had greater guts than the completed congress.
2016-11-26 00:43:42 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
no i do no thtink so becauase it was scongress who went to war not Bush. He needs congresses consent to go to war. he can only hold invasion troops there for 180 days before congress has to declare war. and even if he did congress can get majority rule and run over his veto so it wont matter
2006-10-28 03:00:55 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
As Commander In Chief, he can station troops where he chooses without anyone else's approval.
Congress can refuse to appropriate money for it, and if they don't present him a budget that includes money for a purpose, he wouldn't have anything to veto.
2006-10-28 03:00:34 · answer #7 · answered by open4one 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
yes but they won't, even the democrats running still believe we will need another 12 to 18 months at least to get our
2006-10-28 06:38:40 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutly.
2006-10-28 02:59:52 · answer #9 · answered by sshhmmee2000 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Not if we impeach him first.
2006-10-28 03:17:07 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋