Quote:
Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Let's fisk what he said:
See US Constitution, Clause 4: The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.
This is an undeniable fact. The Constitution further provides for a president pro tempore to preside over the Senate in the absence of the vice president.
I've yet to see this refuted by anyone. Cheney is reportedly quite the hit in the lunchroom
When, golly gee. I cannot imagine why Cheney would be on Capitol Hill when the Senate is in recess.
Then again, Kerry and Edwards don't even show up on Capitol Hill when the Senate is in session.
|
Cheney said this:
- "Now, in my capacity as vice president, I am the president of Senate, the presiding officer. I'm up in the Senate most Tuesdays when they're in session."
Cheney plainly implied that he is "in the Senate most Tuesdays" in his role as the president of the Senate -- that he was there on official business, and Edwards is not. This is not true. As I posted, Cheney has presided over the Senate on exactly two Tuesdays in the last four years.
Your defense of Cheney is that he's hanging out in the lunchroom, even when he's not the "presiding officer" of the Senate. In point of fact, I read this morning that Cheney meets with the GOP Senate leadership regularly -- maybe this is what you're referring to -- but that he generally declines to meet with Democrats. But when he's in the lunchroom, he's not acting as the presiding officer, which is what he was implying.
If a Democrat had said stuff like this, you'd be all over it like flies on shit. I'm sure it was fun for you to see Cheney go after Edwards like that. Too bad for you it turned out like this.
Threaded Mode