burlingtonfreepress.com

Sponsored by:

vt.Buzz ~ a political blog

Political notes from Free Press staff writers Terri Hallenbeck, Sam Hemingway and Nancy Remsen


5.30.2008

 

Address on a bill

Gov. Jim Douglas allowed the hemp bill to become law yesterday without his signature. His staff had sounded the alarm earlier this month that because the Legislature had left town without creating a veto session, the governor didn't have the option of letting something become law without signature.

They found a way to do it, though. By sending the bill to the Secretary of State's Office without a signature it becomes law By sending it to the Senate office without signature it's vetoed. The address on the hemp bill: the Secretary of State's Office.

Douglas spokesman Jason Gibbs said he doesn't expect any more bills to travel that route.

Douglas doesn't like the hemp bill, noting that it doesn't do anything as long as the federal government considers hemp illegal.

Advocates for the bill say it will put the state in a position to take advantage of an agriculture boon once the feds legalize it.

The purpose of allowing a bill to become law without signature thing eludes me. But now Douglas will be able to say he had nothing to do with it if it ever becomes troublesome.

- Terri Hallenbeck

Comments:
Let me clear it up for you:

He's against it, but he isn't really against it ...

See now? It's leadership.
 
This was an important bill the majority in this year's Legislature focused on, along with the Bouzer (Sha Na Na) bill, the Library privacy bill, the plastic bag bill, the buffer zone bill, the marijuana bill, Entergy bills, global warming and the stress reduced egg bill, all took priority over Education budget reform, property taxes, legitimate energy bills, affordable housing and transportation funding. The last two only because Gov Douglas took some initiative.
 
Douglas signed this because he wants to create some more jobs for illegals working on his relative's farm. He is also intriqued at the thought of someday being able to wear hemp flood pants.
 
He didn't veto it because he isn't against it.

He didn't sign it because he isn't for it.

He's both for it and against it.
 
It's always good to know that the legislature got a really important piece of legislation through.

Cripes...one more waste of time to keep from having to deal with the sustantial issues facing the state..

Peter and Gaye should be real proud of what they have gotten done....and to think Gaye wants even more responsibility. but then, this should wrap up the Cheech and Chong vote.
 
Douglas is a joke. He hasn't done anything for years except cash checks from the state of Vermont.
 
The VT GOP is impotent. They can't do anything but complain about how awful Vermont is.
 
Douglas did not write this bill- Peter and Gaye let this bill ride through the Legislature and they passed a bill that is illegal. I don't care if people smoke hemp or tie up the legislators with it and apparently Douglas doesn't either. What a waste this past legislative session was.
 
Anonymous said...

"The VT GOP is impotent. They can't do anything but complain about how awful Vermont is."

Well, it's not like they can run on their record.

Still, there's nothin' wrong with Vermont that a competent Governor wouldn't cure.
 
NEK said...

"Douglas did not write this bill- Peter and Gaye let this bill ride through the Legislature and they passed a bill that is illegal."

Ya better get your grand kids to explain the legislative process and the duties and responsibilities of the three branches of government to your ignorant, ill-informed ass, nekkie boy.

Clearly, you don't have a clue.

"I don't care if people smoke hemp or tie up the legislators with it and apparently Douglas doesn't either. What a waste this past legislative session was."

Evidently, hemp and the State of Vermont are among the vast number of things Doogie and his dimwitted supporters don't give a damn about, little factually-challenged fella.

Always a pleasure.

Dismissed.
 
This comment has been removed by the author.
 
This comment has been removed by the author.
 
Hemp isn't smoked. Learn something about the issue before you start spouting off.
 
Like I said- I could care less what you do with the hemp and apparently I don't move in the right circles.

Coop- are you insinuating that the Douglas administration had a hand in writing this bill? Maybe you should look in your dusty old civics book!
You just like to spout off- mostly without saying squat.
 
You could care less about the facts. Thanks for being honest about it.
 
Symington for Governor
Hemp for all!
 
NEK....

""Like I said- I could care less what you do with the hemp and apparently I don't move in the right circles.""

"Coop- are you insinuating that the Douglas administration had a hand in writing this bill? Maybe you should look in your dusty old civics book!"

First of all, nekkie boy, I didn't write the passage you've just cited.

Secondly, now that you've cheneyed that up, perhaps I should address this to your grand kids so they can explain it to your ignorant ass, little fella.

In no way did I claim or "insinuate" Doogie wrote the bill. Clearly, being part of the executive branch, he doesn't have the power to legislate. That power belongs to the Legislature. Hence, the name.

That's probably why they call them Legislators, little factually-challenged/too dumb to live fella.

All of which seems to be news to your ignorant ass, deducebag.

Allow me to refresh your faulty memory.

You spewed this specious slop:

"NEK said...
Douglas did not write this bill- Peter and Gaye let this bill ride through the Legislature and they passed a bill that is illegal...."

To which I replied:

Ya better get your grand kids to explain the legislative process and the duties and responsibilities of the three branches of government to your ignorant, ill-informed ass, nekkie boy.

Clearly, you don't have a clue."

How does your ignorant, ill-informed ass interpret that as insinuating that Doogie wrote the Legislation, nekkie boy?

That's what I thought.

Again, clearly, you don't have a case or a clue.

Then again, you never do.

You're ignorant trash, nekkie boy. You're dumb, you're scum and ya got bupkis.

Disappear.
 
Anonymous said...

"He didn't veto it because he isn't against it.

He didn't sign it because he isn't for it.

He's both for it and against it."

At which point Doogie said, Jason, ya got anything to munch on? I'm wicked hungry and I've got cotton mouth like you wouldn't believe. Go downstreet to the convenience store, snag a couple bags of Doritos, some dip, and some Mountain Dew. While you're at it, snag me a Red Bull or five, charge it to the taxpayers and remind me what we were talkin' about and why I'm against this bill again."
 
yawn....you moron
 
That's about all Jason Gibbs is good for, fetching things for Doesless. He's pretty good at lapping Jim's patent leather loafers as well. He should have bailed with Smith and let the little witch dictate the message.
 
Allowing a bill to become law without signature is a standard operating procedure; executives of all political persuasions do it for a variety of reasons.

In this case, I'm inclined to think Douglas did it for two: One, as he said, it's a meaningless bill. Two, he can continue the narrative that the Democratic/Progressive legislative majority have given him: That they were more interested in "boutique" issues that most Vermonters couldn't care less about and wasted time on those instead of tackling tough ones like education finance reform, property tax relief, etc.

Seriously, how many of the NOFA/Rural Vermont/pro-hemp devotees was Douglas going to get anyway?
 
IndependentVter...

"Allowing a bill to become law without signature is a standard operating procedure; executives of all political persuasions do it for a variety of reasons."

Do tell, deduce bag. By all means, feel free to substantiate your latest load of delusional dreck.

That's what I thought.

Just 'cause it ain't unprecedented don't make it a SOP, schmuck.

"In this case, I'm inclined to think Douglas did it for two: One, as he said, it's a meaningless bill. Two, he can continue the narrative that the Democratic/Progressive legislative majority have given him: That they were more interested in "boutique" issues that most Vermonters couldn't care less about and wasted time on those instead of tackling tough ones like education finance reform, property tax relief, etc."

In other words, like shrub, he's gonna keep lyin' his sorry butt off and hope nobody notices.

We've noticed.

If Doogie the Dim is Governor because Vermont voters want it that way, little fella, then it also follows that the composition of the Legislature grows increasingly Democratic with each election cycle because Vermont voters wants it that way, little factually-challenged fella.

Ya best get used to it, indy, 'cause it ain't gonna change.

"Seriously, how many of the NOFA/Rural Vermont/pro-hemp devotees was Douglas going to get anyway?"

This is a Blue State in a Blue Year. Even with Pollina gummin' up the works, Doogie needs all the votes he can get to keep his job.

Always a pleasure.

Dismissed.
 
Sorry JW, but pointing out how much time was spent on issues like hemp, marijuana, impeaching the president, recalling the Vermont Guard, or entertaining Bowser or Cindy Sheehan, etc. may be spinning, but it ain't "lying" as you claim. I don't know if it will be effective, but Randy Brock has already made it clear this will be the GOP strategy.

Trying to tie Jim Douglas to Bush didn't work for Scudder or Clavelle; Gaye may try again (or try to tie him to McCain) but there's no reason to believe she'll get any more traction this time.

With Pollina still in the race, the only way I see for Gaye to win is to finish second and have the Legislature vote her in, but the downside risk to the Democratic Party of doing so isn't insignificant, IMHO.
 
Go Pollina!
 
IndependentVter has left a new comment on the post "Address on a bill":

"Sorry JW, but pointing out how much time was spent on issues like hemp, marijuana, impeaching the president, recalling the Vermont Guard, or entertaining Bowser or Cindy Sheehan, etc. may be spinning, but it ain't "lying" as you claim."

It is if you believe the ignorant slop in the paragraph of yours directly above this statement, little factually-fella.

Little fella, since you're clearly having trouble making contact with reality, let me go over it again for your ignorant ass.

I don't give a damn what you "think" since, like most gops, you think almost as often as ya get your name engraved on the Stanley Cup.

I only care what you can prove and to date, you're 0 - everything.

Just because you don't think the Legislative Dem Majority should do anything but rubber-stamp doogie's gop-slop nonsense while you pretend to be independent doesn't make it so. That's not their job.

Again, doogie had a Gop Legislature when he took office. He doesn't have it any more. Vermont seems to want it that way.

As for what you "think" is a waste of time, I think Doogies's a waste of oxygen. Just like his supporters. Unfortunately, whether I like it or not, he's still the Governor of the State of Vermont until 1/09. Ditto for Dubie.

On the other hand, the composition of the Legislature is the will of Vermont voters and, like doogie, they ain't goin' anywhere 'til somebody knocks 'em off.

"I don't know if it will be effective, but Randy Brock has already made it clear this will be the GOP strategy."

So, Randy Brock has already made that clear, eh?

Well, with a one-term an out State Auditor at the helm we may as well all cancel the election and go home.

What other psychotic slop did the Naples nitwit have to offer, little fella?

"Trying to tie Jim Douglas to Bush didn't work for Scudder or Clavelle; Gaye may try again (or try to tie him to McCain) but there's no reason to believe she'll get any more traction this time."

Yeah, Bush, the gops and the War in Iraq are considerably more popular now than they were two years ago, little fella.

I see your point, indy.

The price of gas and home-heating oil are down, employment, wages and benefits continue to soar as rapidly as the cost of living continues to plummet and the US and VT Economies continue to boom making conditions for the gops all the more favorable.

Clearly, under gop leadership, things are much better on the global, national, state and local level than they were two years ago and Vermonters and the American people love bush and the gops because of it, too, since he's now over 30 percent in some public opinion polls.

Gee, is your ignorant, ill-informed, lunatic-fringe ass gonna tell me the Surge is working and Saddam's WMD were right where Shrub and Rummy said they were now, too, little factually-challenged fella?

"With Pollina still in the race, the only way I see for Gaye to win is to finish second and have the Legislature vote her in, but the downside risk to the Democratic Party of doing so isn't insignificant, IMHO."

With Pollina still in the race, Doogie just may keep his job.

In a two person race in a Dem year, it's 50-50 and he's got his incompetent hands full.

Always a pleasure.

Dismissed.
 
Gaye Symington is running for governor? You wouldn't know it. Campaign is stealth, or so it would seem. Who's running her show? Must be a novice.
 
Pollina will help her - don't worry.
 
JWCOOP10 said: "I don't give a damn what you "think" since, like most gops, you think almost as often as ya get your name engraved on the Stanley Cup.

I only care what you can prove and to date, you're 0 - everything."

Again, JW, you claim to know I'm a "gop" without offering any of your precious "proof."

I choose to call myself an independent because, unlike you, I don't mindlessly condemn anyone who calls themselves Republican, or slavishly kiss the behinds anyone who labels themselves a Democrat. I take people -- even politicians -- as I find them and judge them on their merits.

Prove something to you? I don't need to, and it's become obvious that it's a fool's errand. Like Doug Hoffer, your double standard in that regard means it's a waste of time; your opinions are like papal edicts while anyone else's require proof that can never meet your exacting (and one-way) standards.

Keep telling yourself that your vitriol and simple-minded insults are endearing you to all and earning you respect on this board. I'm sure you believe it. In the meantime, the rest of us are moving on...
 
You actually read JW's posts? That makes you a bigger fool than him.
 
Anonymous said...

"You actually read JW's posts? That makes you a bigger fool than him."

Which leaves your ignorant, ill-informed, anonymous ass in a factually-challenged, lunatic-fringe league of your own, little filly.

Ya got any more preemptive strikes ya wanna launch on the bottom of my foot with your face or have ya gotten it outta your system for the time being?

Always a pleasure.

Dismissed.
 
1-800-BPD-GIVE
 
IndependentVter said...

JWCOOP10 said: "I don't give a damn what you "think" since, like most gops, you think almost as often as ya get your name engraved on the Stanley Cup.

I only care what you can prove and to date, you're 0 - everything."

"Again, JW, you claim to know I'm a "gop" without offering any of your precious "proof.""

As opposed to your nonexistent proof, little factually-challenged fella?

Well, if it's proof ya want, it's proof you'll get. Ya see, indy, proof is never a problem when ya have the facts on your side.

So, for openers, indy, there's your utterly-psychotic citation of "one term and out" Randy Brock as an authority on electoral strategy, little self-delusional dreck-dealin' fella.

Then, of course, there's your clueless-cretin contention in response to the one unimpeachable, factual part of the Doyle Poll that Vermont's Independents will flock to McCain when, despite being thumped by Obama, Hillary garnered more votes than McCain and Huckabee combined while finishing a distant second to Obama and the only people McCain has ever beaten when listed on a Vermont ballot are Bush, Huckabee and an assortment of other best forgotten gops.

What's more, there's virtually every other pile of delusional dreck you've ever uttered and the fact that, as a rule, is invariably critical of any and all Dems, invariably complimentary of any and all gops and every time I call your sorry butt and challenge you to substantiate your factually-challenged slop, invariably, you've got bupkis and fail to do so.

That, once again, is why I challenge you and your coalition of the clueless compatriots to substantiate your delusional dreck all the time, little fella. It's a sure bet that you'll fail to come up with the goods.

"I choose to call myself an independent because, unlike you, I don't mindlessly condemn anyone who calls themselves Republican, or slavishly kiss the behinds anyone who labels themselves a Democrat. I take people -- even politicians -- as I find them and judge them on their merits."

"..on their merits.", eh?

That's a good one, little fella.

Given the fact that neither you nor your bubbleheaded chums have been able to substantiate any of your psychotic slop since ya got here, one would have to look long and hard and scour the four corners of the Earth in an effort to find a gop with merits, I can see why you and/or your fellow bubbleheads have such and abundance of free time to be here waiting for me when I log on.

The only thing you're independent of, little fella, is reality.

"Prove something to you? I don't need to, and it's become obvious that it's a fool's errand."

In other words, you can't prove anything 'cause you're dumb, you're scum and ya got bupkis.

Thanks for clearin' that up, indy.

As for "fool's errands". that's why, upon stepping out of the dugout on my way to the mound to relieve the incompetent bubblehead preceding you, I raised my right arm, tapped my elbow, and signaled your ignorant, anonymous ass in from the bullpen to meet me on the mound, relieve said bubblehead and send him packing to the showers because I can think of no factually-challenged/fundamentally-dishonest, utterly-psychotic, gop-slop spewin' fool more qualified to throw jet fuel on the already raging clueless-conservative cause than the likes of your ignorant, ill-informed ass, indy.

Clearly, you're the coalition of the clueless cretin for the job.

Again, it's become obvious that, like bubbles and the rest of the nameless-nitwit, ignorant-trash bubbleheads who've spent the better part of the past eight months proving time after time that ya don't know your ignorant asses from your elbows.

Then again, those facts were never in dispute.

"Like Doug Hoffer, your double standard in that regard means it's a waste of time; your opinions are like papal edicts while anyone else's require proof that can never meet your exacting (and one-way) standards."

Nah, Hoffer is far more patient and tolerant of ignorant trash with bupkis than I am.

Hoffer would attempt to inform and reason with your ignorant asses. I, on the other hand, cut right to the chase, see ya, raise ya and call your ignorant ass because it's a lock that you've got bupkis, won't be able to come up with the goods to substantiate your delusional dreck and have no interest in the facts in particular or reality in general.

I never claimed to suffer fools gladly and I sure as hell ain't gonna start with the lunatic-fringe likes of your ignorant ass.

Again, little factually-challenged fella, all I've gotta do is call ya on your delusional dreck, ask to see your evidence and say you've got bupkis when ya invariably fail to produce any to state the facts.

You, on the other hand, are basically screwed.

Once again, little fella, in the invariable absence of any and all evidence to support your dimwitted delusional dreck, like all gop-slop spewin' slime, you have it all backwards.

You're not ignorant trash with bupkis because I disagree with you and your factually-challenged/fundamentally-dishonest, pathetic excuse for a political philosophy. I disagree with you because you're ignorant trash with bupkis in support of your delusional dreck.

"Keep telling yourself that your vitriol and simple-minded insults are endearing you to all and earning you respect on this board. I'm sure you believe it. In the meantime, the rest of us are moving on..."

In other words, you and your coalition of the clueless compatriots have found a new board to try to dominate and control.

Gee, that's a shame. Best of luck, schmuck. You clowns are gonna need it.

As for being endearing, if nothing else, indy, I would have thought that even the dimwitted likes of your ignorant, ill-informed, lunatic-fringe ass would have figured out by T-Day that the less the lunatic-fringe likes of you and the bubblehead brigade like me, the better I feel about the World and my place in it.

Especially, given the fact that I'd expressed that very sentiment in no uncertain terms more than a few times by then, but nobody ever accused you gops of being less than thick in the best of circumstances. Nobody with access to this keyboard anyhow.

Always a pleasure.

Dismissed.
 
Anonymous said...
"1-800-BPD-GIVE"

In other words, ya want me to be a big brother to ignorant, ill-informed, nameless-nitwit trash like you.

Thanks anyway, I'll pass.

Always a pleasure.

Dismissed.
 
moron
 
Apparently Coop spent a rainy Sunday nipping away at his Wild Irish Rose then spreading more goodwill on the BFP board.
 
Obviously, your ignorant anonymous ass has got bupkis.

Thanks for clearin' that up, little fella.

Always a pleasure.

Dismissed.
 
1-800-BPD-GIVE.

Now, more than ever, JW needs your support.
 
independentvter mentioned...
"how much time was spent on issues like hemp, marijuana, impeaching the president, recalling the Vermont Guard, or entertaining Bowser or Cindy Sheehan, etc. may be spinning"

I'd like to remind you that hemp had tri-partisan support, and listening to Cindy Sheehan was set up by a Senate Republican Chair, as well as Sen Canns -one of the most conservative members and a WW2 vet - was opposed to the intial start of the war!

In addition, the National Popular Vote also had tri-partisan support - including a House co-sponsor of Rep Kurt Wright!

So keep on slamming Democrats if you want - but please have your facts sstraight!

That goes for Bubba as well!
 
I think it's strange.

My first thought was lack of leadership.

There is no reason to not sign it or veto it.

If the intent was to muddy the legal waters of the new law, then why not just veto it and put it to rest?

Where's the leadership here?
 
To all that continually claim the legislature wasted their and our time this past session.

Do you have any idea how many times members bring in their friends to be recognized by the chamber? At least a handful a day. Don't believe me, come out one day, any day, next session and watch this charade. This can take anywhere from 20-30 minutes a day x 75 days = 25 hours. And remember that this the entire body not just one committee which means no one in the building is doing any official business.

Or how about the time the entire body, not just one committee, wastes to pass a resolution congratulating Buelles Gore hop scotch team for winning the elementary championship Div 7. Oh there are probably a 100 or so of these each year taking 10 minutes each for another 16 hours.

So that's a total of about 40 hours for the ENTIRE body wasted to run through these charades which let's face it are nothing more then reelection campaigning by the incumbents.

Now lets compare that to just ONE committee discussing the Hemp bill. Less then 12 hours of total testimony. Now I know you're going to say they should have been dealing with property taxes. Well guess what the ag committee does not work on property taxes. But do you know who does, it's the entire body but they are too busy recognizing the high school performers from Shrewsbury because they managed to present Cats without anyone falling asleep.

You want to complain about the mismanagement of time, fine. Just make sure your chastising the folks not working on actual law along with those doing their jobs just not to YOUR liking.
 
Is that you Speaker Symington?
 
Now that you have accounted for 1 lost week, do you care to account for the rest?
 
If gops had their facts straight and could distinguish their ignorant asses from their elbows there'd be no gops.

That said, what's the downside?
 
Anonymous said: "I'd like to remind you that hemp had tri-partisan support, and listening to Cindy Sheehan was set up by a Senate Republican Chair, as well as Sen Canns -one of the most conservative members and a WW2 vet - was opposed to the intial start of the war!"

If by "Senate Republican Chair," you mean Vince Illuzzi, I got news for you: He's a RINO, or Republican In Name Only.
 
In name only, eh? Ya mean he's not psychotic enough to suit your ignorant anonymous ass, little factually-challenged fella.

Gee, that's a shame.

Dismissed.
 
"Now that you have accounted for 1 lost week, do you care to account for the rest?"

It's just sad. Everything has to be explained to you right wingers. That's 40 hours that the entire body is on the floor away from committee time, which is exactly where the real work gets done. Now there are 14 committees in the house, multiply that by the 40 hours wasted = 560 hours of committee work time lost, dealing with issues you claim to care so deeply about. And yet, did we hear one Republican suggest the chamber stop the non-sense of clapping for their donors or passing resolutions congratulating the fire departments victory in donkey basketball, to get back to work? No, we only heard "we should leave two weeks early" Well why, because the Republicans only want to play politics not actually get anything done.

Like I said before, you want chastise the legislature for not working on the issues that matter, great. But, you better at the very least be honest and bash the Republicans for wasting just as much time having the House standing up and clapping for their donors from their home town.
 
To anonymous 1:39p

Its only the House that does the introductions of constituents.

The Senate traditions limits introductions only to former Senators or statewides - which are usually very few in a session.

The most prolific introducer of constituents and amendments is Repbublican Mary Morrissey of Bennington.
 
Hence the reason the explanation only has 14 committees and closes by saying the "House standing up and clapping for their donors...." Not to mention that it clearly says chamber if it was a reference to the Senate and House it would have said ChamberS
 
Post a Comment



<< Home

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

June 2006   July 2006   August 2006   September 2006   October 2006   November 2006   December 2006   January 2007   February 2007   March 2007   April 2007   May 2007   June 2007   July 2007   August 2007   September 2007   October 2007   November 2007   December 2007   January 2008   February 2008   March 2008   April 2008   May 2008   June 2008   July 2008   August 2008   September 2008   October 2008   November 2008   December 2008   January 2009   February 2009   March 2009   April 2009   May 2009   June 2009   July 2009   August 2009   September 2009   October 2009   November 2009   December 2009   January 2010   February 2010   March 2010   April 2010