Englishfor English speakers
Examples absolut veto examples
How do I use absolut veto in a sentence?
Simple sentences
The President vetoed the bill, but Congress overrode his veto.
Movie subtitles
Oh, he had the power of veto.
Of course, and we reserve the right to veto.
We veto it.
I veto it.
That you, Dr. Humbert, should definitely un-veto that girl's nonparticipation in the school play.
In that case, I veto the plan.
It makes no sense at all, and if you could reach Mission Control. they'd veto this crackbrained plan of yours, hands down. I'm not so sure of that.
Mind you, I reserve my legal right of veto.
Besides censoring our mail, you also veto what books are allowed to be sent in to us?
Ministers never veto honours.
With a Magnum 44 whose owner asked authorities responsible for the investigation, veto. - I do not want to watch TV.
Veto, Darwin.
Kryten, can we override her shutdown veto?
TRYING TO SCARE THE SENATE INTO A VETO?
The National Association of Homosexuals. has finally removed the veto from the Big Hunt.
Besides censoring our mail you also veto books sent?
Do you think the governor is gonna veto your budget proposal?
The President is expected to veto the bill.
I must use my veto power.
Veto, I say!
You will not make a mockery of my veto power.
Veto.
I could veto this Simpson-Gardner thing if I wanted to, but I don't.
When you veto their funding, that's not a mistake. When you hurt someone intentionally, that's not a mistake.
We didn't veto anything.
The veto again.
To what delays? Veto.
So, in that case, are you going to lift your veto?
And if I were Queen, I would veto it.
Veto to carajo! You can cogerte a that puta, to me concerns carajo to me!
What? Veto to carajo, fat person of excrement!
Veto of here!
Veto to the excrement!
Veto it.
The president will veto any bill prohibiting sampling data as a component of the 2000 census.
Insist on prohibiting sampling, and count on a long fight followed by a veto.
The White House will veto it when no one's looking.
News and current affairs
A US veto of a Security Council resolution - supported by the Council's 14 other members - to oppose Israeli settlements seemed to signal that Obama had crumbled under pressure from America's pro-Israel lobby.
In particular, they object to the plan's proposal to give increased powers and responsibilities to the Secretary General, whose selection is effectively in the hands of the Security Council's five permanent members, which wield veto power.
Because the Czech Parliament's upper house has an absolute veto over constitutional amendments, the opportunity to amend the Constitution was lost.
Witness, for example, Ireland's veto of the institutional reforms adopted at the EU's Nice summit in December 2000 - reforms without which enlargement cannot go forward.
But the UK government could - and undoubtedly would - veto any such adaptation of the Bank of England's responsibilities for monetary policy, financial stability, and banking supervision.
This means that no single country can block action, in contrast to the IMF executive board, which makes decisions by consensus, giving large countries like the United States de facto veto power.
The two crises have nothing in common, but their resolution will depend in large part on whether these two permanent members of the United Nations Security Council use their veto power.
The American president would choose the Bank's head, and Europe would collectively decide on the IMF leader, with the understanding that the other side would exercise its veto only if a candidate were totally unacceptable.
But the League's unanimity requirement effectively gave all members veto power, and the United States Senate's refusal to ratify its Covenant condemned the effort to a premature death.
This alone justifies referring these issues to the UN General Assembly, which, unlike the Security Council, knows no veto power.
The fact that America can veto even these modest IMF proposals illustrates a fundamental weakness of current international economic arrangements.
In the UN, five countries hold a veto - largely a historical anachronism.
Whatever one's attitude to these arrangements, the notion that a single country can exercise effective veto power seems inconsonant with basic democratic principles.
The world cannot allow America to veto its efforts.
While Russia retains the world's largest (if somewhat aging) arsenal of nuclear weapons, as well as a permanent seat (and thus veto power) on the UN Security Council, it is more sick than BRIC.
But China wields a veto there and will block enforcement of an adverse ruling, just as the US did in the Nicaragua case.
Substantive safeguards, such as giving groups of national parliaments the power to veto unwanted EU proposals, are trickier; but here, too, negotiators should be able to finesse a solution.
What will most likely emerge is a eurozone pact that member states can sign and ratify at will, making it impossible to veto.
More recently, however, Obama has threatened to veto any further attempts to roll back financial reform.
The junta then assumed legislative authority, as well as the power to form a constitutional assembly and veto proposed constitutional provisions.
The US (which has veto power) has now taken the stance that it will no longer approve the higher number of executive directors (24 at present).
The EU's member governments name the members of the European Commission, and the Parliament lacks an explicit right to veto them.
Of course, it could be that the United Kingdom's veto of the summit's proposed changes to the EU's Lisbon Treaty drowned out all else, while further increasing distrust on the part of the public and financial markets of a divided Europe.
And yet confidence in the recent decisions taken in Brussels remains low, owing not only to dissipated trust and the fuss about the British veto, but also to the apparent absence of measures to intervene in the current crisis.
Indeed, he may not even object to ruining the EU's entire legislative engine by granting national parliaments a veto.
If Russia does veto the Ahtisaari plan, the EU's united facade will likely fracture, with many European countries refusing either to join the US in recognizing an independent Kosovo without the UN's blessing or to send a supervisory mission there.
So long as unanimity remains, the more countries that take part in decisionmaking, the bigger the danger of a single veto blocking action.