General Discussion

Sheepshank

(12,504 posts)

22. Really? Folks on DU are pissed that the WH spoke on the matter?

Sat Jan 14, 2012, 11:41 AM

Jan 2012

So let me see if I understand

A couple of vocal folks on this thread are frustrated over words...because those words don't always morph into the action they desired.

Some think it would be better if the words were never said? These folks amking the assumtion there is/was never going to be any effort to implement those words? You want the WH to stay silent?

You don't think saying the words out loud/publically carries consequences? Public information of efforts made and succeeded and perhaps efforts lost and failed? You don't think the WH take a popularity risk everytime they speak openly about what they want to see happen?

Sheesh....nothing like voting the WH to stay silent on all topics that affect the general population because you personally are sick of words that don't succeed into the 100% desired action.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

33 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

White House on SOPA: "We will not support legislation that reduces freedom of expression..." [View all] jefferson_dem Jan 2012 OP

why is it so hard to believe what they say? ChairmanAgnostic Jan 2012 #1

those words are given as fuel boston bean Jan 2012 #2

DU...Never fails... jefferson_dem Jan 2012 #5

DU never fails to amaze me. boston bean Jan 2012 #6

2, even 8 years ago, I would have scoffed in your face, claimed you were too ChairmanAgnostic Jan 2012 #15

While I have guarded skepticism like that that I have reserved for the NDAA think Jan 2012 #23

Perhaps because you simply feel destined to be disappointed, regardless of reality. jefferson_dem Jan 2012 #3

It gets to be a bit too late to hold folks accountable boston bean Jan 2012 #4

Those who are hoping to do damage (with SOPA) just received a major pushback from the POTUS... jefferson_dem Jan 2012 #7

Good if it's really true, but no reason for anyone boston bean Jan 2012 #8

Your ,not disruptive, insensitive or over the top orpupilofnature57 Jan 2012 #11

Adn you are entitled to speak your opinion,, even if someone else boston bean Jan 2012 #16

Priceless. jefferson_dem Jan 2012 #12

I am not in the doldrums, and I do notice one thing with your posting style. boston bean Jan 2012 #14

I like the statement and also strongly agree that 'Vigilance is the word' Bluenorthwest Jan 2012 #19

Maybe POTUS is trying to compensate orpupilofnature57 Jan 2012 #9

I agree with you jd. This is a strong and good statement. Now. Do I go easy on the Bluenorthwest Jan 2012 #17

Indeed, Bluenorthwest. jefferson_dem Jan 2012 #18

How is it Internet Freedom when the US wants the ability to prosecute justiceischeap Jan 2012 #21

That's the point. jefferson_dem Jan 2012 #26

They said much the same about the Defense Authorization Act JCMach1 Jan 2012 #10

Please provide examples! FarLeftFist Jan 2012 #29

"any bill I sign must contain a public option" Zhade Jan 2012 #31

Actions vs words. Edweird Jan 2012 #13

So does this mean more signing statements. n/t Joe Shlabotnik Jan 2012 #20

Let's hope not. Zalatix Jan 2012 #33

Really? Folks on DU are pissed that the WH spoke on the matter? Sheepshank Jan 2012 #22

+1 Itchinjim Jan 2012 #24

I wouldn't say "pissed" unless you mean in the british sense. ChairmanAgnostic Jan 2012 #25

I'll believe it when I see the veto. n/t LadyHawkAZ Jan 2012 #27

MORE: Obama Administration Comes Out Against SOPA, PIPA jefferson_dem Jan 2012 #28

Thanks. Scurrilous Jan 2012 #30

So far when the WH says such things it signals an eventual signing. We should believe this because? Dragonfli Jan 2012 #32