Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
62. And none of that addresses the point of the OP.
Fri Mar 2, 2012, 02:24 AM
Mar 2012

It isn't about YOU or where you stand. It is about principles, it is about fighting for what is right the same way Democrats fought when Bush was implementing all these violations of our rights. And we won. If we refused to accept Bush's excuses many of which also sounded reasonable enough to an awful lot of Americans, why on earth would anyone be willing to accept excuses now?

Your post is filled with excuses. Excuses we hear each time a bad decision is made. Thankfully enough people are not willing to accept them, and the President listens when the people speak out, he has at least acknowledged it is a bad bill.

But that is not nearly enough, so we will keep on criticizing whether you like it or not. Because it is about this COUNTRY and because it is the job of every elected official first and foremost to 'defend and protect the Constitution of the US' and because they need to be constantly reminded of that. THAT is our job.

Do as you wish, but don't expect those arguments to have much resonance with any but a few Washington insiders, lobbyists and political operatives who in no way relate to the people or their needs which is why the people are now taking matters into their own hands. The people were derelict in their duties, and you are asking them to continue to not participate in their country's affairs. That is not going to happen until the damage that has been done is fixed, and it may take years.

Recommendations

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

If the response to this thread is any indication, I see what she means. Comrade Grumpy Mar 2012 #1
Naomi Wolf NAILED IT. WE have to STOP this NOW Vincardog Mar 2012 #2
Holy crap! What do we do?? GreenPartyVoter Mar 2012 #3
Watch reality tv and go shopping! nt JNathanK Mar 2012 #23
Wait ProSense Mar 2012 #4
The statute is what it says. If Obama didn't believe he'd use the power, he wouldn't sign it. leveymg Mar 2012 #65
You'd be right, The Doctor. Mar 2012 #72
If he was unwilling to sign the Bill, it would be returned to Committee to strip out those sections leveymg Mar 2012 #73
And they'd send it back with even worse shit in it. The Doctor. Mar 2012 #74
No, Democratic Senate majority. Have you ever actually worked on Capitol Hill? leveymg Mar 2012 #75
So you're saying that what you described is *exactly* what would happen? The Doctor. Mar 2012 #79
What certain people believe and shouted since this came up. Justice wanted Mar 2012 #5
It's only a big deal if there is a (R) behind the presidents name. eom Puzzledtraveller Mar 2012 #6
Uh, one of the copy and pastes is from MineralMan Mar 2012 #7
I have a broken watch that is correct at 12:18 every day! What do you make of the main article? Dragonfli Mar 2012 #10
When I read editorial writing, I always look to see where the writer MineralMan Mar 2012 #12
What about writers that contribute to the FR, do you dismiss their input. bahrbearian Mar 2012 #39
I haven't read FR for years. MineralMan Mar 2012 #42
All good questions bahrbearian Mar 2012 #45
And oddly enough Bruce Fein was a hero to the Left when he came against Bush's anti-Constitutional sabrina 1 Mar 2012 #32
Here's the thing: I oppose parts of NDAA, too. I think it is a very MineralMan Mar 2012 #35
So a bad bill has a couple of parts that your Ok with, so lets pass it? bahrbearian Mar 2012 #47
A couple of parts? Have you seen the bill? MineralMan Mar 2012 #67
That doesn't address the point of the OP. Not to mention the fact that you could say Bush sabrina 1 Mar 2012 #58
And none of that addresses the point of the OP. sabrina 1 Mar 2012 #62
Fantastic post. Yes! A passionate voice. Kaleko Mar 2012 #84
You're attacking the messenger, not refuting the message. Logical error. Fail. leveymg Mar 2012 #66
We put away the repubs socialindependocrat Mar 2012 #8
Can you imagine if all this was in place during Nixon? nc_gadfly Mar 2012 #9
Shouldn't it be a TOS violation to use a Reaganite Ron Paul advisor to attack Democrats?...nt SidDithers Mar 2012 #11
You'd think so, wouldn't you. MineralMan Mar 2012 #13
I don't hold it against them if they're Ron Paul suppoters. JNathanK Mar 2012 #25
What ProSense Mar 2012 #26
Obama is a Hypocrite by your definition, bahrbearian Mar 2012 #48
Exactly bahrbearian Mar 2012 #49
Absolutely telling (and pathetic) that attacking the messenger is what you do Bonobo Mar 2012 #31
For ProSense Mar 2012 #36
Did you call Bruce Fein a tool when he went after Bush? Airc, Fein was a big hero sabrina 1 Mar 2012 #80
Indeed. woo me with science Mar 2012 #41
You want to censor someone who was a hero on DU for standing up against his own party sabrina 1 Mar 2012 #57
So Alert on it, Sid, and see if you get a majority of a DU jury to agree with you. leveymg Mar 2012 #68
+1 L0oniX Mar 2012 #83
Should be. Bobbie Jo Mar 2012 #78
Still stalking Better Believe It I see. Did you alert on it yet? My bet is that it will stand. L0oniX Mar 2012 #82
I'm no Paul supporter davidthegnome Mar 2012 #14
Naomi Wolf NOT Naomi Klein Quantess Mar 2012 #15
Too bad these are just voices in the wilderness. bvar22 Mar 2012 #16
I don't care if she is a Ron Paul supporter. I am too, only to the extent he doesn't want war... JNathanK Mar 2012 #24
+1 bahrbearian Mar 2012 #51
The Ron Paul freakout is a symptom of malignancy in the party. woo me with science Mar 2012 #61
Oh, that's OK. Obama will certainly veto any bill that includes indefinite detention. Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2012 #17
But the ACLU is always complaining about violations of the Constitution and stuff. Better Believe It Mar 2012 #18
I know. They're just professional leftist troublemakers who don't toe the party line. Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2012 #19
don't they realize this is an election year!!1 frylock Mar 2012 #28
I heard the ACLU was comprised of nothing but rabid Ron Paul supporters!!! Dragonfli Mar 2012 #64
The language is just too murky and even downright missleading. JNathanK Mar 2012 #55
K&R woo me with science Mar 2012 #20
This will not end well. n/t Moondog Mar 2012 #21
What begins poorly often ends poorly. MineralMan Mar 2012 #27
and president obama's signing statement won't mean jack shit to the next republican admin frylock Mar 2012 #29
Yes, that's true, but we have almost 5 years before that happens. MineralMan Mar 2012 #30
i think you're being delusional if you believe the republicans will never inhabit the white house.. frylock Mar 2012 #46
Is Obama's signing statement proof against further Presidents as well? nt Bonobo Mar 2012 #33
Of course not. But, the NDAA, which authorizes defense spending MineralMan Mar 2012 #38
Really? The REAL question is what am I doing, Mineral Man? Bonobo Mar 2012 #40
See the link below: MineralMan Mar 2012 #43
Nope, not interested. Bonobo Mar 2012 #44
Not many here have over 26,000 posts over there and call themselfs liberal bahrbearian Mar 2012 #50
Signing statements aren't binding not even on the signer TheKentuckian Mar 2012 #34
Nobody SHOULD be held without trial. MineralMan Mar 2012 #37
It sucks for the the POTUS Really? bahrbearian Mar 2012 #52
Killing People used to be limited by the Constitution, until when? bahrbearian Mar 2012 #53
Kick woo me with science Mar 2012 #22
k & friggin r! wildbilln864 Mar 2012 #54
I clicked on this thread, hoping against hope, MadHound Mar 2012 #56
Naomi Wolf "eloquently educated all of us on the perils of unchecked crony capitalism"?... SidDithers Mar 2012 #59
Yeah, ProSense Mar 2012 #70
Naomi Wolf, Naomi Klein, Matt Taibbi, Jeremy Scahill, Michael Moore the list is long sabrina 1 Mar 2012 #60
+100000. nt riderinthestorm Mar 2012 #63
Kick woo me with science Mar 2012 #69
Over the top, sensationalistic, typical. The Doctor. Mar 2012 #71
I disagree.. I don't think people are "sleepwalking" SomethingFishy Mar 2012 #76
Bruce Fein is legit dreamnightwind Mar 2012 #77
Yes, it says something, not about him, but about anyone who would now try to sabrina 1 Mar 2012 #81
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Naomi Wolf: "U.S. is...»Reply #62