|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency |
cali (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 07:53 PM Original message |
How can anyone justify President Obama saying through Clinton that he'd |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Mass (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 07:55 PM Response to Original message |
1. I was going to post the same thing. I wonder too what the explanation is. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
razorman (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 08:32 PM Response to Reply #1 |
15. It is worrisome. We cannot castigate Walker for ignoring the court decision if we meekly accept |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
InAbLuEsTaTe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-31-11 05:51 AM Response to Reply #15 |
42. I question the messenger. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
razorman (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-31-11 08:26 AM Response to Reply #42 |
46. You have a point. But what ulterior motive could she possibly have? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Autumn (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 07:57 PM Response to Original message |
2. WTF |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cali (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 07:59 PM Response to Reply #2 |
4. well, he likely won't have to, but it's of great concern to me that he |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Autumn (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 08:07 PM Response to Reply #4 |
6. It's in the Constitution. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
northoftheborder (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 08:11 PM Response to Reply #6 |
9. Well, why would the Senate, after passing a resolution unanimously approving... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tx4obama (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 08:15 PM Response to Reply #9 |
11. The Senate probably wouldn't but the GOP House might. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
paulk (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-31-11 12:02 PM Response to Reply #11 |
49. the Senate resolution |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cali (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 08:19 PM Response to Reply #9 |
12. there has been no resolution authorizing any action in Libya |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tx4obama (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 08:27 PM Response to Reply #12 |
14. But the U.S. Senate did pass S. Res.85 by unanimous consent regarding Libya on March 1st. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
northoftheborder (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 09:09 PM Response to Reply #14 |
22. Yes. That was what Rand Paul was being nailed for by Laurence, for voting for... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dokkie (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 11:30 PM Response to Reply #22 |
34. A Paul supporting a war? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Autumn (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 08:27 PM Response to Reply #9 |
13. Read the article. It explains it and |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
truedelphi (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-31-11 02:51 AM Response to Reply #4 |
41. When he voted for the ability to let the phone companies & others |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tx4obama (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 07:58 PM Response to Original message |
3. Becaue 'resolutions' are not binding and they are not law. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cali (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 08:02 PM Response to Reply #3 |
5. non-binding resolutions are not law |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tx4obama (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 08:10 PM Response to Reply #5 |
7. The House did not pass the resolution. It was not a joint resolution. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cali (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 08:11 PM Response to Reply #7 |
8. that's not the point. the point is that he sent a message to Congress |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tx4obama (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 08:13 PM Response to Reply #8 |
10. And he would have the right to ignore it if it is passed by only one branch of Congress. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jaxx (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 08:36 PM Response to Reply #10 |
16. You got that right! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Mass (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 08:46 PM Response to Reply #3 |
17. Except this was not what the article is about. Read it rather than stopping at the title. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
karynnj (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 09:03 PM Response to Reply #17 |
21. One slight possibility |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Clio the Leo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 08:53 PM Response to Original message |
18. The way in which we accept reporting against the President as the gospel never ceases to amaze me... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
frylock (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 09:54 PM Response to Reply #18 |
26. the converse applies.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Clio the Leo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 10:21 PM Response to Reply #26 |
27. I'm saying some are accused of blindly following the President.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
frylock (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 11:13 PM Response to Reply #27 |
32. that may be true, but i don't see the relevancy as it applies to this story.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PurityOfEssence (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-31-11 02:50 AM Response to Reply #27 |
40. Okay, so IF this is true, do you support it? What would you say if a Republican did it? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tekisui (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-31-11 08:21 AM Response to Reply #27 |
45. First off, 'the press' is not a monolithic singular body. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cali (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-31-11 08:50 AM Response to Reply #27 |
47. I don't blindly follow the press, nor do I accuse others of blindly following the president. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Mass (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-31-11 06:25 AM Response to Reply #18 |
43. There is an easy fix. The WH can say this is not true. They have not! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
InAbLuEsTaTe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 08:57 PM Response to Original message |
19. Not sure Obama was pulling the strings on that one. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
karynnj (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 08:57 PM Response to Original message |
20. You can't - they are over reaching |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
amandabeech (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 09:12 PM Response to Original message |
23. This is exceptionally troubling. This is not the time for Obama to be setting up a possible |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PurityOfEssence (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-31-11 01:57 AM Response to Reply #23 |
36. The President may not send in forces by himself UNLESS ATTACKED |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
amandabeech (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-31-11 02:20 AM Response to Reply #36 |
37. Yes, I absolutely do recognize the problems, and did so from the start. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Vattel (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 09:44 PM Response to Original message |
24. Some people mistakenly believe |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
geek tragedy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 11:10 PM Response to Reply #24 |
30. Every President has taken that position. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hippo_Tron (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 11:16 PM Response to Reply #24 |
33. Every President since Nixon has taken that position and it's not tested in court |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bornskeptic (951 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 09:47 PM Response to Original message |
25. Here's how he can do it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PurityOfEssence (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-31-11 02:32 AM Response to Reply #25 |
38. No; that's overriding a veto, which has already been done |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Runework (141 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-31-11 02:35 AM Response to Reply #38 |
39. THis bears repeating |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Vattel (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-31-11 10:16 AM Response to Reply #38 |
48. I can't vote for Obama in 2012 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slay (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 10:42 PM Response to Original message |
28. Don't you get it man?? It's ok as long as a Democrat does it!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tx4obama (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 10:57 PM Response to Original message |
29. Here's a link to the segment of The Last Word regarding S.Res.85 & Rand Paul |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hippo_Tron (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 11:11 PM Response to Original message |
31. I'd respond by saying that it's probably time to test the War Powers Act in court |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-30-11 11:59 PM Response to Original message |
35. Deleted message |
Harmony Blue (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-31-11 07:50 AM Response to Reply #35 |
44. I believe that... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Sat May 04th 2024, 02:00 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC