|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 10:11 AM Original message |
Public Letter to President Obama: - President Obama: Veto Yes; Pocket Veto, No on HR 3808 ! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Newsjock (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 10:13 AM Response to Original message |
1. A little late to the party on this one |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 10:15 AM Response to Reply #1 |
2. Deleted message |
Name removed (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 10:15 AM Response to Reply #1 |
3. Deleted message |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 10:26 AM Response to Reply #3 |
7. Do you have a opinion on the scholars article or would you rather engage in personal attacks? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HughMoran (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 10:34 AM Response to Reply #7 |
13. The two day article is irrelevant. It's called a VETO |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jaxx (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 10:34 AM Response to Reply #7 |
14. The scholar should have checked his facts |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 10:52 AM Response to Reply #14 |
18. Really? So you understand a great deal more about the constitution than him. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jaxx (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 10:59 AM Response to Reply #18 |
21. The President knows. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SargeUNN (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 11:01 AM Response to Reply #18 |
22. still doesn't change the facts |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SargeUNN (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 10:40 AM Response to Reply #7 |
16. the article is as useless as can be |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HughMoran (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 11:08 AM Response to Reply #3 |
25. +infinity |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 10:31 AM Response to Reply #1 |
10. How's that? The scholar questions the "pocket veto". |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Pathwalker (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 10:18 AM Response to Original message |
4. Linky link to ACTUAL veto: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 10:29 AM Response to Reply #4 |
9. Would you like to respond to the writers letter? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HughMoran (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 10:31 AM Response to Reply #9 |
12. Listening? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JTFrog (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 10:23 AM Response to Original message |
5. /double facepalm |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 10:28 AM Response to Reply #5 |
8. Not a response. I take it you can't challenge the constitutional scholars letter. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 10:31 AM Response to Reply #8 |
11. Deleted message |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 10:54 AM Response to Reply #11 |
20. And your regular personal attacks against DU'ers have grown even staler. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HughMoran (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 11:04 AM Response to Reply #20 |
23. Oh, please, I beg of you! Put me on ignore too!!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DevonRex (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 11:38 AM Response to Reply #23 |
28. Hugh, I'm beginning to wonder if perhaps he already did, but failed to make |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MineralMan (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 11:42 AM Response to Reply #28 |
31. A pocket ignore! Bwahaha! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HughMoran (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 11:43 AM Response to Reply #28 |
32. Pocket ignore!!!!!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Spazito (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 12:03 PM Response to Reply #28 |
37. ROFL! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
apocalypsehow (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 01:03 PM Response to Reply #28 |
42. LOL! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HughMoran (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 10:25 AM Response to Original message |
6. Lol - the preemptive outrage is still full tilt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lamp_shade (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 10:39 AM Response to Original message |
15. Oh... it's you. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 10:49 AM Response to Original message |
17. Democrats challenged a virtually identical "pocket veto" by George Dubya Bush! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HughMoran (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 11:05 AM Response to Reply #17 |
24. Defending posting old, no longer relevant news with an article about Bush? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
treestar (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 10:53 AM Response to Original message |
19. Why not just be happy it's not going to become a law for now? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 11:26 AM Response to Reply #19 |
26. Didn't you read my post on Thursday? ""President Obama is not signing HR 3808! Good news!" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grantcart (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 11:34 AM Response to Original message |
27. Trying to pick apart the President's veto |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 11:54 AM Response to Reply #27 |
34. That's what the banks and Repubs may try to do. Are you against safeguards that can prevent that? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grantcart (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 01:08 PM Response to Reply #34 |
44. The President's veto is the safeguard against it but typically you don't |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HughMoran (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 02:41 PM Response to Reply #34 |
48. Are you against safeguards that can prevent that? Posted by Better Believe It |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Radical Activist (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 12:56 PM Response to Reply #27 |
40. Over time it becomes obvious |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
apocalypsehow (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 01:08 PM Response to Reply #27 |
43. This is why I wish we could "Rec" individual replies in OP's - you summed it up perfectly. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DevonRex (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 11:39 AM Response to Original message |
29. It was already vetoed the regular way, but even better. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MineralMan (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 11:40 AM Response to Original message |
30. Had you had a look at the news this morning, you wouldn't have |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HughMoran (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 11:46 AM Response to Reply #30 |
33. . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 11:58 AM Response to Original message |
35. This "scholar" is worrying about something that isn't going to happen |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 12:51 PM Response to Reply #35 |
38. Well I hope you're right and that we won't see lawsuits by the banksters. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 01:10 PM Response to Reply #38 |
45. what are they going to allege? that the bill wasn't vetoed? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 02:18 PM Response to Reply #45 |
46. Can't they make the same allegations that Democrats made against Bush on his "pocket veto" in 2008? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 04:05 PM Response to Reply #46 |
49. thank you for making my point: the issue in 2008 was whether the bill could be overriden |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pinboy3niner (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 11:15 PM Response to Reply #35 |
56. FTW |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 11:58 AM Response to Original message |
36. Delete - dupe |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Radical Activist (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 12:54 PM Response to Original message |
39. What a waste of time. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
apocalypsehow (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 01:01 PM Response to Original message |
41. LOL..."as recommended by this constitutional scholar".... Literally. Can't. Make. This. Shit. Up. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 02:32 PM Response to Reply #41 |
47. You're challenging Robert Spitzers credentials? List your credentials on this subject professor. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 04:15 PM Response to Reply #47 |
51. I'll list mine: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 06:21 PM Response to Reply #51 |
52. Has apocalypsehow retained you as his/her legal counsel or pinch hit poster? LOL |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
apocalypsehow (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 06:44 PM Response to Reply #52 |
53. *Tsk, *tsk. Such anger - that can't be good for you. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 11:06 PM Response to Reply #53 |
55. I'm hardly angry with you. Just curious on why you need professional help in responding to a post. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
apocalypsehow (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 11:34 PM Response to Reply #55 |
58. Oh, you're fairly boiling over with it - largely a symptom of embarrassment. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 11:33 PM Response to Reply #52 |
57. I'll try one more time to explain although it appears you can't/won't pay attention |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
apocalypsehow (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 11:43 PM Response to Reply #57 |
59. It's been a valiant effort, but our friend the OP gets fairly overwhelmed when confronted with facts |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
backscatter712 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 04:11 PM Response to Original message |
50. He vetoed it. What more do you want? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
apocalypsehow (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 07:04 PM Response to Reply #50 |
54. You're about to get an earful about the "constitutional scholar" who never bothered with law school |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
inna (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Oct-09-10 11:53 PM Response to Original message |
60. Wow. One sad, pathetic thread - and I don't mean the OP. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Sat May 04th 2024, 09:04 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
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