![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
underlankers.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticshttp://news.yahoo.com/obama-signs-defense-bill-despite-reservations-200818531.html
^That One BilllTM is now law. The President expressed severe reservations about it but still signed it into law anyway. To me if he really expressed reservations about it and did not want to object to it becoming law he could simply have refused to sign it or to return it and thus let it become law without his signature. Signing it indicates President Obama's objections to this as a law are a mite bit.....hypocritical. I also think that the practice of including provisions like this in bills where the overall thing includes other, necessary actions is one reason why there should be a constitutional amendment to permit a line-item veto. I also view the further extension of the government's coercive power since the first attempt at a Patriot Act in the 1990s to be a deplorable and worrying trend and hope we can all agree on that much. Your thoughts?
^That One BilllTM is now law. The President expressed severe reservations about it but still signed it into law anyway. To me if he really expressed reservations about it and did not want to object to it becoming law he could simply have refused to sign it or to return it and thus let it become law without his signature. Signing it indicates President Obama's objections to this as a law are a mite bit.....hypocritical. I also think that the practice of including provisions like this in bills where the overall thing includes other, necessary actions is one reason why there should be a constitutional amendment to permit a line-item veto. I also view the further extension of the government's coercive power since the first attempt at a Patriot Act in the 1990s to be a deplorable and worrying trend and hope we can all agree on that much. Your thoughts?
(no subject)
Date: 31/12/11 22:35 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/1/12 01:36 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/1/12 00:17 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/1/12 01:34 (UTC)2) Support legislation that will alter our voting structure to allow more alternatives than the right leaning corporatists and the other party that's even more right wing.
(no subject)
Date: 1/1/12 01:37 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/1/12 02:51 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/12/11 22:43 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/12/11 23:10 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/12/11 23:20 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/12/11 23:32 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/1/12 02:52 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/1/12 04:07 (UTC)Restated: Is it my fault the lesser evil lost for not voting for him, or is it everyone else who voted for the lesser evil's fault for not voting for my third party candidate?
(no subject)
Date: 1/1/12 00:05 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/1/12 02:54 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/1/12 04:15 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/12/11 23:04 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/1/12 01:39 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/1/12 03:44 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/1/12 03:47 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/1/12 05:01 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/1/12 06:00 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/1/12 06:40 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/12/11 22:43 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/1/12 01:46 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/1/12 01:58 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/12/11 23:03 (UTC)This is supposed to be the full signing statement: http://blogs.ajc.com/jamie-dupree-washington-insider/2011/12/31/obama-defense-bill-signing-statement/
(no subject)
Date: 2/1/12 18:58 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 3/1/12 04:24 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 3/1/12 18:09 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31/12/11 23:32 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/1/12 01:36 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/1/12 02:05 (UTC)But, yeah, I was just enjoying some gallows humor. The whole situation stinks.
(no subject)
Date: 2/1/12 00:03 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/1/12 14:37 (UTC)There may be parts of the bill that are eventually declared unconstitutional, but he has to sign something to keep the military funded. It's called compromise.
(no subject)
Date: 1/1/12 16:26 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1/1/12 17:28 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2/1/12 17:34 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 3/1/12 04:37 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 3/1/12 16:31 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 5/1/12 01:15 (UTC)My objection is that it would give the president power to fuck over virtually any member of congress.
"Don't vote against my bill Senator/Representative X. If you do, I'll line-item veto everything you are trying to get for your state/district."
Isn't that sorta a substantial problem with such a kind of veto?