General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums5 Reasons To Vote For Obama...In Pictures!
by weatherdude
<...>
1: The Supreme Court.
2: The veto.
3: A long record of solid accomplishments.
The healthcare bill.
DADT repeal.
4: He's a strong leader.
5: His policies are working.
?
- more -
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/30/1115188/-5-Reasons-To-Vote-For-Obama-In-Pictures
BumRushDaShow
(128,483 posts)And especially because of that 1st picture!
SunSeeker
(51,513 posts)Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)Coexist
(24,542 posts)spanone
(135,792 posts)Response to ProSense (Original post)
Post removed
ProSense
(116,464 posts)aikoaiko
(34,162 posts)Last edited Mon Jul 30, 2012, 10:51 PM - Edit history (1)
abelenkpe
(9,933 posts)Actually that's my number one reason, but the others are good too.
HopeHoops
(47,675 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)vetoed the foreclosure bill. That was a huge win.
Still, would you rather Romney gain the veto power?
patrice
(47,992 posts)Indefinite Detention (that was made legal in the Authorization to Use Military Force passed BY CONGRESS in 2002), without a specific exclusion written for American citizens, and without a signing statement directing the DOJ on the Constitutional grounds upon which to proceed if Indefinite Detention is ever enacted against American citizens.
Why isn't that stuff better reported?
patrice
(47,992 posts)If Obama had vetoed, the result would have been much worse than what we ended up with.
John McCain and Carl I-never-met-bank-deregulation-I-didn't-love Levin wrote the original Indefinite Detention under the auspices of the Secretary of Defense language into NDAA 2012.
Obama could have done the politically flashy theatrical thing with a Veto and the Veto would have been over-ridden with that shit-for-language in the bill. And Obama could have benefited politically and then say "It's not my fault. I tried to stop it."
He took the harder political path. The one that cost him an arm and a leg with the Occupy, btw. He had Sen. Boxer get the Sec Def language amended into putting the power of indefinite detention in the Presidency, to use or NOT TO USE as a President, an ELECTIVE office, sees fit. And he had a new amendment for the words specifically excluding American Citizens inserted into the bill.
But the problem is that the NDAA also contains other language which says that the NDAA does not change any preceding legislation means that the original authorization for Indefinite Detention (that many of us here at DU have known about since 2002), written into the Authorization to Use Military Force that Congress passed for Bush, is not changed by even the exclusion for American citizens written into this NDAA. Hence, the President's signing statement that orients the DOJ Constitutionally should Indefinite Detention of American citizens ever occur.
patrice
(47,992 posts)chknltl
(10,558 posts)rockingirl
(39 posts)mitt the twit is not really in shambles. don't fool yourself! The rich white man club is still behind him and every wannabe member of that club is still there too. they don't care about this stuff, really. they're too busy with red herring and straw man crappola regarding everyone else not yet committed. revel in it if u must but it is insignificant in their minds. and the worst is that most other uncommitted people don't either care or aren't interested in any of this. they want dumbed down television or hand-fed news stories from whatever source they favor no matter what. they are not going to listen to reason, even if it slaps them right upside the face. and when or if it ever does, and they might finally listen, it will be too late. so you should try to influence these people in some sort of way that might make a difference, rather than just bitching about it here amidst just a friendly audience, duh!
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"mitt the twit is not really in shambles. don't fool yourself! The rich white man club is still behind him and every wannabe member of that club is still there too."
...I'm not in that category. So, yes, Mitt is in Shambles. Sometimes "The rich white man club" doesn't get what it wants. Ask John McCain and his sidekick.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)did you respond to the right thread?
rockingirl
(39 posts)of course i did, thank you so much.
perhaps you just don't like the content of my response?
wtf, maybe you just didn't understand or what?
rocktivity
(44,572 posts)which is why they invented a voter fraud "problem" and are trying to "solve" it with suppression laws.
And I don't see the majority of "uncommitted" voters not caring about not seeing Mitt's tax returns -- at least, not to the point that they WOULDN'T vote for a black guy.
rocktivity
Rhiannon12866
(204,779 posts)BrendaBrick
(1,296 posts)on which projects actually panned out. Here's a link dated September, 2010 outlining 100 projects:
http://www.phcga.com/100-Recovery-Act-Projects-Changing-America-Report.pdf
I can personally vouch for one of them making a considerable difference in my community! I was wondering, anyone else positively impacted by any of these projects?