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
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: When Obama signs a law into effect, he is not responsible... [View all]pinto
(106,886 posts)93. Ah, thanks. I must have misunderstood it.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
120 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
yup. They both also blamed him for everything before he even took office
graham4anything
Mar 2013
#31
Of course-- because they're bound to win anyway, see? You should learn to be a good,
Marr
Mar 2013
#64
I've already posted the specific language in the bill, attached to one of your own
sabrina 1
Mar 2013
#94
I thought I was voting for a person with principals, who do you think you voted for?
A Simple Game
Mar 2013
#73
The continuing funding bill couldn't be vetoed, imo. Of course he had the right to veto.
pinto
Mar 2013
#16
I'm not focused on who's right or wrong. It's an interesting piece of political background, imo.
pinto
Mar 2013
#22
Yes, that little rider only removed all regulations that protect our food supply.
sabrina 1
Mar 2013
#87
Oh come on. You know it was a blind amendment tacked on to the funding bill that had to be passed.
pinto
Mar 2013
#7
My understanding is that it was submitted without a sponsor of record. Hence "blind".
pinto
Mar 2013
#89
Until you get a Constitutional amendment allowing for a line-item veto (something I would support),
NYC Liberal
Mar 2013
#11
Nope, unless you're getting paid or otherwise financially benefiting from this, it's a poor excuse.
AnotherMcIntosh
Mar 2013
#60
Yea, shut the government down and kill the Violence Against Women Act to feel more uber progressive.
phleshdef
Mar 2013
#66
Isn't it odd that the people who are so enraged have not been able to point to the problem? (nt)
jeff47
Mar 2013
#71
No. No. He caved to Monsanto for our own good and he couldn't find his veto pen.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Mar 2013
#57
The bill completely removed all regulations and protections that were in place
sabrina 1
Mar 2013
#75
OMG he didn't veto a bill to fund the government that passed with a veto proof majority
onenote
Mar 2013
#81
Then you better get busy finding the super Progressive candidate for 2016 ... or ...
JoePhilly
Mar 2013
#76