General Discussion

Occulus

(20,599 posts)

7. The fact an alert was sent is proof of the truth of the post.

Reply to mitchtv (Reply #6)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 02:10 PM

Apr 2012

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

45 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

If Democrats cannot support a limited Executive Order [View all] ruggerson Apr 2012 OP

courage and leadership are in short supply in the republican-lite party nt msongs Apr 2012 #1

You are seeing what you're seei.g because Occulus Apr 2012 #2

Wow. The whole national issue is caused by "several DUers"? That seems like an easy fix. saras Apr 2012 #3

Yeah, that is EXACTLY what I meant. Occulus Apr 2012 #4

congratulations, your post survived the challenge mitchtv Apr 2012 #6

The fact an alert was sent is proof of the truth of the post. Occulus Apr 2012 #7

Yep. (nt) Posteritatis Apr 2012 #9

no it's not. that's absurd. cali Apr 2012 #13

why would someone alert on it? ruggerson Apr 2012 #14

'Zactly. Occulus Apr 2012 #15

More like they're indifferent. Marr Apr 2012 #37

they're trying to get support for Barney Frank's bill instead, to make the change permanent bigtree Apr 2012 #5

You apparently are not familiar with the history of ENDA ruggerson Apr 2012 #11

makes no sense bigtree Apr 2012 #22

While I think he does want to change it, I'm unconvinced an executive order would hurt it. joshcryer Apr 2012 #24

of course it's political bigtree Apr 2012 #28

Yes, I have no doubt had he had the Congress back he would deliver EDNA. No doubt. joshcryer Apr 2012 #38

I think, unfortunately, politics trumps courage for the President right now ruggerson Apr 2012 #30

I don't agree with making the WH (and Barack Obama's unilateral order) the issue in this election bigtree Apr 2012 #32

The ENDA has come up in Congress each session less one, since 1994 Bluenorthwest Apr 2012 #36

This message was self-deleted by its author bigtree Apr 2012 #41

Congress is not going to be doing anything on ENDA for a long, long time ruggerson Apr 2012 #40

you do know that Johnson's executive order came AFTER passage of the Civil Rights Act? bigtree Apr 2012 #45

"now is not the time" Occulus Apr 2012 #12

remarkably similar to the attacks on supporters of LGBT rights during the DADT repeal debate bigtree Apr 2012 #23

While those are stupid arguments they don't mean someone is anti-gay. joshcryer Apr 2012 #25

well they could be both ruggerson Apr 2012 #31

True! joshcryer Apr 2012 #34

Can you outline how it could put a lid on the measure for good? joshcryer Apr 2012 #27

the issue would be framed as some battle against Obama and his unilateral action bigtree Apr 2012 #29

Executive orders are well within a Presidents right, across the board, no question. joshcryer Apr 2012 #35

Election calculations are their only concern, not what is right or wrong. mmonk Apr 2012 #8

"Recent years" being "all of the years since the last election." (nt) Posteritatis Apr 2012 #10

More like "since 1994" Doctor_J Apr 2012 #16

Their calculations are way off Doctor_J Apr 2012 #17

I'm gonna agree with the Doctor, here. Warren DeMontague Apr 2012 #19

Same reason they're still letting the DOJ throw cancer grannies in prison for pot smoking Warren DeMontague Apr 2012 #18

I'm not sure about the EO, but I do know that the public isn't crazy about EOs.... Honeycombe8 Apr 2012 #20

My only pushback is the target of the push-forward. Bolo Boffin Apr 2012 #21

I agree. And this is why Democrats are weak. joshcryer Apr 2012 #26

Only one hand in America can sign that order. Bluenorthwest Apr 2012 #33

And there are many things that hand must take into account. Bolo Boffin Apr 2012 #39

This is all a fantasia not a set of facts.... Bluenorthwest Apr 2012 #42

This discussion moved from my thread to this one. Bolo Boffin Apr 2012 #43

Even if Obama wins re-election and we retake the House, I doubt ENDA survives a Repub filibuster LonePirate Apr 2012 #44