You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #10: No matter how many times this is pointed out on DU, we STILL hear the bullshit. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 10:42 AM
Response to Original message
10. No matter how many times this is pointed out on DU, we STILL hear the bullshit.
Edited on Thu Sep-13-07 10:46 AM by TahitiNut
It's actually quite appalling to confront such a fundamental ignorance of the basics, including Constitutional provisions that have existed for over 220 years, on a site composed of people who view ourselves as so relatively well-informed.

It's bad enough to contemplate a general public who've been deluded into thinking that a halt in funding will somehow result in the troops being left in the field to starve, without ammo and without transport. But to see people claim idiotically that 60 or 67 Senate votes are required to refuse to wage an illegal war and occupation is truly disturbing. Any high school student SHOULD be able to do better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -FAIR reiterates: Congress doesn't need to overcome veto or filibuster to end war swag  Sep-13-07 09:41 AM   #0 
  - K&R.  KoKo01   Sep-13-07 09:45 AM   #1 
  - that occurred to me when the repugs filibustered something recently.  ellenfl   Sep-13-07 09:50 AM   #2 
  - nothing more important than this right now.  robinlynne   Sep-13-07 09:57 AM   #3 
  - Kicked for the deluded.  Bonobo   Sep-13-07 09:59 AM   #4 
  - absolutely right, and that's only ONE strategy that dems could use....  mike_c   Sep-13-07 07:25 PM   #89 
  - Makes sense  bryant69   Sep-13-07 10:00 AM   #5 
  - Yeah, they'd "lose the respect" of the 35% who still "support this war" (n/t)  ProudDad   Sep-13-07 07:18 PM   #86 
     - They'd save lives -- how many thousands of lives . . .. Iraqi and US -- and maybe Iranian????  defendandprotect   Sep-14-07 02:42 AM   #127 
        - Did I really need a  ProudDad   Sep-14-07 02:54 AM   #130 
  - Finally nice to have some backup out there.  mmonk   Sep-13-07 10:05 AM   #6 
  - Bush can't accept a bill that the Dems don't offer.  followthemoney   Sep-13-07 10:24 AM   #7 
  - K&R  Spurt   Sep-13-07 10:34 AM   #8 
  - The Democrats keep treating the base as if we're as stupid as  Sentinel Chicken   Sep-13-07 10:39 AM   #9 
  - Sadly, too many DUers seem all to willing to confirm such perceptions.  TahitiNut   Sep-13-07 10:47 AM   #11 
     - Those pesky moderates. n/t  redqueen   Sep-13-07 04:44 PM   #61 
  - No matter how many times this is pointed out on DU, we STILL hear the bullshit.  TahitiNut   Sep-13-07 10:42 AM   #10 
  - Oh for cryin' out loud.....  FredStembottom   Sep-13-07 10:52 AM   #12 
  - Did you miss the "no matter how many times this is pointed out" wording??  TahitiNut   Sep-13-07 11:01 AM   #13 
     - I can see your frustration.  FredStembottom   Sep-13-07 11:51 AM   #18 
     - Amen TahitiNut  Truth2Tell   Sep-13-07 10:56 PM   #120 
  - It's often the same people who say there aren't enough Senate votes for impeachment,  notsodumbhillbilly   Sep-13-07 11:06 AM   #14 
  - The apologetics for political cowardice are almost infinte, it seems.  TahitiNut   Sep-13-07 11:09 AM   #15 
  - It almost seems as if some folks think their argument has to have a component which ridicules  bigtree   Sep-13-07 12:19 PM   #22 
     - Some of those "ideas on how best to confront Bush" are (1) not at all or (2) ...  TahitiNut   Sep-13-07 12:47 PM   #28 
     - so objective  bigtree   Sep-13-07 01:23 PM   #39 
        - that's pretty disingenuous-- the issue is not "how to confront Bush..."  mike_c   Sep-13-07 07:30 PM   #93 
           - I really don't believe that refusing funding without direction  bigtree   Sep-13-07 07:52 PM   #96 
     - Not at all  OzarkDem   Sep-13-07 01:01 PM   #30 
        - I don't think that an impeachment process which relies on Democratic charges alone  bigtree   Sep-13-07 01:19 PM   #38 
  - The Pukes didn't get the conviction for Clinton (thankfully!) but look how much mileage  FiveGoodMen   Sep-13-07 04:57 PM   #68 
     - In my opinion, the GOP "won" 8 years of the worst President in history  TahitiNut   Sep-13-07 05:36 PM   #75 
        - The GOP managed to lose seats in '98  creeksneakers2   Sep-13-07 07:59 PM   #100 
           - Losing a couple seats to an unpopular impeachment trial is different  MessiahRp   Sep-13-07 08:39 PM   #108 
           - Nonsense.  TahitiNut   Sep-13-07 09:23 PM   #114 
           - In '98 Republicans were the opposition party  creeksneakers2   Sep-13-07 10:02 PM   #117 
           - or ballot box was rigged  klyon   Sep-14-07 04:48 AM   #143 
  - Those who repeat that tripe on DU KNOW BETTER,  bvar22   Sep-13-07 12:09 PM   #20 
  - 'propaganda' to some here is apparently whatever they disagree with  bigtree   Sep-13-07 12:14 PM   #21 
     - No. Propaganda is a series of lies, distortions, and 1/2 truths...  bvar22   Sep-13-07 12:32 PM   #24 
     - Then it's also a LIE to assert that just refusing a funding request  bigtree   Sep-13-07 12:40 PM   #26 
        - We DO know this:  bvar22   Sep-13-07 01:49 PM   #45 
        - it is *NOT proven that simply refusing to vote for an Iraq budget request would cause Bush  bigtree   Sep-13-07 02:01 PM   #47 
        - And you believe the military would just sit there, without food, without pay,  John Q. Citizen   Sep-13-07 03:15 PM   #49 
           - so far, they've stood by Bush with all of the shortages of equipment and manpower  bigtree   Sep-13-07 03:27 PM   #51 
              - Actually they haven't stood by bush. bush keeps firing anyone who says, hey  John Q. Citizen   Sep-13-07 05:52 PM   #78 
        - They also know this  creeksneakers2   Sep-13-07 09:32 PM   #115 
        - Well, He'd have to have his daddy give him the money  ProudDad   Sep-13-07 07:22 PM   #87 
        - It may be simple  bigtree   Sep-13-07 07:54 PM   #99 
           - Get over Bush already; he does not matter in this  Chulanowa   Sep-13-07 08:44 PM   #109 
              - YOU get over Bush. NOWHERE have I shown ANY support for him  bigtree   Sep-13-07 09:08 PM   #112 
                 - Where did I say you supported him? I didn't  Chulanowa   Sep-13-07 10:06 PM   #118 
                    - Bush will still have the ultimate ability to direct our forces deployed  bigtree   Sep-14-07 06:31 AM   #146 
                       - Because he'd NEVER brush off "enforcable legislation," amirite?  Chulanowa   Sep-14-07 01:59 PM   #159 
        - no-- refusing to appropriate funds would REQUIRE...  mike_c   Sep-13-07 07:38 PM   #94 
        - There is nothing in a 'no' vote which would 'require' Bush to take ANY course of action  bigtree   Sep-13-07 07:59 PM   #101 
        - The Vietnam War was finally ended because Congress would not fund it ---  defendandprotect   Sep-14-07 02:52 AM   #129 
     - It's pretty clear that "don't think" and "don't see" is a stance popular with some.  TahitiNut   Sep-13-07 12:51 PM   #29 
     - so we disagree sometimes  bigtree   Sep-13-07 01:04 PM   #33 
        - OK, do you have ANY clue as to what the Dem's "secret plan to end the war" is?  ProudDad   Sep-13-07 07:24 PM   #88 
           - I keep hearing this as an excuse for us to let the Dems "stay the course"  Hydra   Sep-13-07 07:29 PM   #92 
              - Exactly!  ProudDad   Sep-14-07 02:57 AM   #132 
     - See #68  FiveGoodMen   Sep-13-07 04:59 PM   #69 
     - Here's the thing...  emmadoggy   Sep-14-07 10:08 AM   #153 
  - Bush may strand them  Hydra   Sep-13-07 03:25 PM   #50 
  - I think there should more concern for these troops than a "so what"  bigtree   Sep-13-07 03:38 PM   #53 
  - Why should I?  Hydra   Sep-13-07 03:57 PM   #55 
  - those troops aren't blackmailing you, Bush is  bigtree   Sep-13-07 04:16 PM   #57 
     - And you are a moron if you read my post as "the troops are blackmailing us"  Hydra   Sep-13-07 04:49 PM   #66 
        - the troops are still there because of the failure of Congress to agree  bigtree   Sep-13-07 05:41 PM   #76 
           - Congrats on not addressing any of my questions  Hydra   Sep-13-07 07:16 PM   #84 
              - you completely miss my point  bigtree   Sep-13-07 08:07 PM   #103 
                 - Does anyone remember the point of the Magna Carta?  Holland   Sep-13-07 08:53 PM   #110 
                    - having directed him to do nothing at all, with the original resolution still in place  bigtree   Sep-13-07 09:12 PM   #113 
                       - That is a good point  Holland   Sep-13-07 10:24 PM   #119 
                          - Also  Hydra   Sep-14-07 10:55 AM   #156 
  - Yes, the Democrats should hide somewhere nice and safe and warm.  followthemoney   Sep-13-07 06:48 PM   #81 
  - this is such a straw man....  mike_c   Sep-13-07 07:45 PM   #95 
  - If they have money to effect a withdrawal then Bush also has enough money to continue  bigtree   Sep-13-07 08:17 PM   #107 
  - I have more concern for the innocent civilians  ProudDad   Sep-14-07 02:58 AM   #134 
  - That's not a possible outcome.  TahitiNut   Sep-13-07 03:50 PM   #54 
     - They are 'stranded' right now  bigtree   Sep-13-07 04:24 PM   #58 
     - Explain to me how any member of Congress, Dem or GOP, could possibly ...  TahitiNut   Sep-13-07 04:44 PM   #60 
        - This Congress would be just back to the point where they stand now  bigtree   Sep-13-07 05:16 PM   #70 
     - I know that  Hydra   Sep-13-07 04:31 PM   #59 
        - There'd be political opportunists of all stripes rushing in to "rescue" the troops.  TahitiNut   Sep-13-07 04:47 PM   #64 
  - There is only one thing stopping it  MindMatter   Sep-13-07 07:06 PM   #83 
  - Thank you!  sfexpat2000   Sep-13-07 11:11 AM   #16 
  - so class, what conclusion can we draw from this?  tomp   Sep-13-07 11:27 AM   #17 
  - $$$$$$$$$... war is a racket  redqueen   Sep-13-07 04:47 PM   #63 
  - The point which has been ignored is that, at least up to this point  bigtree   Sep-13-07 11:57 AM   #19 
  - Bush will do what he wants, but there's no excuse for helping him out  Lydia Leftcoast   Sep-13-07 12:23 PM   #23 
  - Having concern for the welfare of the troops already deployed, not expecting Bush to care  bigtree   Sep-13-07 12:33 PM   #25 
     - This is a lame excuse  Lydia Leftcoast   Sep-13-07 01:01 PM   #31 
     - I agree that the legislation must contain a deadline for withdrawal  bigtree   Sep-13-07 01:10 PM   #35 
        - So why haven't they tied the appropriations bills to a deadline?  redqueen   Sep-13-07 04:48 PM   #65 
           - The majority of the nation supports universal healthcare also.  followthemoney   Sep-13-07 07:01 PM   #82 
              - *sigh*  redqueen   Sep-14-07 09:29 AM   #150 
     - what would be wrong with defunding first......  tomp   Sep-14-07 08:27 AM   #148 
  - Congress was late in funding the DOD in 1969 when I had orders to go over.  followthemoney   Sep-13-07 01:09 PM   #34 
  - well, as long as they debate, Bush is without the funds he says he needs.  bigtree   Sep-13-07 01:14 PM   #36 
  - Bush is playing chicken with congress.  followthemoney   Sep-13-07 01:33 PM   #42 
     - Actually, political concerns are not all based on their own survival  bigtree   Sep-13-07 01:41 PM   #43 
  - what do you expect of a house full of warmongering bastards?  Tom Joad   Sep-13-07 08:10 PM   #105 
  - YOUR troops  ProudDad   Sep-14-07 03:06 AM   #136 
  - The Dems are not taking this stand because they value their CAREERS more than they value ending  paparush   Sep-13-07 12:42 PM   #27 
  - Complicity in ongoing war crimes.  The Stranger   Sep-13-07 01:03 PM   #32 
  - Absolutely!  notsodumbhillbilly   Sep-13-07 01:49 PM   #46 
  - That is assuming that they want to end the war by cutting off funding to the troops  Freddie Stubbs   Sep-13-07 01:15 PM   #37 
  - such attack ads would be folly  goodhue   Sep-13-07 01:26 PM   #41 
     - Just like that ad which attacked the patriotism of a triple amputee disabled vet?  Freddie Stubbs   Sep-13-07 02:08 PM   #48 
        - Believe me  ProudDad   Sep-14-07 03:08 AM   #137 
        - Bring on the attack add. DO NOT think for one moment that Max Cleland was honestly defeated.  Raster   Sep-14-07 07:27 AM   #147 
  - amen  goodhue   Sep-13-07 01:24 PM   #40 
  - Congress did not authorize the war  MsMagnificent   Sep-13-07 01:47 PM   #44 
  - And, it has to pass both houses, and 1 Democrat  rateyes   Sep-13-07 03:35 PM   #52 
  - then what?  bigtree   Sep-13-07 03:58 PM   #56 
     - Dems are between Iraq and a hard place.  Disturbed   Sep-13-07 04:54 PM   #67 
  - K&R! n/t  wildbilln864   Sep-13-07 04:46 PM   #62 
  - I don't see the problem here  PianoBlack   Sep-13-07 05:21 PM   #71 
  - Right -- !!! And it looks like those trying to oppose are pro this war anyway -- ???  defendandprotect   Sep-14-07 02:56 AM   #131 
  - cut funding  southtpa   Sep-13-07 05:22 PM   #72 
  - They don't even have to block passage. The funding bill doesn't even have to be  OmmmSweetOmmm   Sep-13-07 05:28 PM   #73 
  - I could be wrong, but I personally think that the country would reward the dems  MasonJar   Sep-13-07 05:33 PM   #74 
  - I don't believe you are wrong at all. This Iraq "war" is an abomination.  Raster   Sep-13-07 06:23 PM   #79 
  - Kick! nt  babylonsister   Sep-13-07 05:42 PM   #77 
  - Of course, stop funding the war and the troops, and never win an election again.  Dark   Sep-13-07 06:34 PM   #80 
  - Yeah, the 35% who are still for this war  ProudDad   Sep-13-07 07:26 PM   #91 
  - It seems we always need to be concerned about that 35%  Warren Stupidity   Sep-13-07 07:54 PM   #98 
     - You are in dire need of one of these  ProudDad   Sep-14-07 03:11 AM   #138 
        - I got it.  Warren Stupidity   Sep-14-07 05:37 AM   #144 
  - You are not paying attention.  Warren Stupidity   Sep-13-07 07:53 PM   #97 
  - Again -- THIS IS THE WAY THEY STOPPED THE VIETNAM WAR -- !!!!  defendandprotect   Sep-14-07 02:57 AM   #133 
  - Exactly!  ProudDad   Sep-13-07 07:16 PM   #85 
  - In my view it is "can't"  jpgray   Sep-13-07 07:25 PM   #90 
  - better than hundreds of thousands die than Dems do something politically unsafe  Tom Joad   Sep-13-07 08:09 PM   #104 
     - Yes--a Republican majority and/or president could guarantee those deaths  jpgray   Sep-13-07 08:11 PM   #106 
        - fat chance. Hillary *promises* to stay.  Tom Joad   Sep-13-07 11:22 PM   #121 
  - Maybe congress *won't* because their major funders oppose such a move.  Tom Joad   Sep-13-07 08:04 PM   #102 
  - All the more reason to get involved in the primary process  Holland   Sep-13-07 08:56 PM   #111 
  - I wish I had thought of that  Vincardog   Sep-13-07 09:45 PM   #116 
  - K&R  AzDar   Sep-13-07 11:41 PM   #122 
  - Kucinich keeps saying this. All you have to do is NOT GIVE THEM A FUNDING BILL.  cui bono   Sep-14-07 12:52 AM   #123 
  - I've been saying this for months now.Posted it everwhere I could comment  bjobotts   Sep-14-07 02:12 AM   #124 
  - Trouble Is, It Won't End The War  Senator   Sep-14-07 02:29 AM   #125 
  - It ended the Vietnam War --- - - - - -- !!!  defendandprotect   Sep-14-07 02:59 AM   #135 
     - That's a novel theory. Please explain.  Senator   Sep-14-07 04:08 AM   #141 
  - Block -- and Block again. Pelosi should NOT bring Bush stuff to the floor -- No funding for WAR !!  defendandprotect   Sep-14-07 02:40 AM   #126 
  - someone please ream randi rhodes on this  NuttyFluffers   Sep-14-07 02:47 AM   #128 
  - EXACTLY!  ProudDad   Sep-14-07 03:14 AM   #139 
  - My question is  Sherman A1   Sep-14-07 03:36 AM   #140 
  - You are so correct  klyon   Sep-14-07 04:24 AM   #142 
  - shut it all down, NO FUNDING  gasperc   Sep-14-07 06:21 AM   #145 
  - kick for swag.  bettyellen   Sep-14-07 09:20 AM   #149 
  - Can't wait to meet her!  swag   Sep-14-07 09:56 AM   #152 
  - 41  erpowers   Sep-14-07 09:43 AM   #151 
  - Yeah, because Bush follows the law and no longer has an emergency response fund, I guess.  jobycom   Sep-14-07 10:13 AM   #154 
  - I'm pretty sure that Kucinich has BEEN saying this for awhile....  Desertrose   Sep-14-07 10:14 AM   #155 
  - kick.  Bonobo   Sep-14-07 11:32 AM   #157 
  - The Democrats fought to preserve the ability to filibuster...  followthemoney   Sep-14-07 12:46 PM   #158 
  - Dems using Fili is one point, FORCING the Pukes to do it is another!  Bonobo   Sep-14-07 04:46 PM   #160 
  - Kick cause it's as true today as it was yesterday.  Bonobo   Sep-15-07 06:10 PM   #161 
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

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