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: I am not a"Loyal Member of the Democratic Party" I am a Democrat [View all]Blanks
(4,835 posts)51. The fact that I know that Nixon is dead...
hardly makes me responsible for the acts of previous presidents.
I'm simply making the point that Nixon knew (even when he made the statement) that he was not above the law.
I'm certainly not defending any president, past, present or future that breaks the law.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
94 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
I'm conflicted too because as bad as they are they're sure better than the whole
JaneyVee
Feb 2013
#1
I'll agree that Obama is "expanding" these powers when he invades a country for no
JoePhilly
Feb 2013
#22
Whether or not dropping the bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima were war crimes
rhett o rick
Feb 2013
#75
US Congress gave the Executive Branch - well then the president cant hold on to it if congress takes
leftyohiolib
Feb 2013
#35
Sure they could ... but they'll need to be able to overide the President's veto.
JoePhilly
Feb 2013
#40
How many of those attackers were American (or Iraqi or Afghan for that matter), again?
Egalitarian Thug
Feb 2013
#17
Once we actually decided to, we found and killed OBL, but we can't grab
Egalitarian Thug
Feb 2013
#29
Wow. I had hoped (I see now that it was forlorn) that my chide might nudge you into thought.
Egalitarian Thug
Feb 2013
#67
Precisely, in all but "get out of the way". Why are we engaging in that vote thingee, unless we
patrice
Feb 2013
#44
Just because you may be stifled by distance and maybe this sticky little thing called PROOF
rustydog
Feb 2013
#83
yup. As a country we are great for saying that we stand for one thing then doing the exact opposite.
Victor_c3
Feb 2013
#26
I am a Democrat and wasn't loyal to LBJ and his war, nor am I to Obama and his war.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Feb 2013
#27
I can respect that if you can respect that for SOME of us it isn't loyalty to war. It is loyalty
patrice
Feb 2013
#38
So YOU are the judge of my convictions and ethics. Tell me why you are not a fascist, please. nt
patrice
Feb 2013
#87
Bullshit. Please answer the question. By your previous post, AN OBSERVABLE EVENT, you appear to be a
patrice
Feb 2013
#92
Just because an ethical decision is DIFFERENT from yours, that does not NECESSARILY, rationally,
patrice
Feb 2013
#88
Isn't one of the biggest problems of conviction & ethics in the USA the fact that too many of us
patrice
Feb 2013
#91
PRETENDING that two words with the SAME root have ABSOLUTELY different & unique semantic
patrice
Feb 2013
#93
If what you are saying about language were true, Noam Chomsky would be a nobody. nt
patrice
Feb 2013
#94
When did it become bad to ANALYZE specific experiences & situations logically & decide based onthat?
patrice
Feb 2013
#55
You may choose your own risks. You do not have the right to choose other people's risks for them.
patrice
Feb 2013
#31
You especially do not have the right to choose other people's risks for them when it appears that
patrice
Feb 2013
#32
Yep! And EACH person is FREE to identify & commit freely to right and/or wrong as EACH KNOWS it.
patrice
Feb 2013
#41
k, so you are an absolutist, not a rationalist. You claim a "right" to determine what
patrice
Feb 2013
#56
Are you claiming a "right" to determine the RISKS of death that other people face? & if so, by
patrice
Feb 2013
#58
i suspect that you, and many others, won't be as conflicted when the repubs are back in control
frylock
Feb 2013
#37
That's a cheap shot. There is nothing in the OP's comment that even remotely suggests that they want
totodeinhere
Feb 2013
#50
i never suggested that, but to believe the repubs will never have the white house again..
frylock
Feb 2013
#73
Imposing restrictions, and expecting that alone will meet the needs, most often fails, but you
patrice
Feb 2013
#52
I'm not proposing that we just throw them all out. Personally, I think, when I say we need to
patrice
Feb 2013
#69
When you continually show me that violence is the answer to our problems
WHEN CRABS ROAR
Feb 2013
#64
I dunno, personally I think it would be nice to see some consistency of principle from some people..
Spider Jerusalem
Feb 2013
#77
I agree. The democratic party threw hissy fist when George W. Bush used
liberal_at_heart
Feb 2013
#80
Bush claimed the right to spy and torture, Obama added killing Americans to the list
Demo_Chris
Feb 2013
#86