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

katmondoo

(6,454 posts) Mon Mar 4, 2013, 03:25 PM Mar 2013

Couldn't he have just vetoed it?

28 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why did Obama sign the Sequestration bill [View all] katmondoo Mar 2013 OP

So the 2014 house could get to the other side of the street of course. graham4anything Mar 2013 #1

No. A deal was cut with the Republicans OKNancy Mar 2013 #2

He could have but Drale Mar 2013 #3

No. It was not veto abled. lunatica Mar 2013 #6

Had he vetoed it, the U.S. would have been in default riqster Mar 2013 #8

They should at least like the white side of Obama thecrow Mar 2013 #14

Yes they will be left behind still_one Mar 2013 #17

the naive Obama theory Enrique Mar 2013 #24

Thanks to all for helping me understand this katmondoo Mar 2013 #13

Did not have to sign it... onpatrol98 Mar 2013 #15

Actually, it required votes from both parties to pass the bill onenote Mar 2013 #21

thanks for the clarification leftyohiolib Mar 2013 #23

Because it's the 3rd Way of doing things. The "Not as bad" way of selling out. Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2013 #16

No. He was required to sign it. Zen Democrat Mar 2013 #19

I just hate posts like this. Way too much reality. joeunderdog Mar 2013 #25

+1 It is. It's like waking up to a nightmare, isn't it, woo me with science Mar 2013 #28

The evil Republicans forced him to do it. 99Forever Mar 2013 #22