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
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: President Obama’s Creepy Executive Order: "Putting the economy on a permanent war footing" [View all]MrDiaz
(731 posts)126. I understand what you are saying
but it does not change the fact that the IRAQ war just ended 3 months ago while the afghanistan war was escalated under obama, but is now beginning the process of ending. And even though congress may be behind it, the change I was looking for towards guantanamo, hasn't changed, regardless of congress the war is still going on, regardless of congress the Bush Cuts are still there, and even though the congress is majority republicans, If i recall correctly obama had 2 years with a democratic congress, or am I wrong?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
193 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
President Obama’s Creepy Executive Order: "Putting the economy on a permanent war footing" [View all]
Better Believe It
Mar 2012
OP
First George W. Bush's and now Obama's Executive Orders tightens that up. Isn't that right?
Better Believe It
Mar 2012
#5
That's a quote from the lead article. "This amounts to putting the economy on permanent war footing"
Better Believe It
Mar 2012
#7
No problem. I hope my bold highlighting of the quote helps to prevent any more confusion.
Better Believe It
Mar 2012
#14
Not even World Nut Daily fell for the interpretation in the OP. (See my post 27.)
msanthrope
Mar 2012
#28
Like I said, if you want your name hitched to some month old, unhinged foolishness
Number23
Apr 2012
#193
I usually am a bit snippy with people who use hyperbole and half truths to make points yes.
DFab420
Mar 2012
#111
Insulting personal attacks against DU'ers goes way beyond simply being a "bit snippy".
Better Believe It
Mar 2012
#121
I don't think there is a single personal insult or attack. The author of the post clearly has a very
DFab420
Mar 2012
#122
He's right on at LEAST 3 of 4 counts. So your little attack was undeserved. n/t
Zalatix
Mar 2012
#118
Lol he's wrong on 3 out of 4... the only one is the Patriot Act. Other then that it this is all
DFab420
Mar 2012
#120
omg dude...seriously? did you not read my post before face-mashing your keyboard?
DFab420
Mar 2012
#124
"the entire economy is now in service to the military". Hyperbolic BS, imo. Here are the players -
pinto
Mar 2012
#8
Matthew Rothschild points out in detail how that Presidential authority is delegated.
Better Believe It
Mar 2012
#13
Another point: these EO's provide for executive branch compliance with the Defense Production Act
pinboy3niner
Mar 2012
#20
Not even World Nut Daily fell for the interpretation in the OP. (See my post 27.)
msanthrope
Mar 2012
#30
What's even more shocking is that an admin hasn't put a stop to it. The agenda is as clear as day.
Tarheel_Dem
Mar 2012
#17
It sounds to me like somebody knows something they don't want to say in plain language
GliderGuider
Mar 2012
#23
This is going to be the greatest thread, ever. Here's the OP, for posterity.
msanthrope
Mar 2012
#31
I'm not going to depend on the right-wingnut website you used to interpret the meaning of the EO
Better Believe It
Mar 2012
#35
Are you mischaracterizing my post deliberately or did you fail to notice the mention of the Bush EO?
msanthrope
Mar 2012
#44
I didn't notice the one brief mention of a Bush EO. In response to your second question ....
Better Believe It
Mar 2012
#65
How did you miss it in a 4 paragraph excerpt? As for the World Nut Daily, has it occured to you
msanthrope
Mar 2012
#74
Right-wing websites don't like what they view as "attacks" on the military-industrial complex.
Better Believe It
Mar 2012
#77
Because WND isn't able to both critique the President and uphold the MIC? Look, the
msanthrope
Mar 2012
#80
I don't visit any right-wing websites like WND for my news nor for any objective critique of Obama
Better Believe It
Mar 2012
#83
I think you should at least google before you post to save yourself some embarassment. nt
msanthrope
Mar 2012
#84
I'm not embarassed by refusing to use right-wing websites like WND as a prime source of news.
Better Believe It
Mar 2012
#86
Ask BBI about Tucker Carlson's Daily Caller website. He's used it as a source many time...
SidDithers
Mar 2012
#94
The fact that you use a "nuttier than poo" right-wing website to back up your opinion says it all!
Better Believe It
Mar 2012
#97
Ironically, the OP's source was founded by one of the greatest Senators that ever served--
msanthrope
Mar 2012
#49
Apparently, the RW wackos bothered to do the research the 'progressive' editor didn't do....
msanthrope
Mar 2012
#55
Hard to tell the "rightwing wackos" from the "leftwing wackos" these days. They use the same.....
Tarheel_Dem
Mar 2012
#59
Now, now don't pile on. They have to find some way to explain their blind, mindless recs
Number23
Mar 2012
#147
"I have Absolutely NOTHING Intelligent to Say" -dude, lol, quit effing projecting
inna
Mar 2012
#171
Here is a scenario for you to ponder...this is all happening in peacetime between all major players.
Ikonoklast
Mar 2012
#36
I've always been in favor of decency. Now what is our primary duty as citizens?
Better Believe It
Mar 2012
#43
Why are you bringing historical facts into a perfectly good anti-Clinton/Obama rant? nt
msanthrope
Mar 2012
#56
When Obama does the right thing I support him. When he advocates bad policies I oppose them.
Better Believe It
Mar 2012
#69
A permanent military emergency is not okay just because it's been around forever.
JackRiddler
Mar 2012
#70
Did someone say he did? The author wrote that. That's why he's called the author!
Better Believe It
Mar 2012
#78
I've developed a habit here of not reading the continuous false crap by certain posters.
Whisp
Mar 2012
#102
So does that mean you have withdrawn your mistaken claim that Obama was quoted in the caption?
Better Believe It
Mar 2012
#155
"In 2008, I had expected our Constitution Scholar to Walk us Back from the edge...."
Robb
Mar 2012
#96
If you want to argue that issuing the updated EO doesn't move us to the left, I get it.
onenote
Mar 2012
#100
Sorry. When you said this "inched us closer" I didn't realize that you viewed standing still
onenote
Mar 2012
#117
I am happy to see that others are finally joining the suspicion that I have written for months.
bluestate10
Mar 2012
#138
Are you suggesting that I fit that category? If so, what do you base your personal attack on?
Better Believe It
Mar 2012
#143
The Progressive has lower standards than WND. Objectively and indisputably
geek tragedy
Mar 2012
#137
If you've noticed something specific that makes this worse than the EO it replaces
onenote
Mar 2012
#116
Sheriff Arpaio writes for The Progressive now. More fodder for the nutjob
geek tragedy
Mar 2012
#135
That's totally false. The Progressive hates him. What's your source for that bull shit?
Better Believe It
Mar 2012
#142
Right. That's an old propaganda technique used against uninformed people.
Better Believe It
Mar 2012
#156
starting a fire then fanning the flames... typical tricky dick inspired repuke politics
roman7
Mar 2012
#160
The "Executive Order" is what it is. I am sure the usual DU mob will attack anyway.
L0oniX
Mar 2012
#167
Wait a minute, I thought liberals wanted the government to be able to step in
treestar
Apr 2012
#187