This kind of stuff scares the bejayus out of me. Is there any chance of it actually happening, do you think?
I held out for so very long, but now even I am disappoint. This is exactly the sort of shit that was supposed to stop when GWB left in shame. ESPECIALLY that "don't ask, don't tell" bullshit. Of all things promised, that should have been the EASIEST to do. It could have been done through executive order.
In other news, that combined withthismeans I will no longer support the democrats in any way shape or form. Nor the republicans.
The one area that will always enjoy bipartisan agreement and support is whatever makes big corporations happy.
Is it just me, or does anyone else feel as if Viacom, RIAA, Big Oil, Citibank, and a few others must have castrated Obama in his sleep one night and then locked him in a closet until he developed a case of Stockhold Syndrome that makes Patty Hearst look normal?
The NYT insinuated this is the work of the Obama administration, and some less-reputable sites have mistakenly stated Obama HIMSELF is introducting this legislation. Neither one of those are correct.
The article states "Federal law enforcement and national security officials" and there are quotes from FBI counsel.
Executive branch? Yes. That's where Law Enforcement happens. The Obama administraton would be the ones to introduce the bill, IF they approve of it. There's a good chance they may not.
The headline should read "FBI, NSA, DOJ want Obama adminstration to consider..."
Oh, and as for the "proposal’s likely requirements"... well, that's the NYT making a WAG.
Know what is funny? Last year this guy complained about Obama making a speech to school kids at the beginning of the school year. Jim Greer. Yeah. Guys a dick. So every other president has made a speech when kids go back to school. Why complain when Obama does it? And guess what? This dick, Jim Greer, is up for all kinds of corruption charges. Oh and he said something about this years speech. He said he was sorry. That's right. He said he was sorry he made it such a big deal last year. Fuckin dick bag republicans.
I know too many journalism students to do anything but sorrowfully agree.
Myself included. And every year we're told to hold ourselves up to the standards of the New York Times. What A Joke. I'm sorry, Dr. Brown, my writing may not be exactly AP compliant, but I makre sure I put down the motherfucking facts when I write my articles. You can take your C- and blow it out yer ass.
I feel like people need to understand what the function of each branch of the government is. Sure, the President can affect what Congress decides to focus on, but ultimately if Congress doesn't want to pass certain laws then they won't. Obama may have promised more than he can deliver, but he has at least worked on the issues he promised he would. He has generally supported the positions he said he would.
Does anyone really think a different President with the same Congress would have fared better? If you don't like the legislation that has come from Obama's initiatives, hold CONGRESS accountable. Obama isn't the one who voted down the repeal of DADT. Obama isn't the one who quashed the possibility of an effective healthcare plan. The Presidents and Governors of our country can only do so much without a functional legislature.
Now, granted, there is the possibility of using Executive Orders. However, doing this is a short-term solution that basically equates to political suicide in this situation. If Obama issues an EO enacting something that Congress has already rejected, there is even less chance of any support from Congress in the two remaining years of his Presidency. Take DADT: if the next President opposes the repeal, he/she will simply issue another EO reinstating DADT. If you can get Congress to repeal it, then that is the way to go. It's a much more permanent solution because it's harder to change and it's harder for a single administration to get around it.
If Obama gets closer to the end of his Presidency without any effective assistance from Congress, THAT is the time to start issuing the EOs. While he still has a chance of getting anything meaningful done, anything at all, he should wait.
Obama just essentially maimed DADT. He's limited the power to discharge someone for being gay to five of the top DoD officials, pretty much all of whom openly oppose DADT.
What a coward! Running from searing volcanic ash! A real president would defeat the volcano! Also, doesn't he know he can placate the gods of the volcano by sacrificing a virgin? Why doesn't he do that?
Comments
In other news, that combined with this means I will no longer support the democrats in any way shape or form. Nor the republicans.
I am so disgusted.
I held out for so very long, but now even I am disappoint. This is exactly the sort of shit that was supposed to stop when GWB left in shame. ESPECIALLY that "don't ask, don't tell" bullshit. Of all things promised, that should have been the EASIEST to do. It could have been done through executive order. The one area that will always enjoy bipartisan agreement and support is whatever makes big corporations happy.
Is it just me, or does anyone else feel as if Viacom, RIAA, Big Oil, Citibank, and a few others must have castrated Obama in his sleep one night and then locked him in a closet until he developed a case of Stockhold Syndrome that makes Patty Hearst look normal?
Does anyone really think a different President with the same Congress would have fared better? If you don't like the legislation that has come from Obama's initiatives, hold CONGRESS accountable. Obama isn't the one who voted down the repeal of DADT. Obama isn't the one who quashed the possibility of an effective healthcare plan. The Presidents and Governors of our country can only do so much without a functional legislature.
Now, granted, there is the possibility of using Executive Orders. However, doing this is a short-term solution that basically equates to political suicide in this situation. If Obama issues an EO enacting something that Congress has already rejected, there is even less chance of any support from Congress in the two remaining years of his Presidency. Take DADT: if the next President opposes the repeal, he/she will simply issue another EO reinstating DADT. If you can get Congress to repeal it, then that is the way to go. It's a much more permanent solution because it's harder to change and it's harder for a single administration to get around it.
If Obama gets closer to the end of his Presidency without any effective assistance from Congress, THAT is the time to start issuing the EOs. While he still has a chance of getting anything meaningful done, anything at all, he should wait.
/Stevespeak