The Iraq War Resolution, October 11, 2002

2»

Comments

  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    sweetpotato wrote:
    a post from the very first thread you list here:
    http://forums.pearljam.com/showpost.php?p=5300531&postcount=4

    and i quote:

    "blackredyellow:

    The problem is that you say to "pass something rather quickly to support the troops" or "fund a safe and proper withdrawal", but how, if Bush will veto anything less?

    Granted, Bush will take some bad press for vetoing a bill that has some funding, but what does he care? Most of the backlash will go against the legislators that are seen as not funding our troops.

    The progressive younger generation might see the big picture, but for those who lived through Vietnam, know that if you de-fund a war that a president has no intention of stopping, more and more soldiers will get killed, and they won't have the support and protection that they need. They will go from pretty much screwed over there, to royally fucked, and no one in the white house will really care about it."


    I'm partial to this one, myself:

    http://forums.pearljam.com/showpost.php?p=5316688&postcount=11
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    I'm partial to this one, myself:

    http://forums.pearljam.com/showpost.php?p=5316688&postcount=11[/url



    Seemed more like an ill-formed opinion to me. The public wants this war to end but they will blame the congress for pushing Bush to stop it?

    Their approval rating will go down for pushing for an end to this war that the people want to end and is the #1 issue this election year?

    'Fuck those guys! They're actually doing what we want them to! That's not how congress is supposed to work...get those fuckers out of here!!!'

    The president can not keep us in a war that the congress and the people want to be over. You guys act like we're all powerless and live in a dictatorship.

    um, that is how this government works. the president has veto power. the only way to over ride a presidential veto is to have a massive majority, 65 votes in the senate, not sure what it is in the house. and they house AND senate did not have enough votes to over turn the veto.

    this is 5th grade civics...

    thats the way it works. this is how it is set up. once they votesd to give him authority in 2002 that was all she wrote, he called the shots. hence the term "decider"

    as far as being a dictatorship, have you missed the last 8 years and the constat consolidation of power into the executive branch with his republican lapdog dominated congress cheering all the way?



    WE ALL WANT THE WAR TO END, OBAMA PRESENTED A BILL TO END THWE WAR BY 6 WEEKS AGO, THE HOUSE PASSED IT, THE SENATE PASSED IT, THE PRESIDENT VETO'D IT. THE HOUSE DIDNT NOT HAVE ENOUGH SUPPORT TO TRY AND OVER RIDE THE VETO. WHAT DO YOU PROPOSE COULD BE DONE DIFFERENTLY?
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    There were other options as discussed in the links I provided.


    like what?


    and please dont tell me to go digging through 75 links... cliff notes... the time it takes you to track down the links and paste them you could just type it out
  • sweetpotato
    sweetpotato Posts: 1,278
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    I'm partial to this one, myself:

    http://forums.pearljam.com/showpost.php?p=5316688&postcount=11

    of course you are- it's your OWN. quelle surprise.

    :rolleyes:
    "Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States, Barack Obama."

    "Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore

    "i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
    ~ed, 8/7
  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    my2hands wrote:
    like what?


    and please dont tell me to go digging through 75 links... cliff notes... the time it takes you to track down the links and paste them you could just type it out


    I'm sure you can manage. Why repeat myself when I've already provided it to you so many times? All you have to do it click...but if makes you feel better just pretend the date says today...my thoughts haven't changed.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    my2hands wrote:
    um, that is how this government works. the president has veto power. the only way to over ride a presidential veto is to have a massive majority, 65 votes in the senate, not sure what it is in the house. and they house AND senate did not have enough votes to over turn the veto.

    this is 5th grade civics...

    thats the way it works. this is how it is set up. once they votesd to give him authority in 2002 that was all she wrote, he called the shots. hence the term "decider"

    as far as being a dictatorship, have you missed the last 8 years and the constat consolidation of power into the executive branch with his republican lapdog dominated congress cheering all the way?



    WE ALL WANT THE WAR TO END, OBAMA PRESENTED A BILL TO END THWE WAR BY 6 WEEKS AGO, THE HOUSE PASSED IT, THE SENATE PASSED IT, THE PRESIDENT VETO'D IT. THE HOUSE DIDNT NOT HAVE ENOUGH SUPPORT TO TRY AND OVER RIDE THE VETO. WHAT DO YOU PROPOSE COULD BE DONE DIFFERENTLY?

    I've already shown you how they could have handled it differently. I agree with Kucinich and Paul's stance on this matter. I've also posted those for you, as well. Why should I even bother posting it again? So you can just continue to ignore it then ask me again in a couple of weeks when I continue to disagree with voting to fund this war? Hell, there's a link in my sig that works nicely, too. I'm not going to keep typing it for you, I'll just give you the links to where I have discussed it in depth already.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    I've already shown you how they could have handled it differently. I agree with Kucinich and Paul's stance on this matter. I've also posted those for you, as well. Why should I even bother posting it again? So you can just continue to ignore it then ask me again in a couple of weeks when I continue to disagree with voting to fund this war? Hell, there's a link in my sig that works nicely, too. I'm not going to keep typing it for you, I'll just give you the links to where I have discussed it in depth already.


    sorry, i sont read every post written on the MT and i dont always go back to see what everyone has wrote on a subject... i honetstly have not seen how you think it could have been different?


    by the way... shouldnt the President be the one getting the ultimate blame here? the poeple want out of iraq overwhelmingly... they voted in 2006 with that purpose in mind... the new congress passed a resolution to end the war and remove all the troops by march 2008 (authored by Obama your so called war monger manchurian candidate)... and the President VETO's it... against the will of the people, against the will of the congress... yet you still blame the democrats? the people and the congress passed a bill that would have had every soldier out of Iraq by 6 weeks ago... the President is the one that blocked those efforts and the will of the people with his veto

    thats just what the republicans have been doing since 2006, shift the story and shift the blame to the democrats. the very ones that voted against the war from day 1 and the same ones that have continued to try and end it... and as you can see the president is now blaming EVERYTHING on congress :rolleyes:

    i guess propaganda works, on anyone
  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    my2hands wrote:
    sorry, i sont read every post written on the MT and i dont always go back to see what everyone has wrote on a subject... i honetstly have not seen how you think it could have been different?


    by the way... shouldnt the President be the one getting the ultimate blame here? the poeple want out of iraq overwhelmingly... they voted in 2006 with that purpose in mind... the new congress passed a resolution to end the war and remove all the troops by march 2008 (authored by Obama your so called war monger manchurian candidate)... and the President VETO's it... against the will of the people, against the will of the congress... yet you still blame the democrats? the people and the congress passed a bill that would have had every soldier out of Iraq by 6 weeks ago... the President is the one that blocked those efforts and the will of the people with his veto

    thats just what the republicans have been doing since 2006, shift the story and shift the blame to the democrats. the very ones that voted against the war from day 1 and the same ones that have continued to try and end it... and as you can see the president is now blaming EVERYTHING on congress :rolleyes:

    i guess propaganda works, on anyone

    The funding should have been filibustered and the president should have been impeached.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde

Categories