Reading freepers complain about signing statements is . . what? I don't have the right word.

[Fuzz]

wtf? All of a sudden signing statements are no longer ok? I don't like them and still don't, veto the damn thing and send it back if you don't like it. Seems they don't remember when a republican like Bush used them, all the time.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2827390/posts

[southernyankeebelle]

1. Republicans are really good at saying do as I say, not as I do. Its ok if the republicans do it.

[ixion]

3. IOKIYAR

as the acronym goes...

[southernyankeebelle]

4. Gee you learn something new everyday. Thanks

[Motown_Johnny]

2. double standards are necessary when you are constantly wrong

they really don't have a choice

[MNBrewer]

5. Reading DUers defend them now gives a similar reaction.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

8. His were different, weren't they?

He was basically saying that he would refuse to enforce sections he did not personally agree with. Obama is not refusing to enforce parts of this law, is he- just expressing his objections. Signing statements don't technically carry with them the force of law, right?

[MNBrewer]

9. No different in legal standing. Nope.

[Sedona]

6. List of the chimp's signing statements

all 153 of them.


http://www.coherentbabble.com/listGWBall.htm

Edited for typo

[surfdog]

7. "veto it and send it back"

I am pretty sure the president had to sign the bill , as it was veto proof.

[Capitalocracy]

10. ?

That's one parliamentary procedure I'm unfamiliar with, the veto-proof bill.

[surfdog]

12. Congress can override a veto

And I think the votes were there

[Capitalocracy]

13. The idea that the votes might have been there is a ridiculous reason not to veto...

a bill you're against. It's the best way to show your opposition, even if it is going to be overridden... and regardless of how many people voted for a bill originally, voting to override a veto, voting to override the president and leader of their party in many cases, is a very different vote. You can't just say "it was veto-proof, I had to sign it" because you don't have to sign it. If you don't agree with the bill, veto it and force them to override, if that's what they're going to do.

[surfdog]

14. thanks for the laugh

didn't the bill get 80 votes ?

I was only pointing out that a bill can be veto proof , something a poster questioned me about.

[Capitalocracy]

15. A veto can be overridden, but a bill can't be "veto-proof"

A veto still sends a message that you're against what's in the bill... and a challenge to those who passed it to put their money where their mouth is and override an actual veto.

You said the president had no choice but to sign it because it was veto-proof. That's what I disagree with.

[MNBrewer]

11. Only because he telegraphed his cave