General Discussion

TheKentuckian

(25,038 posts)

42. Why would that be? Obama likes the insurance cartel and "uniquely American" bogus solutions.

Reply to MineralMan (Reply #5)

Mon Jan 2, 2012, 01:37 PM

Jan 2012

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

162 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

David Swanson: Obama Crowned Himself King on New Year’s Eve [View all] Better Believe It Jan 2012 OP

so does this mean another body under the bus? xchrom Jan 2012 #1

David's been under the bus so long he has a tire tread tuxedo Donnachaidh Jan 2012 #9

! xchrom Jan 2012 #10

he goes to the 'king' shit and it just smells like a one-sided argument bigtree Jan 2012 #2

If he really believes this treestar Jan 2012 #3

The author knows better. FarPoint Jan 2012 #12

Swanson under the BUS! fascisthunter Jan 2012 #4

Now that Obama is a King treestar Jan 2012 #17

nah, it's more like, poor poor Obama, and poor treestar fascisthunter Jan 2012 #40

Now that your freedoms are gone treestar Jan 2012 #54

sorry, you'll have to put up with my criticizing OUR President fascisthunter Jan 2012 #156

I've been doing that treestar Jan 2012 #159

He willingly jumps under every bus on that route. Ikonoklast Jan 2012 #35

Aw, Geez.... MineralMan Jan 2012 #5

+1 treestar Jan 2012 #27

Why would that be? Obama likes the insurance cartel and "uniquely American" bogus solutions. TheKentuckian Jan 2012 #42

>Implying Obama actually wants single payer. Edweird Jan 2012 #69

Yes. I believe he does want that. MineralMan Jan 2012 #71

You believe it - despite all indications to the contrary. Edweird Jan 2012 #83

David Swanson also bloviated "Osama bin Lynched"... SidDithers Jan 2012 #6

yes getdown Jan 2012 #30

David Swanson is an oustanding DUer. Octafish Jan 2012 #118

Sure. His Pearl Harbor truther stuff is great... SidDithers Jan 2012 #125

So's his analysis of the BFEE and Prescott Bush's role in the fascist Wall Street Coup Against FDR. Octafish Jan 2012 #129

+1 proud2BlibKansan Jan 2012 #145

what does he say about non voting foreign SwampG8r Jan 2012 #152

ROFL!!...nt SidDithers Jan 2012 #154

Yet another thing I agree with him on tavalon Jan 2012 #153

Does ProSense Jan 2012 #7

Good point, of course. elleng Jan 2012 #16

No kidding. CakeGrrl Jan 2012 #51

Elective Monarchy... Luminous Animal Jan 2012 #70

'Unconstitutional signing statement?' elleng Jan 2012 #8

Yeah. WTF?... SidDithers Jan 2012 #13

Which article of the Constitution are signing statements established in? MNBrewer Jan 2012 #66

Which article of the Constitution precludes the issuing of a signing statement? Dewey Finn Jan 2012 #73

No part of the Constitution permits Presidential signing statements, and no part of the sad sally Jan 2012 #97

I didn't claim they had any legal value. Quite clearly they do not. Dewey Finn Jan 2012 #99

Sorry - didn't mean to challenge anything you said. sad sally Jan 2012 #101

No need to apologize! Dewey Finn Jan 2012 #106

"Not prohibited" is not the test, nor could it be, as the "not prohibiteds" are INFINITE. WinkyDink Jan 2012 #133

Sorry, but I think you're looking at Constitutional authorization Dewey Finn Jan 2012 #149

Okay, fine: Extraconstitutional signing statement. JackRiddler Jan 2012 #105

Okay, fine: Somethng quite different Dewey Finn Jan 2012 #150

Wasn't me who "insinuated" anything. I merely cut in to respond (something allowed in threads). JackRiddler Jan 2012 #155

Unrec. Pure hysterical bullshit. n/t FSogol Jan 2012 #11

facts getdown Jan 2012 #34

Given that the basic premise is factually incorrect, mythology Jan 2012 #43

it's not getdown Jan 2012 #46

Amazingly, we still live in a country where one could write such things about the Prez with no FarLeftFist Jan 2012 #14

How do you know Swanson isn't on some FBI "subversive" or "radical" surveillance list? Better Believe It Jan 2012 #20

I have met him and really like the man and his sincerity. Shrug. nt Mojorabbit Jan 2012 #28

Why would he be? FarLeftFist Jan 2012 #29

Because he's a dissident and critic of the federal government. That's reason enough today. Better Believe It Jan 2012 #61

But while you have no proof of that Swanson is still a free man making $$$$ by writing articles. FarLeftFist Jan 2012 #64

What does that have to do with government spying on and surveillance of dissidents. Better Believe It Jan 2012 #119

My dad was NSA Charlemagne Jan 2012 #136

Really? Then why are President Obama's detractors MineralMan Jan 2012 #72

Not to mention all of those evil teabaggers. You'd a thunk they'd be the first to go. FarLeftFist Jan 2012 #81

I keep wondering about that too. JoePhilly Jan 2012 #102

So you deny that our civil liberties and Constitution are under attack? Better Believe It Jan 2012 #132

Woo-woo.... MineralMan Jan 2012 #36

Given his real-world organizing there is no way he is not. JackRiddler Jan 2012 #107

OK, help me out here. I don't get it. no_hypocrisy Jan 2012 #15

Swanson has always distorted. tabatha Jan 2012 #21

he has. he does. More than any other commentator on the left. cali Jan 2012 #160

I'm waiting eagerly , now that this has happened treestar Jan 2012 #22

Good one, thinking people. elleng Jan 2012 #24

You will probably find the answers to your questions if you read the entire article by Swanson. Better Believe It Jan 2012 #25

Yes, he's a DUer. Why not let him post his own screed? MineralMan Jan 2012 #37

Because it's not yet in a book that's for sale RZM Jan 2012 #49

Well, there is that, I suppose. MineralMan Jan 2012 #50

"I don't think I've seen David Swanson on DU3" He has a DU Journal. Better Believe It Jan 2012 #94

OK. Still, I have not noticed him here. MineralMan Jan 2012 #96

(spits coffee) Robb Jan 2012 #112

Are you telling DU'ers when and how to post on Democratic Underground? Better Believe It Jan 2012 #63

Uh, I asked you a question. I didn't tell you to MineralMan Jan 2012 #67

. Bobbie Jo Jan 2012 #93

obama retained getdown Jan 2012 #33

On record is the veto, the signing statements are nothing. They aren't law but the bill signed is. TheKentuckian Jan 2012 #80

Sorry, Swanson has always been under the bus for me tabatha Jan 2012 #18

yup. PeaceNikki Jan 2012 #31

+ 1 nt Kahuna Jan 2012 #87

+2 ellisonz Jan 2012 #161

Obama Bad Obama Bad Obama Bad Obama Bad Obama Bad JoePhilly Jan 2012 #19

Love how he insults Democrats in this sentence... Ikonoklast Jan 2012 #39

YUP / nt JoePhilly Jan 2012 #44

Yup, I got to that line... one_voice Jan 2012 #47

What? You don't pass out from joy when stupid, uninformed people call YOU the stupid one? Number23 Jan 2012 #144

Look at the bright side, David! treestar Jan 2012 #23

Absolutely. And he can slap a big fat tax MineralMan Jan 2012 #41

He has no such inclination and outcomes indicate the position of a small increase was phony TheKentuckian Jan 2012 #48

Finally the banks can be nationalized! treestar Jan 2012 #53

Yeah I'm sure he'll get right on that a simple pattern Jan 2012 #135

All HAIL KING OBAMA! FarLeftFist Jan 2012 #57

Yes, we've known that since HCR. treestar Jan 2012 #59

"Bully Pulpit!!", "Pretty speech!", "Bully Pulpit!!", "Pretty speech!", "Bully Pulpit!!", "Pretty sp JoePhilly Jan 2012 #104

He doesn't want single payer. girl gone mad Jan 2012 #84

Now that he's King, he doesn't treestar Jan 2012 #91

like we saw getdown Jan 2012 #26

Many Democratic Senators supported the Bush regimes actions such as the Patriot Act. Better Believe It Jan 2012 #56

yup getdown Jan 2012 #58

Crap on this logic! mfcorey1 Jan 2012 #32

I can't find the article Swanson wrote rocktivity Jan 2012 #38

He wrote quite a bit about Bush's imperial presidency and then an entire book about it. Luminous Animal Jan 2012 #75

Yet he accuses Obama of the same thing? rocktivity Jan 2012 #121

What? That makes zero sense. Luminous Animal Jan 2012 #128

Yanno, why doesn't an idiot like this just find another line of work. Cab driver or somthin'. They deacon Jan 2012 #45

Another powerful rebuttal! You smart! Better Believe It Jan 2012 #55

Ride in a lot of cabs deacon? HangOnKids Jan 2012 #126

More anti-Obama screed? How surprising! MjolnirTime Jan 2012 #52

Really. Surprising? HangOnKids Jan 2012 #114

Let Me Be Clear by David Swanson Better Believe It Jan 2012 #60

Wait ProSense Jan 2012 #62

bush did it = bad, obama does it = hallelujah. ok nt msongs Jan 2012 #65

Obviously, Mr. Swanson hasn't READ the signing statement. johnaries Jan 2012 #68

The statement is a fat nothing. It isn't binding even to the guy who signed it much less TheKentuckian Jan 2012 #82

the passage of the NDAA pisses me off, but that is over the top. Odin2005 Jan 2012 #74

+1 fishwax Jan 2012 #77

Seems essentially accurate to me. Circumventing the entire basis of the law and one man's TheKentuckian Jan 2012 #85

+1000 and ty inna Jan 2012 #100

the drafters did NOT empower an *elected* legislature to declare war (or any of those other things) fishwax Jan 2012 #76

This is rhetorically over the top cthulu2016 Jan 2012 #78

Swanson keeps going farther 'round the bend. madamesilverspurs Jan 2012 #79

Hahahaha. Loony toons. DevonRex Jan 2012 #86

He 'crowned himself' with a bill he couldn't have vetoed? What bullshit. n/t Akoto Jan 2012 #88

It's even worse than that! DevonRex Jan 2012 #89

Why do you think Obama could not have vetoed the bill? Better Believe It Jan 2012 #95

The bill had a veto-proof majority in both houses of Congress. n/t Akoto Jan 2012 #130

You must not be aware of people's changing their minds after a VETO. WinkyDink Jan 2012 #134

That may be true but that didn't prevent Obama from vetoing the legislation. Better Believe It Jan 2012 #141

The president has lost veto power? When did that happen? JackRiddler Jan 2012 #109

He never had the power to veto veto-proof legislation from Congress. n/t Akoto Jan 2012 #131

There is no "veto-proof." JackRiddler Jan 2012 #137

This message was self-deleted by its author spanone Jan 2012 #90

But..but..didn't he veto it..as promised? Tierra_y_Libertad Jan 2012 #92

Oh well...guess I'll have to join the Republicanunderground now. Old and In the Way Jan 2012 #98

Hey, don't go yet. Stick around a bit. I just got an e-mail from King Barack I. Ikonoklast Jan 2012 #103

No way...I'm joining Ron Paul's freedumb fighters! Old and In the Way Jan 2012 #116

You'll be declared 'Outlaw', and all your lands confiscated by the Crown. Ikonoklast Jan 2012 #117

More hyperbolic bullshit from the left's version of the TeaNuts. RBInMaine Jan 2012 #108

isn't he the frozen tv dinner heir? Whisp Jan 2012 #110

Swanson is another liberal Paulite. Robb Jan 2012 #111

"In the absence of progressives with backbones, more Libertarians like Paul would be welcome" ProSense Jan 2012 #120

What these people don't understand, let's just say it's true. joshcryer Jan 2012 #124

Funny how so much of the over-the-top Obama hating hyperbole... SidDithers Jan 2012 #127

No coincidence. joshcryer Jan 2012 #140

None whatsoever. Bobbie Jo Jan 2012 #146

They're gaming the system, which was expected, of course. joshcryer Jan 2012 #147

Gotta love the recs for that post and this one Number23 Jan 2012 #148

This isn't hyperbolic to the extreme! killbotfactory Jan 2012 #113

K&R NorthCarolina Jan 2012 #115

Good. Perhaps now he can raise taxes mzmolly Jan 2012 #122

Does that mean we don't need congress anymore? joshcryer Jan 2012 #123

The President doesn't need Congress anymore for a lot of things. bvar22 Jan 2012 #138

So that helps the economy and social welfare how? joshcryer Jan 2012 #139

And WHICH Party's Congressmen are going to: bvar22 Jan 2012 #142

Long screed aside, it's simply which is more likely to stop it: joshcryer Jan 2012 #143

Cenk also discussed this tavalon Jan 2012 #151

"Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts absolutely." Lord Acton Tierra_y_Libertad Jan 2012 #157

It's the same, same old song..... cliffordu Jan 2012 #158

Wow Major Hogwash Jan 2012 #162