|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » General Discussion |
![]() |
tabatha
![]() |
Tue Nov-29-11 07:33 PM Original message |
Senate Votes To Let Military Detain Americans Indefinitely, White House Threatens Veto |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Blue_In_AK
![]() |
Tue Nov-29-11 07:37 PM Response to Original message |
1. This is sickening. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tx4obama
![]() |
Tue Nov-29-11 07:39 PM Response to Original message |
2. Well not really. They only voted so far on the Udall amendment, not the full bill yet |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Blue_In_AK
![]() |
Tue Nov-29-11 07:41 PM Response to Reply #2 |
4. The Military Detention section should never even have been proposed. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RKP5637
![]() |
Tue Nov-29-11 07:49 PM Response to Reply #4 |
6. Authoritarianism IMO. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bluestateguy
![]() |
Tue Nov-29-11 07:39 PM Response to Original message |
3. Absolutely outrageous. Totally unacceptable to let the military detain anyone indefinitely. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BadDog40
![]() |
Tue Nov-29-11 07:43 PM Response to Original message |
5. Who are these 16 Dems that support this? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
a simple pattern
![]() |
Tue Nov-29-11 07:51 PM Response to Reply #5 |
7. Traitors all. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MNBrewer
![]() |
Tue Nov-29-11 07:52 PM Response to Reply #5 |
8. These are they |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
woo me with science
![]() |
Tue Nov-29-11 09:47 PM Response to Reply #5 |
15. They need to be replaced with real Democrats. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
robinlynne
![]() |
Tue Nov-29-11 08:00 PM Response to Original message |
9. veto. veto. veto. It's there for a reason. USE IT. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
annabanana
![]() |
Tue Nov-29-11 08:09 PM Response to Original message |
10. Sheldon Whitehouse voted FOR it?!? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
msongs
![]() |
Tue Nov-29-11 08:17 PM Response to Original message |
11. "threatens" veto - is that like a John Conyers "stern" letter? nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
coalition_unwilling
![]() |
Tue Nov-29-11 08:19 PM Response to Original message |
12. Buh-bye Constitution: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
a simple pattern
![]() |
Tue Nov-29-11 08:23 PM Response to Original message |
13. I think I get it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dawson Leery
![]() |
Tue Nov-29-11 09:38 PM Response to Original message |
14. No surprise to see "songbird" McCain is a chief sponsor of this monstrosity. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
woo me with science
![]() |
Tue Nov-29-11 09:54 PM Response to Original message |
16. Veto. Period. No "threatening." It should be a VOW. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Sat Sep 07th 2024, 07:36 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » General Discussion |
![]() |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC