It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Indigo5
I think you confused this with the RNC convention thread....
Originally posted by Kaploink
They have always been jealous that the Kennedys threw better parties. Nobody wanted to go to Newt Gingrich's parties.
How did you leap to Anti-God..
Originally posted by RealSpoke
There is a nun speaking, I thought the DNC was supposedly anti-god?
edit on 5-9-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by RealSpoke
There is a nun speaking, I thought the DNC was supposedly anti-god?
edit on 5-9-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)
In 16 years before Obama, we had 8 each with a republican and democratic president. The Dem has a current rating of 66% favorable, the Rep is 43%. And yet, there is still a huge faction wanting to put a Republican administration back in. This seems inconsistent to me.
No party could ever be Agnostic.
Originally posted by RealSpoke
reply to post by Tw0Sides
I don't think they're anti-God....I kinda was hoping that they could be. An agnostic party would be awesome. I was just parroting the anti-Dem propaganda to show that it isn't the case.
There is a nun getting a ton of applause.edit on 5-9-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)
They are until they figure out they need some votes
Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Cynicaleye
NDAA
Instead, the House passed, by a vote of 243-173, an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) sponsored by Reps. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), Jeff Landry (R-La.) and Scott Rigell (R-Va.) that affirmed U.S. citizens would not be denied habeas corpus rights.
Smith and Amash had hoped to attract enough support from libertarian-leaning Republicans to pass their measure, but only 19 Republicans voted for it, while 19 Democrats voted against
Originally posted by RealSpoke
reply to post by Tw0Sides
I don't think they're anti-God....I kinda was hoping that they could be. An agnostic party would be awesome. I was just parroting the anti-Dem propaganda to show that it isn't the case.
There is a nun getting a ton of applause.edit on 5-9-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)
From Wikipedia: The Constitution does not authorize the President to use signing statements to circumvent any validly enacted Congressional Laws, nor does it authorize him to declare he will disobey such laws (or parts thereof). When a bill is presented to the President, the Constitution (Art. II) allows him only three choices: do nothing, sign the bill, or (if he disapproves of the bill) veto it in its entirety.
Obama’s use of signing statements has clearly shown his willingness to continue the George W. Bush legacy– not only of torture and illegal detainment, but in the dangerous trend of de facto rule by “executive fiat.” Worse, such signing statements put in place a precedent for future presidents to follow– or expand upon.
After the legislation cleared Congress, the ACLU commented that signing the bill “will damage both his legacy and American’s reputation for upholding the rule of law,” while executive director of the Human Rights Watch blasted the President for being ‘on the wrong side of history,’ noting that “Obama will go down in history as the president who enshrined indefinite detention without trial in US law.”
Don't worry about them being anti God, they are.