Hate to be the one to break it to you, but he was being metaphorical.
I’m glad this thread is here, because I’ve been wanting to tell D’Anconia what a dishonest moron he is for awhile, but I couldn’t be arsed to start a thread to do it. Dumbshit’s vehicle has no reverse gear; no matter how idiotic the argument he makes, he never backs down from it an iota. It’d be maddening if there were any reason to take him seriously.
Is that what we are calling treason and dishonesty these days? Good to know. Conservatives are so metaphorical.
To get this thread back on . . . “topic” seems too strong a word . . . well, anyway, here’s an article speculating on how McConnell is going to spin the separation of the deportation riders from the DHS funding bill without admitting he simply caved.
No, I suppose they were not legally obligated to continue. But neither did they originate the policy, which was (in my reading) the implication of your criticism.
1 and google the rest is rhetoric.
Thank you, ** D’Anconia **!
And it really is a useful custom for a new administration to continue defending a lawsuit. It’s all about continuity. Nobody wants a new administration to flush everything down the toilet the minute it gets in office.
Yes, I’m sure there are circumstances where the new administration would drop or give up on a lawsuit from the old one, but that would require some serious public-policy differences be involved.
No, they didn’t originate the policy, and that was not my implication.
If the Obama Administration didn’t agree with the policy, why did they go before the SCOTUS to defend it? As you said, they didn’t have to.
You agree, then, that the Bush administration’s policy that was repudiated by the decision was clearly wrong?
Yes, clearly.
One of the first things the Republicans do when they get the executive branch is stop any corporate lawsuits and anti-trust policies and SEC oversight. Reagan dumped most of Carter’s energy policies like they were radioactive turds with ebola. This including ripping out a solar energy demonstration system on the roof of the White House. Democrats used to start voting rights lawsuits a few days after taking over. The right wingers are just a whole lot more metaphorical than liberals.
You’re either being deliberately obtuse, or willfully ignorant. Have you read the responses to your nonsense? Do you understand that bill riders that go against administrative policy will result in the defeat of that bill or the eventual veto of same? Remove the rider and it will sail through; McConnell has admitted as much and intends to try to introduce a ‘clean’ bill that will pass. Christ.
Why the sudden love of “administrative policy”? I’m quite sure you didn’t agree with it from 2001-2009.
Even if McConell introduces a clean bill, so what? It’s not likely to pass in the House.
Because the House wants to hold the DHS hostage, so they can placate the racists that make up the GOP base.
Let’s be clear. You had no idea they weren’t behind the policy, because you’re an empty vessel that does nothing more than echo what you hear on the RW media.
Opposing the Administration is not racist, moron.
You don’t have to sign your posts.
Also, they want to kill immigration reform, because the people you vote for want Mexicans and other brown folk to suffer.
So, that’s why they’re racist. <3
Of course I did. And I don’t listen to RW media. Funny how you don’t comment when Glutton quotes liberal media for the umpteenth time.
IOW, you don’t know what you’re talking about, so just shut up.