Comments on: Bush Ignores Law, Fails To Appoint Policy Coordinator For North Korea http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/ Thu, 26 Nov 2009 10:44:30 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Gay Sex Gay Sex Videos Black Gay Men http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/comment-page-2/#comment-4908890 Gay Sex Gay Sex Videos Black Gay Men Mon, 14 Apr 2008 16:29:25 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/#comment-4908890 <strong>Gay Sex Gay Sex Videos Black Gay Men</strong> I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view Gay Sex Gay Sex Videos Black Gay Men

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

]]> By: Payday Advance http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/comment-page-2/#comment-4667768 Payday Advance Tue, 01 Apr 2008 02:36:10 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/#comment-4667768 <strong>Payday Advance</strong> If a family member is plain on check just easily apply for an online payday cash advance that is tremendous, effortless, and swift today! Payday Advance

If a family member is plain on check just easily apply for an online payday cash advance that is tremendous, effortless, and swift today!

]]> By: Robert T. http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/comment-page-2/#comment-1392212 Robert T. Fri, 05 Jan 2007 20:49:33 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/#comment-1392212 <strong>This seems to have become simply a formum for complaining and "Bush Bashing". Maybe it would be better served if everyone would focus their energies on the positive. The "Law of Attraction, is in effect, beleive it or not / like it or not. By complaining and giving energy to the negative perspective, you are actually giving it support and creating what you don't want......... think about it. Better Yet..... watch "The Secret". http://thesecret.tv/home.html</strong> This seems to have become simply a formum for complaining and “Bush Bashing”. Maybe it would be better served if everyone would focus their energies on the positive. The “Law of Attraction, is in effect, beleive it or not / like it or not.

By complaining and giving energy to the negative perspective, you are actually giving it support and creating what you don’t want……… think about it.

Better Yet….. watch “The Secret”. http://thesecret.tv/home.html

]]> By: BushSuckz http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/comment-page-2/#comment-1390607 BushSuckz Fri, 05 Jan 2007 14:49:26 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/#comment-1390607 Time for impeachment, how long will we let this idiot and his gang of dumbazzez go on???... Time for impeachment, how long will we let this idiot and his gang of dumbazzez go on???…

]]> By: ForTruth http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/comment-page-2/#comment-1387899 ForTruth Fri, 05 Jan 2007 01:47:53 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/#comment-1387899 <em>Comment by RUCerious</em> Hilarius. Probably written in crayon too. Comment by RUCerious

Hilarius. Probably written in crayon too.

]]> By: RUCerious http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/comment-page-2/#comment-1387246 RUCerious Thu, 04 Jan 2007 22:29:06 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/#comment-1387246 good job of research, Robert. Can you site me a case where oral sex was interpreted as adultery? good job of research, Robert. Can you site me a case where oral sex was interpreted as adultery?

]]> By: RUCerious http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/comment-page-1/#comment-1387242 RUCerious Thu, 04 Jan 2007 22:28:00 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/#comment-1387242 FT #49 - Something like this. Now I know y'all think that this bill is good for the nation, but Ah don't think so. Because it may disallow me to allow myselft a make the rewles bout decidin an stuff. So none of this counts fer nothin. Cuz im the desider an i sed so. FT #49 -
Something like this.

Now I know y’all think that this bill is good for the nation, but Ah don’t think so. Because it may disallow me to allow myselft a make the rewles bout decidin an stuff.
So none of this counts fer nothin. Cuz im the desider an i sed so.

]]> By: ForTruth http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/comment-page-1/#comment-1386311 ForTruth Thu, 04 Jan 2007 20:49:25 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/#comment-1386311 If Bush wants to issue signing statements he should have to actually write them himself. That would be a hoot. If Bush wants to issue signing statements he should have to actually write them himself. That would be a hoot.

]]> By: gmnotyet http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/comment-page-1/#comment-1386199 gmnotyet Thu, 04 Jan 2007 20:22:09 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/#comment-1386199 Worst. President. Ever. Worst. President. Ever.

]]> By: robert http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/comment-page-1/#comment-1386049 robert Thu, 04 Jan 2007 19:44:19 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/#comment-1386049 <em>WC, here’s an interesting thought. Since Bush is the CINC, can we get him a Section 8? Comment by RUCerious</em> Sorry, the Uniform Code of Military Justice does not apply to the C-in-C. If it did, then Clinton would have been hammered over Monica (Article 134-2--Adultery) WC, here’s an interesting thought.
Since Bush is the CINC, can we get him a Section 8?

Comment by RUCerious

Sorry, the Uniform Code of Military Justice does not apply to the C-in-C. If it did, then Clinton would have been hammered over Monica (Article 134-2–Adultery)

]]> By: RUCerious http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/comment-page-1/#comment-1385952 RUCerious Thu, 04 Jan 2007 19:21:07 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/#comment-1385952 WC, here's an interesting thought. Since Bush is the CINC, can we get him a Section 8? WC, here’s an interesting thought.
Since Bush is the CINC, can we get him a Section 8?

]]> By: WC http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/comment-page-1/#comment-1385781 WC Thu, 04 Jan 2007 18:22:17 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/#comment-1385781 <em>Oh I see. Kinda miss details sometimes when I’m checking from work. So. He’s basically being his usual, vile, scumbaggish self. Comment by Loonie — January 4, 2007 @ 1:01 pm</em> I posted a link at 10:32am to the entire signing statement. Check it out if you have time; Bush picked out quite a handful of sections that he claims he doesn't have to abide by. Oh I see. Kinda miss details sometimes when I’m checking from work.

So.

He’s basically being his usual, vile, scumbaggish self.

Comment by Loonie — January 4, 2007 @ 1:01 pm

I posted a link at 10:32am to the entire signing statement. Check it out if you have time; Bush picked out quite a handful of sections that he claims he doesn’t have to abide by.

]]> By: WC http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/comment-page-1/#comment-1385772 WC Thu, 04 Jan 2007 18:19:52 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/#comment-1385772 <em>WC, thanks for the interpretation. It seems tangential at best, illegal on its face. The only thing being impaired is separation of powers and the unbridled authority of the “unitary executive”. Comment by RUCerious — January 4, 2007 @ 12:24 pm</em>\ In reality, I probably give Bush too much credit. It's likely he didn't even bother with thinking about having to explain why he didn't appoint a coordinator of policy. He just wasn't going to do it. Period. I hope Congress follows through and holds hearings for a couple of days on Bush's signing statements, and gets this in the public record. WC, thanks for the interpretation.
It seems tangential at best, illegal on its face.

The only thing being impaired is separation of powers and the unbridled authority of the “unitary executive”.

Comment by RUCerious — January 4, 2007 @ 12:24 pm\

In reality, I probably give Bush too much credit. It’s likely he didn’t even bother with thinking about having to explain why he didn’t appoint a coordinator of policy. He just wasn’t going to do it. Period.

I hope Congress follows through and holds hearings for a couple of days on Bush’s signing statements, and gets this in the public record.

]]> By: Zooey http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/comment-page-1/#comment-1385725 Zooey Thu, 04 Jan 2007 18:02:38 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/#comment-1385725 <em>He’s basically being his usual, vile, scumbaggish self. Comment by Loonie </em> Hey Loonie, you haven't missed a thing. Heh. He’s basically being his usual, vile, scumbaggish self.
Comment by Loonie

Hey Loonie, you haven’t missed a thing. Heh.

]]> By: Loonie http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/comment-page-1/#comment-1385722 Loonie Thu, 04 Jan 2007 18:01:24 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/#comment-1385722 Oh I see. Kinda miss details sometimes when I'm checking from work. So. He's basically being his usual, vile, scumbaggish self. Oh I see. Kinda miss details sometimes when I’m checking from work.

So.

He’s basically being his usual, vile, scumbaggish self.

]]> By: Zooey http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/comment-page-1/#comment-1385704 Zooey Thu, 04 Jan 2007 17:55:30 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/#comment-1385704 Loonie, See #17 Loonie,

See #17

]]> By: Loonie http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/comment-page-1/#comment-1385653 Loonie Thu, 04 Jan 2007 17:41:56 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/#comment-1385653 Did Bush make a signing statement when he signed it? Did Bush make a signing statement when he signed it?

]]> By: paco http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/comment-page-1/#comment-1385627 paco Thu, 04 Jan 2007 17:34:20 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/#comment-1385627 ...yes, i have a hard-drive full of criminal activity by this 'unitary executive'. It's time we jam the DC Police phone lines until they take him into custody; a permanent injunction on chimpy's criminal presidency. ....uh, if that dead-ends...WHO can we call to put chimpy in a cell while awaiting the charges against him? …yes, i have a hard-drive full of criminal activity by this ‘unitary executive’. It’s time we jam the DC Police phone lines until they take him into custody; a permanent injunction on chimpy’s criminal presidency.

….uh, if that dead-ends…WHO can we call to put chimpy in a cell while awaiting the charges against him?

]]> By: RUCerious http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/comment-page-1/#comment-1385581 RUCerious Thu, 04 Jan 2007 17:24:06 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/#comment-1385581 WC, thanks for the interpretation. It seems tangential at best, illegal on its face. The only thing being impaired is separation of powers and the unbridled authority of the "unitary executive". WC, thanks for the interpretation.
It seems tangential at best, illegal on its face.
The only thing being impaired is separation of powers and the unbridled authority of the “unitary executive”.

]]> By: WC http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/comment-page-1/#comment-1385549 WC Thu, 04 Jan 2007 17:15:32 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/04/bush-law-north-korea/#comment-1385549 <em>Thanks for the research WC. Those are really catch all phrases. This admin. is so paranoid. How a coordinator of policy for North Korea affect any of the four reasons is beyond me. Comment by hellinabucket — January 4, 2007 @ 11:19 am</em> <em>What I don’t get is how he lumps 1211 into “executive branch to furnish information to the Congress or other entities on various subjects.” This is in no way “withholding information” Comment by RUCerious — January 4, 2007 @ 11:08 am</em> Only thing I can figure is that Bush is focusing on sections 3B and 3C of sec. 1211(a). By "consult(ing) with foreign governments" and "providing policy direction and leadership for negotiations," there's no doubt going to be sensitive information floating around. Bush is saying, "Oh no, we can't do that. It may impair..." and then read the 4 reasons he gives for withholding the info, especially the 3rd and 4th reasons. The Dems in Congress may approve of any suggestions the coordinator comes up with, which would put more pressure on Bush to act. Bush doesn't like anyone to go up against a decision that he's already made. Thus we have Bush's reasoning for not appointing a coordinator. He doesn't want one, and Congress can't make him appoint one. Congress is nothing more than a speed bump to this president. Yeah, they get in his way, but they can't stop him. He just drives right over them. Despite his public display of support for multi-party negotiations with N. Korea, Bush isn't the least bit interested in dealing with them. He'd rather leave things simmering so that he can whip the situation out when it suits him. There is no reason we shouldn't be dealing with them one-on-one. But it would make us look weak, and the cowboy we have in the White House can't have that. Just my 2 cents. I could be wrong. Thanks for the research WC. Those are really catch all phrases. This admin. is so paranoid. How a coordinator of policy for North Korea affect any of the four reasons is beyond me.

Comment by hellinabucket — January 4, 2007 @ 11:19 am

What I don’t get is how he lumps 1211 into “executive branch to furnish information to the Congress or other entities on various subjects.” This is in no way “withholding information”

Comment by RUCerious — January 4, 2007 @ 11:08 am

Only thing I can figure is that Bush is focusing on sections 3B and 3C of sec. 1211(a).

By “consult(ing) with foreign governments” and “providing policy direction and leadership for negotiations,” there’s no doubt going to be sensitive information floating around. Bush is saying, “Oh no, we can’t do that. It may impair…” and then read the 4 reasons he gives for withholding the info, especially the 3rd and 4th reasons. The Dems in Congress may approve of any suggestions the coordinator comes up with, which would put more pressure on Bush to act. Bush doesn’t like anyone to go up against a decision that he’s already made.

Thus we have Bush’s reasoning for not appointing a coordinator. He doesn’t want one, and Congress can’t make him appoint one. Congress is nothing more than a speed bump to this president. Yeah, they get in his way, but they can’t stop him. He just drives right over them. Despite his public display of support for multi-party negotiations with N. Korea, Bush isn’t the least bit interested in dealing with them. He’d rather leave things simmering so that he can whip the situation out when it suits him. There is no reason we shouldn’t be dealing with them one-on-one. But it would make us look weak, and the cowboy we have in the White House can’t have that.

Just my 2 cents. I could be wrong.

]]>