Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Entry 52702
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2022/05/27 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular

2009/3/11-17 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:52702 Activity:kinda low
3/11    after Democrats criticized former President George W. Bush's signing
        statements, Mr. Obama issued one of his own, declaring five provisions
        in the spending bill to be unconstitutional and nonbinding, including
        one aimed at preventing punishment of whistleblowers.
        \_ Rather than make the blanket statement that ALL SIGNING STATEMENTS
           ARE EVIL, perhaps you'd prefer to read the actual signing statement
           and make up your own mind?
           Signing statement is toward the bottom.
           \_ Yah, saying that "I think some of this is unconstitutional so I'm
              going to ignore it" is much better than vetoing it.
              \_ You misunderstand the purpose of the veto. Also, it's the
                 Judiciary's job to determine what is unconstitutional in
                 legislation; the Pres., in this case, is saying, "This is
                 a semi-covert attempt to subvert the authroity of the Exec.
                 Branch, so I refuse to acknowledge it. I understand how
                 this may seem confusing: it's been a long time since we've
                 had a lawyer in the Oval Office.
2022/05/27 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular

You may also be interested in these entries...
2013/6/13-8/13 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/China, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast] UID:54693 Activity:nil
6/13    NSA NSA NSA!!!
        \_ I am shocked, *SHOCKED* that the NSA spies on foreign and US
           citizens and foreign governments. This Snowden guy must have
           been born yesterday to think he is revealing anything of import.
           \_ Most people seem to have been surprised by this.
2013/3/16-5/10 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:54629 Activity:nil
3/16    Obama has lowered overall per-capita government spending:
2013/2/18-3/26 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/SIG] UID:54608 Activity:nil
2/18    F U NRA: (Sandy Hook Truthers)
           This shit makes me weep for America.
        \_ I didn't see any mention of the NRA on that page.  Did you mean "FU
           Crazy Conspiracy Theorists?"  Or do you have this really great
2012/11/6-12/18 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:54524 Activity:nil
11/6    Four more years!
        \_ Yay! I look forward to 4 more years of doing absolutely nothing.
           It's a much better outcome than the alternative, which is 4 years
           of regress.
           \_ Can't argue with that.
        \_ Massachusetts went for Obama even though Mitt Romney was its
2012/10/16-12/4 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:54502 Activity:nil
10/16   Cheat sheet for those who plan to watch tonight's debate:
        "What Romney and Obama will say at the debate, and what's the truth" (
           Pretty much all you need to know.
2012/10/19-12/4 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:54508 Activity:nil
10/19   Obama had Solyndra LLC, and now Roomey has Renewable Energy Development
2012/10/19-12/4 [Politics/Domestic/HateGroups, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:54509 Activity:nil
10/19   Do you think Obama will have to send in troops to put down rioting
        Southern Whites after the election?
        \_ south = stupid
2012/10/22-12/4 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:54511 Activity:nil
10/22   "Romney Family Investment Ties To Voting Machine Company That Could
        Decide The Election Causing Concern" (
        "There have already been complaints that broken machines were not
        being quickly replaced in precincts that tend to lean Democratic and
        now, word is coming in that there may be some software issues."
2012/10/23-12/4 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:54512 Activity:nil
10/23   "Obama takes aim at Romney on naval readiness: 'We also have fewer
        horses and bayonets'"
2012/10/25-12/4 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:54514 Activity:nil
10/25   Palin accuses Obama of "shuck and jive shtick"
2012/10/30-12/4 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:54517 Activity:nil
10/30   "One of Mitt Romney's biggest supporters, New Jersey Gov. Chris
        Christie, had nothing but praise for President Barack Obama today, ..." (
2012/11/2-12/4 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:54518 Activity:nil
11/2 (
        "An email message mistakenly sent to Newt Gingrich's list serve
        this morning told subscribers that President Obama would no
        doubt win in 2012 and that they should be more worried about
        Obama's winning in 2016."
2012/12/18-2013/1/24 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:54559 Activity:nil
12/18   Bush kills. Bushmaster kills.
        \_ Sandy Huricane kills. Sandy Hook kills.
           \_ bitch
2011/5/1-7/30 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:54102 Activity:nil
5/1     Osama bin Ladin is dead.
        \_ So is the CSUA.
           \_ Nope, it's actually really active.
              \_ Are there finally girls in the csua?
              \_ Is there a projects page?
              \_ Funneling slaves -> stanford based corps != "active"
2010/11/8-2011/1/13 [Politics/Domestic/Abortion] UID:53998 Activity:nil
11/8    Have you read how Bush says his pro-life stance was influenced
        by his mother keeping one of her miscarriages in a jar, and showing
        it to him?  These are headlines The Onion never dreamed of
2010/11/2-2011/1/13 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:54001 Activity:nil
11/2    California Uber Alles is such a great song
        \_ Yes, and it was written about Jerry Brown. I was thinking this
           as I cast my vote for Meg Whitman. I am independent, but I
           typically vote Democrat (e.g., I voted for Boxer). However, I
           can't believe we elected this retread.
           \_ You voted for the billionaire that ran HP into the ground
2010/5/26-6/30 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/China] UID:53845 Activity:nil
5/26    "China could join moves to sanction North Korea"
        How did Hillary manage to do that when we're also asking China to
        concede on the economic front at the same time?
         \_ China doesn't want NK to implode. NK is a buffer between SK and
            China, or in other words a large buffer between a strong US ally and
2010/4/28-5/10 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:53808 Activity:nil
4/28    Laura Bush ran a stop sign and killed someone in 1963:
        How come she didn't go to jail?
        \_ Car drivers rarely go to jail for killing people.  -tom
        \_ Ted Kennedy killed a girl. Dick Cheney shot a man.
        \_ Ted Kennedy killed a girl. Hillary and Dick Cheney both shot a man.
2010/2/21-3/9 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:53717 Activity:nil
2/18    If not 0 then 1 - wasn't that the basis of the logic of the bush
        administration on torture?  If we do it, it's legal, and since
        torture is illegal, therefore we don't torture?
        \_ Bush is a great computer scientist.
           \_ He must be, given that he defeated the inventor of the Internet
              and AlGorithm.
2009/12/25-2010/1/19 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:53603 Activity:nil
12/24   Why San Francisco and union and government suck:
           San Francisco to become richer and richer and richer. It's
           Disneyland for adults! YAY!!!
        \_ No doubt that there is plenty of corruption in San Francisco that
Cache (4100 bytes)
This service is temporary unavailable due to system maintenance. The username entered is already associated with another account. Please enter a different username The email address you have entered is already in use. Getty Images President Obama on Wednesday said earmarks must serve a "legitimate and worthy public purpose." WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama signed a $410 billion spending bill Wednesday that includes thousands of pet projects inserted by lawmakers, even as he unveiled new rules to restrict such so-called earmarks. At the same time, after Democrats criticized former President George W Bush's signing statements, Mr Obama issued one of his own, declaring five provisions in the spending bill to be unconstitutional and nonbinding, including one aimed at preventing punishment of whistleblowers. Presidents have employed signing statements to reject provisions of a bill without vetoing the entire legislation. Democrats and some Republicans have complained that Mr Bush abused such statements by declaring that he would ignore congressional intent on more than 1,200 sections of bills, easily a record. Mr Obama has ordered a review of his predecessor's signing statements and said he would rein in the practice. "We're having a repeat of what Democrats bitterly complained about under President Bush," said Sen. The president said the spending measure should "mark an end to the old way of doing business." His proposals, seconded by the House Democratic leadership, followed days of attacks by Republicans -- and some Democrats -- over the spending for local projects tucked into the bill. Senate Approves $410 Billion Spending Bill The White House plan would force any earmark aimed at a private company to be subject to competitive bidding. Earmarks would have to be posted in advance on lawmaker Web sites and publicly aired in hearings before being inserted into spending bills. House Democratic leaders and House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey agreed with Mr Obama's proposed new rules and said any requested earmarks also should be submitted to the appropriate executive-branch agency for a 20-day review of the project to ensure its legality and worth. But the proposals immediately met with skepticism from spending watchdogs and outright opposition in the Senate. The discord comes as Republicans drub the president and his party for a spending spree that they say will inevitably lead to higher taxes for all while failing to bring the country out of recession. "And Americans around the country are increasingly concerned we're spending all this money and yet we continue to lose jobs and the markets continue to slide." Even some Democrats have blanched at the president's proposals for a national health-care plan, an ambitious effort to rein in global warming and proposals to boost education spending, to be paid for with tax increases and cuts to sensitive government programs. White House counselor David Axelrod suggested a veto would send a strong signal that Mr Obama's Washington really would represent change. But the president decided it wasn't worth adding a fight with his own party onto a plate that is already overly filled. "We can't have Congress bogged down at this critical juncture in our economic recovery," Mr Obama said. "But I also view this as a departure point for more far-reaching change." Steve Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, an anti-earmark group, dismissed the significance of the new Obama rules, saying that lawmakers already say their private-sector earmarks are often put up to competitive bidding. They simply draft the legislative language so narrowly that only one company could secure the contract. He also noted that by exempting nonprofits from such scrutiny, Democrats were creating a loophole. Universities and other nonprofits are often awarded earmarks that are then passed on to private companies that partner with them. "Some of this is just trying to give earmarks the good-housekeeping seal of approval when the same troubling processes will still be in place," Mr Ellis said.
Cache (6564 bytes)
Statement on Signing the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 February 17, 2009 Today I have signed into law HR 1, the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009." The Act provides a direct fiscal boost to help lift our Nation from the greatest economic crisis in our lifetimes and lay the foundation for further growth. This recovery plan will help to save or create as many as three to four million jobs by the end of 2010, the vast majority of them in the private sector. It will make the most significant investment in America's roads, bridges, mass transit, and other infrastructure since the construction of the interstate highway system. It will make investments to foster reform in education, double renewable energy while fostering efficiency in the use of our energy, and improve quality while bringing down costs in healthcare. Middle-class families will get tax cuts and the most vulnerable will get the largest increase in assistance in decades. We have inherited an economic crisis as deep and as dire as any since the Great Depression. Economists from across the spectrum have warned that failure to act quickly would lead to the disappearance of millions of more jobs and national unemployment rates that could be in the double digits. I want to thank the Congress for coming together around this hard-fought compromise. No one policy or program will solve the challenges we face right now, nor will this crisis recede in a short period of time. However, with this Act we begin the process of restoring the economy and making America a stronger and more prosperous Nation. My Administration will initiate new, far-reaching measures to help ensure that every dollar spent in this historic legislation is spent wisely and for its intended purpose. The Federal Government will be held to new standards of transparency and accountability. An oversight board will be charged with monitoring our progress as part of an unprecedented effort to root out waste and inefficiency. This board will be advised by experts--not just Government experts, not just politicians, but also citizens with years of expertise in management, economics, and accounting. This effort is about the future of our families and communities, our economy and our country. We are going to move forward carefully and transparently and as effectively as possible because so much is on the line. That is what we have already begun to do--drafting this plan with a level of openness for which the American people have asked and that this situation demands. THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary For Immediate Release March 11, 2009 STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT Today I have signed into law HR 1105, the "Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009." This bill completes the work of last year by providing the funding necessary for the smooth operation of our Nation's Government. As I announced this past Monday, it is a legitimate constitutional function, and one that promotes the value of transparency, to indicate when a bill that is presented for Presidential signature includes provisions that are subject to well-founded constitutional objections. The Department of Justice has advised that a small number of provisions of the bill raise constitutional concerns. Certain provisions of the bill, in titles I and IV of Division B, title IV of Division E, and title VII of Division H, would unduly interfere with my constitutional authority in the area of foreign affairs by effectively directing the Executive on how to proceed or not proceed in negotiations or discussions with international organizations and foreign governments. I will not treat these provisions as limiting my ability to negotiate and enter into agreements with foreign nations. Section 7050 in Division H prohibits the use of certain funds for the use of the Armed Forces in United Nations peacekeeping missions under the command or operational control of a foreign national unless my military advisers have recommended to me that such involvement is in the national interests of the United States. This provision raises constitutional concerns by constraining my choice of particular persons to perform specific command functions in military missions, by conditioning the exercise of my authority as Commander in Chief on the recommendations of subordinates within the military chain of command, and by constraining my diplomatic negotiating authority. Accordingly, I will apply this provision consistent with my constitutional authority and responsibilities. Sections 714 and 714 in Division D prohibit the use of appropriations to pay the salary of any Federal officer or employee who interferes with or prohibits certain communications between Federal employees and Members of Congress. I do not interpret this provision to detract from my authority to direct the heads of executive departments to supervise, control, and correct employees' communications with the Congress in cases where such communications would be unlawful or would reveal information that is properly privileged or otherwise confidential. Numerous provisions of the legislation purport to condition the authority of officers to spend or reallocate funds on the approval of congressional committees. These are impermissible forms of legislative aggrandizement in the execution of the laws other than by enactment of statutes. Therefore, although my Administration will notify the relevant committees before taking the specified actions, and will accord the recommendations of such committees all appropriate and serious consideration, spending decisions shall not be treated as dependent on the approval of congressional committees. Likewise, one other provision gives congressional committees the power to establish guidelines for funding costs associated with implementing security improvements to buildings. Executive officials shall treat such guidelines as advisory. Yet another provision requires the Secretary of the Treasury to accede to all requests of a Board of Trustees that contains congressional representatives. Several provisions of the Act (including sections 211 and 224 of title II of Division I, and section 713 in Division A), effectively purport to require me and other executive officers to submit budget requests to the Congress in particular forms. Because the Constitution gives the President the discretion to recommend only "such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient" (Article II, section 3 of the Constitution), the specified officers and I shall treat these directions as precatory.