> That’s a really poor excuse to sign on to something that you disagree with.

It's a pragmatic excuse.

Not signing changes nothing; clear statements that it's bad law; avoid giving the assholes pushing it more likelihood of winning the next election.

▲

raw_anon_1111 5 hours ago | parent [-]

A clear statement of it being a bad law is not signing it. Should he not do anything that would give assholes an excuse to argue with him?

Am I suppose to be okay if he signed a law overturning “Brown vs Board of Education” because it would become law anyway?

Was the fact that he signed off on executing a mentally retarded man because it would show he was “tough on crime” just him being “pragmatic”?

https://jacobin.com/2016/11/bill-clinton-rickey-rector-death...

Getting back on topic, I don’t get to praise Chuck Norris because of his anti-racism stances but then dismiss his stances against non straight people.

	▲	kelnos 25 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> I don’t get to praise Chuck Norris because of his anti-racism stances but then dismiss his stances against non straight people. Sure, but I think it's fair to praise people when they do good things, and criticize them for the bad that they do. That's true fir Chuck Norris, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama... anyone. Totally agree, though, that it's bullshit to think that having positive views on some issues wipes away the bad.