RSN April 14 Fundraising
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Quoting Obama: "I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists."

President Obama signed the controversial NDAA into law, and issued a long signing statement that includes sanctions on Iran, 12/31/11. (photo: Jason Reed/Reuters)
President Obama signed the controversial NDAA into law, and issued a long signing statement that includes sanctions on Iran, 12/31/11. (photo: Jason Reed/Reuters)



Obama Signs Homeland Battlefield Bill Into Law

By Sara Sorcher, National Journal

31 December 11

 

President Obama today signed the highly controversial Defense Spending Bill. The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), with its so-called Homeland Battlefield provisions, allows, according to many legal scholars, the indefinite detention of US citizens by the US military. What is most striking is a lengthy signing statement by Obama, in which he maintains his reservations about the Homeland Battlefield provisions, saying, 'I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists.' His defense of civil liberties in the signing statement was passionate. Nonetheless, at the same moment, he signed the bill into law. -- ma/RSN

 

resident Obama signed on Saturday the defense authorization bill, formally ending weeks of heated debate in Congress and intense lobbying by the administration to strip controversial provisions requiring the transfer of some terror suspects to military custody.

"I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists," Obama said in a statement accompanying his signature.

The White House had originally threatened to veto the $662 billion bill, considered must-pass legislation, over the language that requires mandatory military custody for suspects linked to al-Qaida or its affiliates, even if they are captured in the U.S. Just before the House and Senate passed the bill comfortably, the White House said it would support the bill’s compromise language that, as tweaked by conference committee, would not impede the administration’s ability to collect intelligence or incapacitate dangerous terrorists.

Still, administration officials have admitted publicly the final provisions were not the preferred approach of this administration.

"Ultimately, I decided to sign this bill not only because of the critically important services it provides for our forces and their families and the national security programs it authorizes, but also because the Congress revised provisions that otherwise would have jeopardized the safety, security, and liberty of the American people," Obama said in Saturday's statement.

Responding to the White House’s concerns that the provisions would limit the flexibility of law-enforcement and counterterrorism officials, lawmakers added written assurances the bill would not affect existing waivers of the FBI or any other domestic law-enforcement agency. They also gave the president the authority to waive the military-detention provisions, and dropped language requiring military tribunals for all cases.

Many Democrats and human-rights groups have decried the bill’s language that would allow indefinite detention for suspected terrorists without a trial - including Americans arrested in the United States. Supporters of the detainee provisions argue that the bill merely codifies existing law as it applies to Americans and legal resident aliens, as they retain the right to challenge their detention in court.

The bill also sets in motion strong sanctions against Iran’s Central Bank, in an attempt to rein in Tehran’s nuclear program, by impeding Iran’s ability to process payments for the roughly $90 billion in oil and gas it sells each year. The measures, which would penalize any foreign financial institution that does business with the central bank, sparked threats by Iranian officials to cut off access to the Strait of Hormuz, which could block transportation of most oil exports from the Persian Gulf.

The administration retains a national security waiver for the sanctions - and one to waive the petroleum sanctions if it determines there isn’t enough global supply to offset the lost Iranian oil - but has said it opposes being held to a timeline that could fragment to the international coalition working to isolate Iran or potentially spike oil prices.

 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+177 # RMDC 2011-12-31 15:46
Obama is a coward and a liar.
 
 
+137 # John Locke 2011-12-31 17:19
Did anyone have doubts that he would sign it... He is part of the problem and wants to be rid of the OWS Movement, otherwise he would not have authorized Homeland security to help the Mayers... nor would he have signed this bill... he is more than a liar, he is a traitor to this country and all it stands for....he is pathetic, has no backbone and licks the boots of the Banks and corporate interest
 
 
+91 # ckosuda 2011-12-31 18:21
hey grweiner -the point is Obama claims to be a Dem / he ran as a Dem / and even worse, as a Dem who cared 2 bits about his fellow humans -
it is far worse to be betrayed, and have one's country betrayed by someone who claimed to know better -
I fell for his b.s., as did everyone who voted for him.
 
 
+26 # ruralhorseman 2012-01-01 10:56
For the three of you above, who I agree with 100%, don't forget it was the Democratic and Republican congress that submitted this bill to him in the same bill that cut our payroll taxes for two months. So for a couple of hundred bucks we were sold down the river. The payroll tax cut will be taken up again come next congressional session, this NDAA travesty is now LAW. I wrote, and wrote, and wrote about this right here but never got a comment. We like to call the president and congress names but we never do anything to change the course of history as individuals. Do Something NOW...drop your registration with the Dems or Repubs or Indies and register with the Justice Party. google them, read and act. We have nothing to lose and everything to gain. ACT NOW!!
 
 
+5 # RnR 2012-01-01 06:55
couldn't have said it better myself :)
 
 
+17 # John Locke 2012-01-01 12:34
The Bill can be challenged even now, any protester can challence the bill as they can allege they have standing because their right of free speach is included, and the bill is unconstitutiona l as applied to protesting and advovcating certain acts that might be deemed terrorist
 
 
-9 # Aduni 2012-01-01 13:58
Quoting John Locke:
Did anyone have doubts that he would sign it... He is part of the problem and wants to be rid of the OWS Movement, otherwise he would not have authorized Homeland security to help the Mayers... nor would he have signed this bill... he is more than a liar, he is a traitor to this country and all it stands for....he is pathetic, has no backbone and licks the boots of the Banks and corporate interest


YOUR AREA OF CONCERN HAS LITTLE TO DO WITH DEFENSE. HOW DO YOU SUGGEST THAT HE FORCE BANKS AND CORPORATIONS TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT THE AVERAGE AMERICAN? WE DON'T WANT TO INSTIGATE WHICH JUST CAUSES CONFUSION AND PUSHES US FURTHER A WAY FROM THE GOAL.
 
 
+24 # John Locke 2012-01-01 16:06
Aduni: Not sure I understand your question, but as much as I do I would suggest that we control banking by bringing back Glass Steagall tax their trade transactions, prosecute the bank executives over their criminal actions, their Foreclosure scams, Robo-signing, their fabricated loans with no ability to repay the loan make them pay everyone back they swindled... in short reparations to those they swindled...
 
 
+8 # James38 2012-01-02 18:55
John, I totally agree with bringing back Glass-Steagall. However, I feel your scathing criticisms of Obama are both overdone and an impediment to the goal of bringing GS back. If one of the Republican candidates is elected President, what are the chances for GS then? If you continue to encourage boycott of Obama, that is what you get. There is no way I can see for a third party victory. The US public is too ignorant to respond even to an ideal dark horse candidate, and I don't see one of those. The only hope I see is to work very, very hard locally to elect intelligent Senators and Representatives who would support GS. If that is done, and Obama is re-elected, there is a good chance GS could be revived. The number of seats we would need to win is small enough to accomplish, if we get started quickly. While I have many criticisms of Obama, I can not give up on him. The alternative is too dreadful to consider - and if we win the Congress, we will accomplish much of what we want. If we lose the Congress and the Presidency, we are in for a disaster. Lets give Elizabeth Warren a victory enhanced with some friends she can work with, and let them help Obama be closer to what we all want him to be.
 
 
+6 # LessSaid 2012-01-01 20:11
Quoting John Locke:
Did anyone have doubts that he would sign it... He is part of the problem and wants to be rid of the OWS Movement, otherwise he would not have authorized Homeland security to help the Mayers... nor would he have signed this bill... he is more than a liar, he is a traitor to this country and all it stands for....he is pathetic, has no backbone and licks the boots of the Banks and corporate interest

Is there any politician that isn't part of the problem these days.
 
 
+3 # disgusted American 2012-01-01 23:47
He's a fascist. They all are.

He was put forth to run for U.S. prez to take up where Bush left off. They knew he could bs his way through everything to make we the people think he was working for us. But if you listen, he doesn't say anything. Just well-crafted, meaningless phrases.

I saw through him during his campaign so voted for myself.

Don't vote for either party! Vote for Jill Stein - Green Party. She stands with the 99 percent!

Not sure about Rocky A. He's a politician so that's a bad sign for starters.
 
 
+14 # grweiner 2011-12-31 17:32
I'm trying to imagine what version of this law would have been signed into law by pretty much any of the Republicans and what words you might have had for them.
 
 
-7 # dorianb@fuse.net 2011-12-31 20:05
grweiner: Reread ckosua's comment and you might understand better and some of the others. You're missing the gist of it.
 
 
+14 # ruralhorseman 2012-01-01 11:03
This was a bi-partisan bill that was passed with no opposition from the Repubs...or Dems and part of the payroll tax cuts bill that was passed the Friday before Christmas. So we Americans allowed them to sell our constitutional rights down the river for a few hundred bucks. The payroll tax cut was time limited and will be revisted in Jan. The NDAA will not...IT IS LAW. This isn't just Obama's fault it is each and everyone of our faults. We continue to allow these fascists to dictate the passage of these laws and just sit back and bitch at them. Most of Americans are just plain COWARDS!
 
 
+11 # disgusted American 2012-01-01 23:56
The payroll tax cut has a hidden agenda. Actually, it's not that hidden. It's FICA that is decreased for both employer and employee. This will deplete the SS fund quickly so the mofs can get rid of SS. That's why Republicans finally agreed BUT they put up a stink b/c that's part of the daily dog-and-pony show on Capitol Hill.

I read that MT is going to recall Dem senators who voted in favor of the detention law. So instead of bitching all over the Interenet, why not get together and do the same in each state?
 
 
+14 # Stephanie Remington 2012-01-02 01:45
Grweiner: Actually, Obama has gone further than Bush did in claiming and exercising powers he does not (and cannot) legally possess. And some of us have been equally critical of both Democrats and Republicans for their actions. For us, an action doesn't become more or less acceptable depending on who commits it.
 
 
+3 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-02 14:52
thank you, Stephanie: this is what I was trying to say to Grweiner.
 
 
+21 # ckosuda 2011-12-31 18:09
a liar absolutely - a coward I'm not so sure, as he is such a liar -

I remember a great article in the NY Times Magazine section some time ago which described what kind of law professor he was - chilling - appears he is a bit cold-blooded - he should f*ck himself.
 
 
-1 # RLF 2012-01-04 06:42
A 1% er for sure...he paid taxes on $5million this year...see what team he is batting for?
 
 
+19 # Nestlewood 2011-12-31 21:49
I agree RMDC! I had worked for Obama, until he hired all the old WA. DC insiders and GEITNER! That is why I have investigated Rocky Anderson. What I am seeing and hearing about him and from him looks good. If we ALL got behind him, and dump this Obama Train (WRECK) I think it may shake up the PTB (Powers That Be) that WE THE PEOPLE are to rule this land....NOT THEM!!!!

voterocky.org

I have not gotten through all the material on his website yet, but what I have heard/read so far is enlightening.
 
 
+7 # granny B 2011-12-31 22:33
A gathering bunch of us really like Rocky Anderson
 
 
-4 # Scott479 2012-01-01 05:12
I think we should all look at the C-Span summation of Obama by constitutional law expert Jonathan Turley of : http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/constitutional-expert-“president-obama-…-says-he-can-kill-you-his-own-discretion-without

Turley is an American unlike his subject who has proven this by destroying the most fundamental American values and laws. No birther issues here, I simply see a man proving he cares not one wit for our most precious of freedoms and protections from the absolute tyranny which spurred the founding of our nation.
 
 
+9 # rockieball 2012-01-01 07:29
I hope and pray that this ends up in the Supreme real fast. It's unconstitutional.
Maybe Obama signed it to let the court decided. But me I would have gone on national TV and vetoed it live and say why.
You are right a coward and liar. He wants the court to make the decission.
 
 
+36 # John Locke 2012-01-01 08:29
I would fear any decision made by this court,...
 
 
+5 # disgusted American 2012-01-02 00:01
He's not looking for the court to make any decision. He signed this b/c it's what he wants. He and Congress - both sides of the aisle. It was written by a Dem and a Repuke.

Look into Jill Stein for U.S. prez. She support a singlepayer health care system and is on our team with all else.

If Rocky doesn't support singlepayer, that's not good.
 
 
+2 # Aduni 2012-01-01 13:53
COULD YOU PLEASE LIST YOUR ACCOMPLISHMENTS FOR HUMANITY TO JUSTIFY YOUR HATEFUL COMMENTS? PLEASE TELL ME WHAT HAS THE RICH DID FOR HUMANITY? WHAT HAS HE LIED ABOUT? YOUR GENERAL STATEMENT IS UNFOUNDED. YOU SOUND LIKE A CHILD. WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING FOR?
 
 
+1 # Gary Austin 2012-01-01 22:34
I long for the days of Harry Truman, Adlai Stevenson, Bobby Kennedy and his brothers, LBJ, and yes, even Ike and Goldwater.

Perhaps a dose of "man juice" is needed.
 
 
-2 # James38 2012-01-02 19:10
Have any of you read "Obama's Wars" by Bob Woodward? I seriously think you should. "In Obama's Wars, Bob Woodward provides the most intimate and sweeping portrait yet of the young president as commander in chief. Drawing on internal memos, classified documents, meeting notes and hundreds of hours of interviews with most of the key players, including the president, Woodward tells the inside story of Obama making the critical decisions on the Afghanistan War, the secret campaign in Pakistan and the worldwide fight against terrorism." (quote from review on Amazon)

What I found was this book putting me in Obama's shoes. It is a powerful experience, and until you can do that, calling him a "coward and a liar" is a cowardly act in itself. Please be honest enough with yourself to consider that there is more to being thrust into the Presidency than anyone can know without being there yourself.

Try to imagine being presented with the responsibility for Iraq and Afghanistan, one war an unnecessary horror, and the other a neglected mess, and having to make the decisions necessary to clean up the situation. It was not easy, and it still isn't easy, and then add in the screwballs in the Republican Party who still hanker for more Bushwhacking. Read the book.
 
 
-4 # RLF 2012-01-04 06:45
And instead of picking up and getting out, he continued to arrogantly believe that he could make it better. Just another Harvard elitist.
 
 
-106 # nice2blucky 2011-12-31 15:46
Anybody but Obama for President... 2012.

Since Democrats have failed to act intelligently or responsibility to put up a Primary Candidacy against Obama, ...

I encourage all voters to register Republican and vote for Ron Paul -- or Gary Johnson, or maybe Huntsman -- in the Republican Primaries.

There is no reason to stay as a Democrat anyway, and this will allow progressives to at least impact the 2012 Presidential Election in a more positive way.

Happy New Year!
 
 
-2 # John Locke 2011-12-31 17:23
nice2blucky: I understand your frustration, those you name will be even worse if that is possible,... I supported this fool, and he fooled me once, but not twice, I may vote Republican just to bring the system down faster...any republican will do that! Happy New Year to you also!
 
 
+5 # nice2blucky 2011-12-31 18:58
Maybe worse, but different; and there are a few dynamics in play, so I would not necessarily concede that.

The Congressional dynamic is very important; so it depends upon how much they could get done. For instance, outside the Presidents executive authority, how much would Congress allow Ron Paul to do?

However, in terms of worse, there is nothing POLITICALLY worse than vindicating Obama's marginalization of progressives and their issues... NOTHING WORSE!!! ... than allowing that strategy of calculated betrayal to be politically successful, which leaves voting liberals, progressives, and independents with (what many consider) no choice at all.

Never mind the fact that RON PAUL IS -- and Gary Johnson (less likely to be a viable contender) -- ABSOLUTELY MORE PROGRESSIVE than Obama on MANY key issues.

And unlike the Obama apologists, I am not ruled by fear. I will not relegate objectivity and clarity for (delusion) when it is simply (psychologicall y or emotionally) convenient, or rationalize everything political into a comparative, nor will I accept what they call "political realities" when I know it is chosen -- or preferred -- capitulation.

Read Glenn Greenwald, at http://www.salon.com/writer/glenn_greenwald/ . If not for the numskull mindset of the modern-day nitwit Democrat, he would be the number one source of relevant news and objective opinion on politics, civil liberties, and media for the left.
 
 
+20 # BobbyLip 2011-12-31 21:48
With great interest, I am waiting to hear who Greenwald--who I like a great deal--is planning to vote for. I also don't want to vote for Obama, but since I live in Massachusetts, I can keep my ideological purity without worrying about the state going Republican. I wouldn't vote Republican if there were a gun to my head--I mean, really, we're not talking about the party of Lincoln or Teddy Roosevelt here!
Noam Chomsky has an interesting rejoinder to someone who decried the idea of voting for the lesser of two evils. "If you vote for the lesser of two evils, you get less evil."
 
 
+10 # Stephanie Remington 2012-01-01 04:41
"If you vote for the lesser of two evils, you get less evil."

The key is in evaluating which is less evil.

Would you say that killing hundreds of children with drones is less evil than any Ron Paul stance you hate? How about assassinating people, including Americans, without even charging them with a crime, much less trying them in a court? Multiple aggressive wars (waged even when Congress votes against war)? Claiming infinite presidential powers? Protecting torturers and destroying the lives of whistleblowers?

If Ron Paul were elected president, there is no way any of us could just go about our lives and assume that he’d represent us. We’d have to organize constantly to keep and expand our rights that he opposes. But the same is true for Obama. And whereas Ron Paul would actually represent me on some issues of vital importance to me, Obama does not and will not.

That said, I like Rocky Anderson and agree with those posting that we should organize around him. But I’d like to see Ron Paul win the Republican primary. That way he’ll at least keep important issues in the conversation.
 
 
+5 # John Locke 2012-01-01 08:31
Stephanie Remington: but you still get evil! the idea is to eliminate evil...
 
 
+4 # Stephanie Remington 2012-01-01 22:08
John Locke: My response was sloppy. I don't believe in voting for the lesser of two evils (even though I don't think it's possible to entirely eliminate it). My point was directed at the still quite prevalent idea that somehow Obama is less evil than Republicans – by default.
I think that if we organize around and vote for the person with a solid record of legal, moral, common sense actions that benefit the people of the United States (as well as the rest of the world) and the planet itself, instead of for whomever we might think has the best chance of winning, then we’d all be better off. Of those people running, Rocky Anderson fits that bill best. If we organize around him instead of Obama he has a good chance of winning.

Ron Paul, regardless of whether you’d want him for president, has ideas that should be heard. He’s raising subjects that all the Republicans candidates and Obama are avoiding. Having him in the mix will force candidates to discuss issues that a lot of us want addressed.
 
 
-3 # disgusted American 2012-01-02 00:08
BobbyLip,

You don't have to vote for either since they are really one in the same. Jill Stein is running. btw, she ran against Cadillac Deval Patrick and Repuke Charlie Baker in the last gubernatorial election.

Democrats are no less evil than Republicans. Look at what they're doing! Killing us while they cry all over themselves.
 
 
+3 # NIKHILANANDA 2011-12-31 21:53
HOWEVER, on many OTHER issues, both gary johnson and ron paul are as far right as most republicans... IF you do NOT want to vote for obama, vote for the GREEN PARTY.... there will be a green on the ballot on most states' ballots....
 
 
0 # dorianb@fuse.net 2011-12-31 20:02
Happy New Year, John Locke: You are so wise and literate.
..."I supported this fool, and he fooled me once, but not twice".

Can you expound on voting Republican to bring the system down faster...what would happen and is there no other way?
 
 
+2 # NIKHILANANDA 2011-12-31 21:54
of COURSE there is another way... if one is NOT going to vote for obama, then vote for the GREEN PARTY... there will be a green candidate on most states' ballots.....
 
 
+10 # John Locke 2012-01-01 07:57
Dorian, I also wish you a Happy New Year. I am sorry to say, I see no other way, the system will collapse, its only when, there is nothing we can do now to stop it, all we can do is make it happen faster so we can rebuild it sooner. Any republican will bring the system down by slashing all ENTITLEMENTS, expanding the military war budget, Taxing the middle and lower class more and cutting taxes more for their wealthy backers. We now have Iran, Syria, and I also feel Pakistan in the looking glass, we will attack Iran or Syria, read the report by the Project for a New American Century, Bush followed the plan, (he had many of their members in his administration) ...and so is Obama, a republican will also follow it...a republican in office would be watched more closely because they would be less trusted and would go against Unions, more people would get involved and take to the streets, many will be arrested and held under this new battlefeld provision, but the country would be so enraged that the people won't care if they are arrested, attorneys will get involved because it is unconstitutiona l, the reaction would forge allies across ideological lines uniting everyone. millions will become tax protestors and stop paying into the system...causin g the FED to create trillions more debt, until the system collapses, Please, Please understand, I am not promoting or advocating a revolution! i just see it coming and if it is our destiny then what better time than now!
 
 
+2 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-01 11:42
Thank you, John Locke. I understand what you are saying. You have written an extremely brilliant, insightful and courageous editorial. Get it published!
 
 
+3 # nice2blucky 2012-01-01 11:42
"Any Republican will ... expand the military war budget..." Not Ron Paul. In fact, Ron Paul does not fit anywhere in that puzzle you describe... except the revolution part... because if Ron Paul is half the man he seems, he is a revolution.

His baggage is the same as many libertarians would have -- naiveté . It is simple-minded to believe that business will regulate itself; in finance and on environmental issues, regulation is key.

But not all eggs are in the Executive basket. People need to vote out Congressional incumbents -- in PRIMARY ELECTIONS -- and elect principled candidates (and Democrats need to NOT use the Rahm Emanuel approach, which works against true progressives and better candidates and forwards Blue Dogs and establishment candidates).

Voters really have the power to change things. But they must think and draw conclusions and strategize outside beltway and Party (propaganda) conventional wisdom, much in the way the Occupy Movements are doing.

But the Occupy Movements are in jeopardy in many ways. Many in Occupy are young and enthusiastic but do not understand how they will be subtly manipulated and tweaked over time and on direction to undermine the effectiveness they have and the goals they could otherwise achieve.

2013 should (could) be a great year for politics, even with the disappointments . Let the hammer come down.

Vote Ron Paul in the 2012 Republican Primaries.

HNY, JL
 
 
+5 # NIKHILANANDA 2011-12-31 21:52
WHY WOULD YOU VOTE REPUBLICAN?... any republican would be worse than obama ... vote for the GREEN PARTY.... there will ba a green on the ballot in most states.....
 
 
+3 # nice2blucky 2011-12-31 22:46
I wrote this at HuffingtonPost in July 2008.
_________________________________________
nice2blucky 01:08 AM on 07/09/2008

Senator Obama, 



Just the idea of McCain, or any other Republican as a future President, is dreadful. 



However, voting for a weak, bending, professor of "political realties," politicall­y calculatin­g, facilitato­r of the neo-con agenda is far too painful to bear. 



Your justificat­ion and words, on this issue, are as hollow as anything Joe Lieberman has to say.

When you win, it won't be because you buckled on telecom immunity. 



So pardon me if I save me vote for you for your second term; that is, should you earn it.
___________________________________________

Well, Obama did not earn it.

As for why I will vote Republican in 2012: Primary Elections are the only elections with choice. Democrats do not have any choices different than what we have. Republicans do.

The proper mindset for voters should be "from Primary to Primary." Not, "Our side won so in eight years we will decide on another." What's missing from the DNA of partisan voters is the understanding that party loyalty absent of objective scrutiny and accountability is foolishness and the cause of poor or non-represetation.

In the 2008 General Election for President, I voted for Cynthia McKinney. This time, I will likely vote for Rocky Anderson of the Justice Party.
 
 
+4 # jimyoung 2012-01-01 09:27
Can we write in Obama as a Republican in their primaries (from his caving on this and what I'd rather call Ignagny Care, etc)? I'm far more concerned with beating all but a very few Republicans in every national, state, county, and municipal election until they stop supporting things like the extension of temporary, failed, tax breaks for people that have not produced anything advertised. There are ones I would support, though I won't as long as their election keeps enabling the worst of them.

I quit the party about the same time Elizabeth Warren did, when a fund raiser told us we had to fight dirtier than Democrats. A recent example of how dirty they have gotten s at http://www.readersupportednews.org/news-section2/319-67/9185-alec-linked-group-revealed-as-major-secret-donor-in-referendum-on-maine-voting-rights, where they spent 3/4 of all funds spent hyper-hypocriti cally claiming to be wanting to counter out of state secret money sources influencing the election (while they were the ALEC backed out of state secret money doing exactly what they were supposedly complaining about).
 
 
+4 # nice2blucky 2012-01-01 12:11
It's amusing that you ask me if you can write in Obama in the Republican Primary. It seems that you may have decided to never again vote Republican, so your dilemma is one of will power and pride. If this is the case, it is simply a semantic mistake.

For me, it's like shopping at Wal-mart, which I almost never do, as well as patronage of other questionable organizations and for using certain products. I just first try to find other alternatives, and beyond that only go to Wal-mart, etc. when it's necessary (or a hassle to do otherwise) for me.

Yes, I have an occasional streak of convenient rationalized selfishness at the expense of others whom I deem otherwise lacking or unworthy.

To your interesting question:

While it would be far more appropriate (honest) for Obama to run as a Republican, you should be careful about disqualifying your entire ballot by that action -- voting write-in on another Party's Primary. Check the rules beforehand. Prior to Rocky Anderson's appearance in the new Justice Party, many people were going to write-in Elizabeth Warren on their Democratic Primary ballot.

In terms of effectiveness, I would say that a Republican Primary vote for Ron Paul, Gary Johnson, or Huntsman would be better, especially since Ron Paul could win the nomination, which incidentally frightens many establishment Republicans and their media henchmen and (in-the-pocket) hack journalists.
 
 
0 # jimyoung 2012-01-05 09:28
Interesting. I'll have to start reading up on Anderson, especially since I'd considered registering as a Democrat and writing in Warren, myself. I've been fiercely independent, though, since leaving the Republican party about the same time she did.

I recently watched the 49th Star (http://www.the49thstar.org/)about how Alaska became a state (before Hawaii, where I'd attended a few 49th State fairs, and was totally shocked when Alaska managed it before them). Their careful crafting of a constitution and electing a complete shadow slate of legislators, ready to be fully operational from day one, seems an excellent model to follow. Perhaps, as some others have suggested, we should have a fully fleshed out progressive shadow legislature that gets candidates elected where possible, but also votes (unofficially, to be sure)on all actual legislation and proposed legislation tied up by those who manipulate the regular legislatures. I'd like to see a fully fleshed out comparison of the actual legislature with an item by item comparison of how a more progressive government would have voted.

Recent research shows an ancestor was Jon Washburn, the 1st Secretary of the Plimouth Company (before the Speedwell was sent) and others who as part of the Committees of Correspondence. Lets see if how they did it can be applied today.
 
 
-3 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-01 14:31
I hear what you are saying, NIKHILANDA:
But realistically speaking, it is a wasted vote or vote of negation which strikes me as passive-aggressive.

I think it would be better to be proactive and try to accomplish a definitive goal. There are options here.
1). Get another democrat on the primary
by signing a petition requesting that Obama step down and hand over the mantle to a democrat who believes in democracy.
2). Vote for a Republican for the reason John Locke has stated.

GREEN is good but not realistic or a high priority at a time when Obama as POTUS has signed a fascist bill into law.
 
 
+34 # wantrealdemocracy 2011-12-31 17:37
My God, Blucky! Have you lost your mind? Anybody but Obama? and you advise us to vote Republican? Are you aware that our rotten two party system in not all we can have? You insist we must stick with the corporations running and ruining our nation? I agree that there is no reason but brain death for a voter to stick with the Democrats---bee n that way for decades but now it is clear to all. Democrats are not better than Republicans. Both are evil and we must not vote for either bunch of lying thieves. There are other candidates on the ballot. We must have a completely new Congress. All the incumbents must be replaced. Don't vote corporate. 99%ers must not vote for members of the top 1%. They don't give a hoot for you or your family and they never will.
 
 
+3 # NIKHILANANDA 2011-12-31 21:55
EXACTLY.... vote for the GREEN PARTY; in most states, there will be a green on the ballot..... how could ANYONE vote REPUBLICAN!!!.. . even as bad as obama is, the republicans, ANY republican, would be WORSE!!!!!
 
 
+4 # Harold R. Mencher 2012-01-01 10:10
Not all of the Dem incumbents in Congress are guilty as charged & should be replaced. Yes, I'm deeply angry at the so-called Democratic (& independent) good guys in Congress, people like Raul Grijalva, Dennis Kucinich & Bernie Sanders (an independent), & others like them, for example, for not strongly pressuring their peers in doing the right things in support of our Constitution & our Bill of Rights & supporting the welfare & the best interests of the common man in this country over that of the rich & the powerful, & warning their peers in Congress as well as the pres himself, Barack Obama, that if they continued on a path that hurts the best interests & the welfare of the common man in this country, that disaster & self-destructio n will be awaiting them at the end of the road, like the unmitigated disaster of the 2010 midterm elections.

I'm even more incensed that these very same people, Raul Grijalva, Dennis Kucinich & Bernie Sanders, & others like them, continue to remain silent while Barack Obama & the Congressional Dems continue on this dangerous path as if they haven’t learned any lessons from the past. We all know the definition of insanity, don’t we? I’m even more surprised that, after the unmitigated disaster of Nov/2010, that both Nancy Pelosi of the House & Harry Reid of the Senate have not learned their lessons and continue on a path that will inevitably spell the end of the Democratic Party as we know it.
 
 
+9 # jimyoung 2011-12-31 17:48
Sorry, I hit the wrong option before I read the whole entry. Obama seems as helpless and perhaps unwilling as Hoover was. I'd like better but truly fear the consequences of any of my old party's candidates getting elected. Perhaps it is more important to beat them in every contest possible in every state, federal and local election. No one person can stop the influence of so much secret money.
 
 
+24 # Harold R. Mencher 2011-12-31 18:49
I don't like Obama at all since he & the Congressional Dems have betrayed their voting base big time almost from the starting gate in Jan of 2009, but the Repubs are so much worse.

I like Ron Paul's stated foreign policy of stopping these stupid illegal wars of aggression by the U.S. for world empire & his stated purpose of closing a large number of our military bases overseas. I like his stated purpose of restoring our Constitution & our Bill of Rights. The question one has to ask oneself is whether or not he's being sincere about these stated purposes.

But Ron Paul's domestic policy of survival of the fittest, getting rid of the entitlements & other govt agencies that are important to our health & welfare is totally unacceptable & crazy. And to vote for any of the other Republican candidates would be absolute sheer lunacy if survival of the common man in this country is important to us.

Barack Obama & the Congressional Dems that have supported his very weak leadership against the Repubs or his purposeful complicity with them, whatever the case may be, have placed their voting base into a very delicate & precarious position. What to do come Nov of 2012? If we support Obama & the Dems, we are then awarding them for massively betraying us, & if we punish them by voting for another political party outside of the Dems & the Repubs, we may be cutting our noses off to spite our face. So what is there for us to do? That's the question.
 
 
+2 # NIKHILANANDA 2011-12-31 21:57
yes, ron paul's positions on foreign policy AND the war on drugs is good.... however, most of his other positions are as BAD as ANY REPUBLICAN... if one does not want to vote for obama, vote for the GREEN PARTY... there will be a green on the ballot on most states' ballots....
 
 
+8 # John Locke 2012-01-01 08:40
Harold R. Mencher: Yes this is the delima, both parties are bought and paid for, our only alternative is to vole for a third party candidate, however keep this in mind, any president will do as the bankers who run this country tell him, or they will simply kill the president, think JFK, and Lincoln!
 
 
0 # NIKHILANANDA 2011-12-31 21:51
WHY VOTE REPUBLICAN.... they would be WORSE then obama... vote GREEN PARTY... IF you are going to not vote for obama.....
 
 
-1 # rockieball 2012-01-01 07:34
Not on your life. Paul is a racists.
 
 
+2 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-02 15:00
Don't progressive libertarians care that Ron Paul is a racist and a bigot and a homophonic? So much bigotry and sexist remarks coming from "progressive" posters. I don't understand.
 
 
0 # Martintfre 2012-01-02 19:44
Dr Paul is not racist or bigoted homophobe. That is unknowing Puppets parroting crap.

Dr Paul is an individualist - your rights come from the fact that you are a human being. You get no more or less rights if your white/black/mal e/female/theist /atheist/gay/st raight .. your rights are because YOU exist.

as Dr Paul points out one of his heroes says you are to be judged by the content of your character.
 
 
+1 # disgusted American 2012-01-02 00:03
You must be kidding. Voting for a Republican is instant death for the 99 percent just as it is if you vote for Obama or any other Democrat.

Look into Jill Stein and some other Greens who are running.
 
 
+77 # USA2012??? 2011-12-31 15:50
President Obama signed this bill anyway: so who really runs this country?
 
 
+39 # John Locke 2011-12-31 17:24
USA2012???: I think that question is retorical, we all know its Wall Street and the large Corporations...
 
 
+144 # volcanoexpert 2011-12-31 15:54
And, THIS is a man who taught Constitutional Law!

What I keep wondering is WHERE IS THE THREAT???!!! Seems that the ONLY persons who will be detained are those who have any "objections" to the way the US threatens its own citizens!!! [You want examples?. . .Look no further than "Occupiers!"]

And, assuming that Obama is "thoughtful" and "considerate" what happens when we have a person of "lesser ethical standards". . .Such as Mad King George or his henchman, Curly-Lipped Cheney??!!!
 
 
+50 # John Locke 2011-12-31 17:27
volcanoexpert, the real threat to the status quo is the Occupy Movement, and that is why Obama was "ordered" to sign this bill, it is unconstitutiona l and he "knows" it, however how does one challenge it when you are in lock up and not allowed to even see an attorney... this reminds me of Germany 1939, Hitler is alive and well in Washington...
 
 
+94 # OldSalt 2011-12-31 15:57
The Orwellian language of “Double Speak” is used by Obama in his regretful signing excuse of "I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists." He was going to veto not to protect our due process rights afford us by 5th, 6th & 8th amendments to the Constitution, but because he was afraid that he would lose some of his imperial presidential powers that he already usurped from “We The People” when used military drones to kill American citizens.
 
 
+21 # 666 2011-12-31 20:21
Obama's defense sounds a lot like that of those in the lower ranks accused of committing war crimes: "yeah I had serious reservations about the legality of my actions, but I lined those villagers up and shot them all anyway because standing up for what is right would threaten the chain-of-comman d"
 
 
+58 # squawcraw 2011-12-31 15:57
As long as even the POSSIBILITY of "indefinite detention for suspected terrorists without a trial--includin g Americans arrested in the United States" is part of this Act, it is fatally flawed. But it is a simple fix: Congress can change/amend/cl arify the provision and explicitly take that heinous possibility off the table. We just need to make sure that it remains an issue going forward and is not forgotten about until it's too late.
 
 
+40 # John Locke 2011-12-31 17:30
squawcraw: There lies the problem, you expect congress, those bought and paid for idiots to correct their unconstitutiona l legislation, Good luck on that...
 
 
+14 # fernly2 2011-12-31 17:55
While congress is at it impeach the Wall Street stooge.
 
 
+51 # OldSalt 2011-12-31 16:03
The road to perdition is paved with good intentions,and I hope that our Congress and POTUS had good intentions, but the future outcome of this law does not bode well for this once great democratic republic.
 
 
+62 # Huck Mucus 2011-12-31 16:03
From this day forward I no longer support President Obama for re-election.
 
 
+4 # MashingTheGas 2011-12-31 17:19
Yeah, 'cause a Republican would have vetoed the bill......

Yes, it sucks. How much worse would it have been if Mitt Romney or (gasp) Newt Gingrich were in charge?
 
 
+12 # John Locke 2012-01-01 08:44
MashingTheGas: as for Mitt Romney's business performance, I would suspect he would begin by selling off our assets...
 
 
0 # Huck Mucus 2012-01-02 16:02
A two-valued orientation is a logical fallacy. It's just as illogical as a two-partied orientation.
 
 
+97 # Scott479 2011-12-31 16:04
'I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations" You know, America is tired of hearing the agent of hope and change utter what are obviously falsehoods if not bald faced lies. Guess der Fatherland is safe now... Someday a Dick Cheney will be elected and Obamas "serious reservations" will be seen as the monumental understatement that it is and our country will simply cease to be.
 
 
+15 # 666 2011-12-31 20:22
our country ceased to be when he signed this unconstitutiona l piece of toilet paper
 
 
+123 # Kev C 2011-12-31 16:05
Well so much for the land of the free and the constitution. Your president just signed them all away. What a nice New Years present for the people.
Sad but true. Your freedomn is now the property of the military industrial complex and the fat cat corporations.
 
 
+33 # John Locke 2011-12-31 17:33
Kev C: I also fear the first time it is used against OWS and the people learn of it, and we will,... that may be the beginning of a real blood bath in America...
 
 
+65 # Above God 2011-12-31 16:05
Obama is a fascist pig POS to nullify the 4th Ammendment and the Posse Comitatous Act of 1887. The military is never to have police power domestically. Seigg Heil Mein Furer Obama!
 
 
+17 # John Locke 2011-12-31 17:35
Above God: The problem with American Politics is that we believe Democrats are for the people, then they always get away with the things Republicans only dare to dream about...
 
 
0 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-01 11:49
This is the main point here.
 
 
+2 # Doubter 2011-12-31 19:39
I figured there were guns pointed at his and his family's heads; but MAYBE he IS and always has been on 'their' side...?
 
 
+74 # unclewags 2011-12-31 16:08
Obama's "defense of civil libertie in his signing statement was passionate".
Hogwash ! If Mr Obama was as passionate as his rhetoric was formulated to suggest ... why did he betray what he claimed to have been his convictions? The answer may be as simple as "political expediency".
 
 
+8 # John Locke 2011-12-31 17:36
unclewags: or simply Bribery! I wonder what he was promised?
 
 
+1 # Johnny 2011-12-31 19:21
It may be, but it is not. The answer is that he is a mass murderer indifferent to justice in the US as he is in the Muslim world. He knows exactly what he is doing and has no reservations about groveling before his Zionist masters.
 
 
+4 # John Locke 2012-01-01 08:48
Johnny: Your comment had credibility until you brought Zionist masters into it, that discredited you as an antisemite...
 
 
+60 # peterjkraus 2011-12-31 16:09
Congratulations , Mr. O! As a law professor specializing in Constitutional law, you are aware of the unconstitutiona lity of the fascist law you signed -- but you signed it anyway.
Look for a lot of other voters to give you a thumbs-up: people like me, who voted for you enthusiasticall y, believing the promises and sighing great breaths of relief after an unbearable Bush Jr. Presidency, will not be snookered again.
 
 
+23 # John Locke 2011-12-31 17:38
peterjkraus: I think he just lost the support of most thinking Democrate both Liberal and progressive
 
 
-1 # LML 2011-12-31 18:06
Do you mean "thumbs down"?
 
 
+74 # handymandave 2011-12-31 16:10
APPALLING! He once again lets us down regarding civil liberties! Police state we are here.
 
 
+38 # cypress72 2011-12-31 16:27
During the 2008 campaign Obama derided George Bush for his use of signing statements claiming that he was basically writing his own laws. Now that Obama is President it's apparently ok since he is President. Didn't Obama ever hear of a pocket veto or doesn't it apply when Congress is not in session?? Comments anyone???
 
 
+47 # wwway 2011-12-31 16:43
Republicans, Libitarians, Teas don't want any public spending for anything but national defense. What better way to bring the use of the military home to use on it's citizens who will be deemed "national secuirty threats" at any whim. On the other hand, if Obama didn't sign it Americans would view him as weak on defense.
Which Republican congress person said not to long ago that Americans are so fearful that if they were asked to spend 99cents on each tax dollar on national defense they would agree.
We've recently discovered that the wealthy own national security and are doing everything they can to squash dissent. It is my prediction that "they" will not hesitate to put anyone in jail, fabricate a national security threat and build prisons to hold anyone they want. The war has come home.
 
 
+15 # John Locke 2011-12-31 17:40
wwway: They already have the prison facilities built and they can hold millions of us...
 
 
+7 # nice2blucky 2011-12-31 20:16
Privatized prison facilities -- to profit from (peaceful) dissent.
 
 
+15 # IndigoE 2011-12-31 16:43
If anyone doubts the collapse of free, democratic, CIVILIAN government in the USA, here is the final nail in its coffin. I actually feel sorry for Obama. I suspect he has been given a terrible choice.
 
 
+16 # John Locke 2011-12-31 17:41
IndigoE: Don't feel sorry for this loser, he got something for his signature and for selling out America...
 
 
+2 # dorianb@fuse.net 2011-12-31 19:51
You said it! John Locke
 
 
+8 # Jude 2011-12-31 17:59
I always suspect that, too, and wonder what the terrible "choice" is? Dead horse heads...?
Is his signing statement a message, an argument for use by "we the people" in a time when courts are not corrupt and presidents don't have guns at their heads and justice and executive power are used for the good of everyone?
Or should I just get over hoping Obama is a good man?
This new homeland battlefield law is every bit as bad as everyone is describing it.
 
 
+4 # John Locke 2012-01-01 08:51
Jude: get over hoping Obama is a good man!
 
 
+25 # LML 2011-12-31 18:08
Don't waste your efforts feeling sorry for the craven coward who signed...feel sorry for the victims of this new law....
 
 
+37 # m... 2011-12-31 17:03
Dear President Always-Compromi ser, I hope you have not compromised the Republic and the Civil Liberties of ALL Americans into the crapper with this lasting swipe of YOUR pen in a personal political poll-fretting moment.
I remember you stating very clearly that you intended to be the President of EVERYONE.
When you were elected, voted into office by a sweeping majority, each voter had any number of reasons for voting for you. But I am sure that EVERY voter had one reason in common--- We hoped that we were electing a LEADER.

How sad this has turned out to be a false hope, a dashed hope.
 
 
+4 # Martintfre 2011-12-31 18:31
Wow so now we are reduced to Hoping he wont Change into the kind of power monger who demands unbridled power - all that is needed is some pearl harbor kind of event to justify using that power.
 
 
+7 # John Locke 2012-01-01 08:56
Martintfre: You mean like the World Trade Center. don't worry they have another plan, its called eco-terrorism, and its definition is an attempt to hurt the Banks or the economy by shutting down the ports, or taking possession of foreclosed properties, England has already classified the occupy movement as a terrorist movement, I am sure Obama also considers anyone who wants a democracy in this day and age to be a terrorist...Thi s is definately aimed at the Occupiers
 
 
+24 # rradiof 2011-12-31 17:04
Iowa caucuses: January 3rd, Minnesota caucuses: February 7th; all disillusioned Obama supporters attend your caucuses and form uncommitted slates to elect uncommitted delegates to your District and State conventions. Occupy the 2012 Election!
 
 
-25 # Martintfre 2011-12-31 17:58
Pissed off Obummer supporters - switch to republican and vote for Ron Paul to show actual support for some one who says your civil liberties are more important then the power of government officials.
 
 
-1 # Martintfre 2012-01-02 19:11
Humm a -25 score and falling

So am I correct to assume there are many people who want a totalitarian state to rule every aspect of your pathetic lives?

That Freedom and personal responsibility are scary and unnecessary since we have Lord Obama to take care of us????
 
 
0 # Billy Bob 2012-01-02 20:33
"So am I correct to assume there are many people who want a totalitarian state to rule every aspect of your pathetic lives?"

Nope. Just you.
 
 
+30 # maheanuu 2011-12-31 17:06
Barak, Barak, Barak............

Everytime I think you might find your way, you waffle again. I have decided that I will NOT Vote in the coming elections for any American, and Most Certainly, NOT For You!

You have proved beyond a doubt that you are not even remotely qualified to be CINC. You lay claim to being a Constitional scholar but then you crap on the bill of rights and Support Fascism... There is something seriously wrong with you Mr. President. I used to think that no one could equal GDubya, but you just keep on, keepin' On.

After having lived for over 73 years, most of it in Uncertainty, and Dissoulution, among the lies and corruption. I thought that you as a bi racial person would be bringing a new future and honor back to the White House.

I had so very much wanted to believe.....

Never More!

Kenneth R. Jackson
CPO USN Ret.
French National and Damn Proud OF It.
 
 
+12 # BJH 2011-12-31 17:11
What a horse's ass. I think Joey the War Horse is a better candidate for president. Better we get the whole horse rather than the horses' asses we have in government; they're all too busy serving themselves rather than the citizens who voted them into office. I'm disgusted. I suppose we should be careful now with these comments, otherwise we'll end up in some secret camp in Tennessee.
 
 
+4 # 666 2011-12-31 20:27
But at least those secret detention camps will create lots of minimum wage jobs in many states...
 
 
+30 # rebelgroove 2011-12-31 17:13
It's really difficult for me, an outsider, to read your President. He comes off as this potentially Kennedyesque leader, yet he always seems to act in direct opposition to his words.

Even worse, why is the issue only about the detention of Americans on American soil? What about the rest of the world's population, whose potential for (and more likely) arrest who are also subject to this American law?

Since when did American law apply internationally ?
 
 
+7 # John Locke 2012-01-01 09:03
rebelgroove: our law applies internationally by force, military force...the US is feared as a superpower...al l it will take is one large country to stand up to the US, and it will stop... but none dare...just as none dare to try Bush and Cheney for War Crimes, because the US is feared, hated, but feared...
 
 
0 # noitall 2012-01-02 19:47
They don't try for war crimes or anything because if you try one you'll have to try them all. Who would sign something that will allow himself to be tried...but then who would sign something that would allow himself to be thrown into military prison without rights or process...just disappeared. Its beyond me. But I'm not a millionaire politician.
 
 
+2 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-01 11:56
Obama is no JFK and nothing like FDR. Obama is all about Obama.
 
 
+19 # angryspittle 2011-12-31 17:14
Apparently his reservations were for the Sheraton on Waikiki and not so much for our fucking constitution.
 
 
+2 # John Locke 2012-01-01 09:05
angryspittle: you could have made the same statement without using the adjective
 
 
+1 # cypress72 2011-12-31 17:16
What a pleasure it is to read so many anti-Obama posts on such a decidedly left-leaning website. It gives me hope for a change. Hey Barbara K what sayeth you ?? By the way, all the 2012 bumper stickers that I've seen say "BarackObama.co m" no mention of Joe Biden. Do you think they're trying to tell us anything ???
 
 
+17 # futhark 2011-12-31 17:16
To be honest, I wasn't going to vote for this Israel-supporti ng, drone-attack-as sassinating, surveillance-st ate-supporting president anyway, but this really seals the deal! And if he thinks the "D" after his name is going to keep his former and present supporters pacified, he better think again.

"Constitutional scholar", my distal digestive orifice!
 
 
+6 # Huck Mucus 2011-12-31 17:18
With the exception of the Second Amendment (which I hope my liberal friends revisit now) I am a left wing liberal socialist. My First Amendment inclinations have been chilled already by the "patriotic" rhetoric of the right and the Patriot Act. Funny thing is though, I know MANY hard corp right wing conservatives who hate this NDAA Act as much as I do. They think their guns will be taken away with this Act (will they?). It seems like all of America was against this except for the Congress and President. What does that tell you? Who is going to be our John Conners?
 
 
+3 # 666 2011-12-31 20:31
good point, I can't think of a better bill to rally support among the anti-gun liberal lefty socialists (to say nothing of the righty pseudo-fascists ) for a stronger 2nd amendment...
 
 
+7 # John Locke 2012-01-01 09:10
Huck Mucus: They fear a revolution, it is in the air, and they are correct to fear it, that is what this legislation is all about...when the revolution begins and no doubt they will push us into it...there will be many John Connors who will appear...
 
 
+6 # slowmo 2011-12-31 17:19
Excuse me, but didn't Carl Levin state recently that the Obama admin requested that language exempting American citizens, be removed? This life long democrat stays home on election day. Probably best for the Re-anderthals to be in charge when OWS turns into American spring.
 
 
+6 # Peace Anonymous 2011-12-31 17:34
This clearly reflects the fear and the lack of understanding the average citizen has regarding the truth. The greatest threat comes from within. It may be an attempt to steal support from the right so once again doing the wrong thing, for the wrong reasons wins. The Republicans will only be worse. The people have nowhere to turn.
 
 
+28 # Patch 2011-12-31 17:35
Never have so many been left so desperate, so hopeless, so betrayed by one man.

Shame on you President Obama. Shame on you!
 
 
+2 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-01 12:03
patch, You said what so many of us feel without the four-letter words or any degrading adjectives which adds so much to the authenticity and poignancy of your comment. Thank you.
 
 
+27 # GrittedTeeth 2011-12-31 17:38
The US of A is truly buggered now!!! There was a time when it was the beacon of freedom and infinite possibility. Now it is just an international bully and a MIC-driven police state at home.

What a shame that this is happening, aided and abetted by a turncoat and spineless Democratic administration.
 
 
+5 # John Locke 2012-01-01 09:15
GrittedTeeth: this has been a plan for generations, whatever party was in control they all followed their leader, each provided a spoke for the wheel but subtly so as not to raise the ire of the nation, many of us saw it early on, but were laughed at, now i fear it is too late, and i also fear a bloody and violent revolution is not far off...
 
 
0 # grweiner 2011-12-31 17:39
As bad as you may think this is, remember Ralph Nader and 2000! The election that our country got shot onto this trajectory! Needless wars and financial collapse...all because we voted a Republican in as President due to a third-party candidate. Tempted tho you may be to vote for Ron Paul or someone else as an independent candidate...DON 'T DO IT! VOTE OBAMA! At least open your ears this coming year and don't throw the baby out with the bath water! Give Obama a chance and don't believe all the Anti-Obama conservative newsmedia and pundit propaganda! Happy New Year all!
 
 
+19 # Socrates 2011-12-31 19:35
Thank you, grweiner, for an attempt at perspective. And, I like what jimyoung says, "Perhaps it is more important to beat them in every contest possible in every state, federal and local election. No one person can stop the influence of so much secret money." So, instead wallowing in self pity because we didn't get our way on this, let's mobilize, recruit, persuade, roll up our sleeves, get to work, and put a genuine Progressive in every elected spot in the country. It's time for an "American SPRING." Stop spewing discontent and build communities for ACTION. NOW! Stop wasting time and energy.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+3 # John Locke 2012-01-01 09:22
Socrates: I do like what you have to say, and it is wise counsel, however this is not 469 BC, when times were different, we have men who are behind the takeover of our Democracy, they control the money and the labor of this country and EVERY elected official, and if you aren't with them and their money influence, they have a solution for that also, they kill you! If we were free and could run for office and not be assasinated you would be very correct in what you state...
 
 
-5 # dorianb@fuse.net 2011-12-31 19:45
grweiner: your comment is a non-sequiter
example of theatrical absurdity!
 
 
0 # jimyoung 2012-01-01 12:01
I have friends who voted for Nader and, though I always want to hear what he has to say, didn't vote for Nader because I didn't want to "waste" a vote on someone I thought would be ineffectual without much stronger support in the house and senate.

I stupidly voted for Bush, more in opposition to Lieberman for his role in overcoming Clinton's Veto of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. Lieberman has revealed himself as more of a foul, big finance supporting, Republican than even I could have imagined, but may have been less "evil" on other issues I also are about. The only cure may be preferential voting that would more clearly block candidates most voters don't want (LePage in Maine for example). I'd probably add Nader in for 2nd choice over any of the candidates I now see running.
 
 
0 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-01 12:06
grweiner:...you think? Sounds like bad advise for the posters and for the country.
 
 
0 # noitall 2012-01-02 19:43
Whoa! Are you Beevis OR ButtHead?
 
 
+34 # dailycall 2011-12-31 17:48
What a fitting end to 2011.

That both Dems and Repugs conspired to betray our Constitution should put to rest any serious thought that there is a significant differences between the parties and certainly between Obama and the Cheney/Bush cadre.

The NDAA is proof positive of just how much the Occupy protests rattled the establishment. With the NDAA the judicial cattle prod is now poised to quell any serious challenge to the military-corpor ate state. Likewise, you can consider the NDAA proof positive that we are going into Iran. When that debacle ramps up under some pretense of national security we will see the usual fear mongering jingoism of the police state used to justify filling up those FEMA camps.

I supported Obama in '08. The level of betrayal he has displayed is of Shakespearan dimensions.

We need to mourn the final passage of our democracy ... and then begin to organize because the fight for America is now on!

Wake up.
Speak out.
Act.
 
 
+13 # shortonfaith 2011-12-31 17:53
In order to uphold this new law we need the full use of the military inside our borders. Next up, drone flights & strikes to protect the citizens.

Why build more prison when The Homeland can just use its borders as walls? The mere fact you are US citizens will soon make you suspect in other countries. Look, they'll say; "some of the cattle/chattel from the US are trying to jump the fence again."
 
 
+11 # 666 2011-12-31 20:33
haven't you been watching the news they (police) are already using drones in the US
 
 
+8 # 666 2011-12-31 20:35
haven't you been reading the news? police are already using drones in the US
 
 
+11 # Crusader Rabbit 2011-12-31 17:55
Welcome to the United Gulag of America. Hereʻs a letter I had printed a few days ago in our local paper. Maybe Obushma read it, since he was vacationing here:

During WWII, the US military detained 110,000 Japanese Americans, 11,000 German-American s and 3,000 Italian-America ns, all deemed potential terrorists. A Japanese-Americ an senator has just voted for a law that negates the 1971 Non-Detention Act, created specifically to make another mass detention impossible. Sadly, itʻs now again possible, with the help of Dan Inouye.

The Senate has just passed the National Defense Authorization Act with provisions specifically requested by Obama that void core constitutional protections: the right to be assumed innocent unless proven guilty and the right to be argue your innocence in front of a judge or a jury of your peers.

The military now has authority to detain anyone, anywhere, forever, for any vague activity deemed in support of terrorism. This “support of terrorism” does not even need to be directed against this country. Americans supporting Arab Spring uprisings against the ruthless dictators of US client states may be subject to the same indefinite military detention in Guantanamo-styl e prisons — for life.

The bill itself, opposed by the heads of the FBI and the Dept. of Defense, is an act of terrorism against the constitution. Those who voted for it should be the ones subject to “indefinite military detention.”
 
 
+4 # Martintfre 2011-12-31 17:56
Dictators and dictator wannabes rarely are honest enough to say I am doing this to consolidate power because I like having the power.
 
 
+14 # shortonfaith 2011-12-31 17:59
The detention of US citizens without trail is in the same bill as who owns the rights to Iranian oil. Does that make us more or less important than the oil?
 
 
-6 # Rabbit 2011-12-31 18:26
Obama faught to have the wording inserted that allows the arrest and detention of American citizens.
Obama lies for what reason?
What are his real intentions? Maybe we should inspect his birth certificate more closely. Or at least talk to his grandmother
 
 
+8 # dorianb@fuse.net 2011-12-31 19:42
Obama lies because he is an "empty suit."
He lacks character and a strong core. He's a man of rhetoric without the conviction to make good on his spin or feigned promises.
 
 
+9 # Peach14 2011-12-31 18:37
I totally agree with "maheanuu".
I don't think I have ever been more disillusioned than by "our" President. Even over finding out about Santa Claus was not nearly so painful!
I think I am going to look more closely at Huntsman. He may switch and run as an Independent.
We absolutely must get rid of the two parties we have if this "Democracy" is going to survive!
 
 
+10 # dorianb@fuse.net 2011-12-31 19:35
Peach 14: Jon Huntsman is intelligent, decent and has foreign policy experience which is why the GOP doesn't want him on board and he stays away from Tea Party issues. He's looking a lot better than Obama right now but would need to run as an Independent.
 
 
+21 # James Marcus 2011-12-31 18:39
Treasonous.
 
 
+21 # HeidiStevenson 2011-12-31 18:40
Notice that Obama is such a coward that he signed right before the longest weekend of the year, when people's attention is directed toward partying? What a gutless wonder.
 
 
+10 # Harold R. Mencher 2011-12-31 18:58
Obama says that he has reservations and he's concerned about signing this $662 Billion Defense Bill as far the power to arrest and detain someone indefinitely without charge or trial, including U.S. citizens. If Obama is willing to murder a U.S. citizen (by assassination) anywhere in the world as he did three times in Yemen, one must ask themselves how sincere that stated concern is about detaining U.S. citizens without charge or trial indefinitely.

Obama is one hell of an actor. It is my belief that he has contracted the very same disease that afflicted George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, the strong desire to be two-bit dictator, not just over the American people but over the world as well.
 
 
+5 # John Locke 2012-01-01 09:28
Harold R. Mencher: Its all part of a plan, the Bushs are part of the planners Obama is only a follower by design
 
 
0 # Harold R. Mencher 2012-01-01 12:01
Quoting John Locke:
Harold R. Mencher: Its all part of a plan, the Bushs are part of the planners Obama is only a follower by design


John, you know that old saying; "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." I don't really know why Obama became a turncoat against the very people that won him the presidency in 2008, but it obviously became too much of a temptation for him not to accept the power he had inherited from the Bush administration and to build on it as he has.

God help us all!!
 
 
+6 # Johnny 2011-12-31 19:00
Actually Ron Paul is a million times better than Obomber, even though Ron Paul is a complete idiot on matters of economics and culture. He is the only candidate who opposes the endless illegal wars for Israel, however, and that is the only issue that matters. The endless wars for Israel are the ruling elite's pretext for destroying the world economy and eliminating all freedom in the USA. Until the wars end, there will be not economic recoverh or restoration of civil liberties in the US, no matter who is president.
 
 
+10 # oakes721 2011-12-31 19:01
Those who CAN, DO.
Those who can't, teach...Constit utional Law.
Then Betray its Foundations
 
 
+15 # Carolyn 2011-12-31 19:02
"How the people cheered when Hitler came into power!"
 
 
+6 # John Locke 2012-01-01 09:32
Carolyn: Nice to see you in this debate...Yes the people cheered Hitler when he came to power with his false hopes and promises, but lets not forget who financed Hitler... Prescott Bush... HW's father and Brown Brothers Harriman and Rockefeller... and who were on the Hitler propaganda payroll Randolph Hurst...
 
 
+11 # dorianb@fuse.net 2011-12-31 19:29
The innuendos over whose progressive vs liberal, or centrist vs L or R totally pale in the glaring light of this fascist bill signed by Obama which disregards "human rights" (ie), liberty and justice for all. You should be ashamed of yourself, President Obama, and anyone who continues to apologize, blame and make excuses for you is in denial of how badly you have failed the people, the constitution and democracy as POTUS.
 
 
+7 # John Locke 2012-01-01 08:06
Dorian it is time to stop labeling ourselves as Liberals, Progressives and conservatives, its time we became Americans...
 
 
0 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-02 15:06
John Locke: Are you a professor and/or a writer? E-mail me if you prefer.
 
 
+11 # Sandy G 2011-12-31 20:00
It makes me absolutely sick to my stomach that Obama has betrayed America, and has placed us all squarely between a rock and a hard place, leaving us with the dreaded 'lesser of two evils'. I hate it, hate it, hate it!
 
 
+13 # 22dragon 2011-12-31 20:01
Have others noticed that the local police forces are now becoming fully-armed for battle against the people? Use it or lose it, it said. Our freedom or their weapons?
 
 
0 # guodr 2011-12-31 20:43
Obama only represents on leg of the stool. This Republican Crap will never stand in the courts.
 
 
+2 # Billy Bob 2011-12-31 23:36
Are you refering to the same courts that are subordinate to the big one led by scalia, alito, thomas, etc.?

No, the courts are, by and large, run by repuglican political appointees.
 
 
+2 # aitengri 2011-12-31 20:45
What variation on the theme of "frustration" and "disillusionmen t" can be added here? The RSN site has a self-selecting audience, in that we are not hearing from typical Main St. Americans. The comments "read" like an echo chamber. After the Iowa caucus, what will Nancy Pelosi have to say? My questions, essentially, bear witness to the transient quality of all this noise (including my own). Bottom line, do not be law abiding, do not smile at your stupid American neighbors, Create a full-on revolution that should make "OCCUPY" pale by comparison. Obey no ordinary property laws. Take what you need when you are needy. Fill in all the remaining blank spaces in these comment boxes with suggestions for necessary chaos, to bring down our corrupt system.
 
 
+1 # maddave 2011-12-31 23:34
And just what the hell do you propose to install in place of the current system? The anarchy that you propose will, if generally adopted, immediately result in an martial law and, in the long run, a dictatorship.

Be careful what you wish for.
 
 
+4 # John Locke 2012-01-01 09:52
maddave: Revolunary's don't think that far in advance they seek to rid their country of its immediate evil, then the surprise comes when another dictator rises up, I point to Egypt as a current example. and Hitler as the last. When the Revolution begins, I only pray we have honorable men and women who lead the country through it...
 
 
+5 # John Locke 2012-01-01 09:48
aitengri: I Understand your sentiments but strongly suggest you DO NOT advocate a revolution, it will come on its own. To advocate it places you at great risk. I myself will never advocate for violence against any country or person, but i see it coming and I am not able to nor do i care to prevent it. I will not advocate for a revolution, although it is time for it on a world wide level. Understand those in charge are very prepared to deal with a revolution, this is a much different time than 1776 and millions of good people will be killed in its wake, that is the reason we will soon see armed service personnel walking our streets and tanks on our streets and highways, it is a complete takeover, a revolution is now as inevitable as the sun rising in the morning...and it will come but not by my hands
 
 
+6 # Hey There 2011-12-31 20:46
The duty of a president should be as a medical doctor "First Do No Harm"
Isn't the general rule that if there is any doubt that it isn't the right thing to do NOT TO DO IT?
Surely we aren't going back to
"Lettre de cache",first used in 1718,often by the wealthy to get rid of certain persons via imprisonment without trial or appeal

To understate this "Aw Heck"
 
 
+5 # John Locke 2012-01-01 09:55
Hey There: all governments throughout history have used similar tactics to quell dissent... we use laws others do it by edict
 
 
0 # Hey There 2012-01-01 13:58
Gave you a plus,John Locke. There are unfortunately many examples where dissent is squashed sometimes in very brutal ways where annihilation of large groups is the method used.
McCarthy in power,detention of Japanese Americans during WW2. Quantanamo Bay are SOME recent examples brought to mind.
This law APPEARS to be designed to quell dissent but hopefully it will have the opposite effect as those opposed to the war in Vietnam had and those who fought for Civil Rights.
 
 
+5 # John Locke 2012-01-01 17:41
Hey There: Tienenmen (sp) square in China is a very good example and Hungary in the 1950's, Kent State and Jackson State 1970...and I fear for our country now, it hasn't even begun, but be assured they will push our people into a real revolution before this is resolved. They are not going to allow peaceful demonstrations to cause them attention...lik e cockroaches they will hide in the dark and use every law they can create to quell any form of resistance...
 
 
+16 # rsnfan 2011-12-31 20:52
" I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists," Obama said in a statement accompanying his signature."

What the hell did you sign it for then?
 
 
+13 # lin96 2011-12-31 20:54
This is about OWS protestors and the stripping away of the civil rights of American citizens. There are very few REAL Republicans and Democrats left. They're all working for a handful of financiers that want to control this country and the world. GHWBush's mantra was "new world order". The financiers are afraid of OWS, and the citizens right to vote. (which they are trying to eliminate by the redistricting and restrictions they're implementing to make it difficult for a citizen to vote) This is the dictatorship that GWBush said he thought would be easier providing he was the dictator. They want the people to be so frustrated with Congress so they can say...Congress doesn't work anymore and they'll transition into a dictatorship. Congress is working it's the corruption within it and lack of loyalty to the Constitution that isn't working. We need to get the corrupt politicians out and put new people in along with term limits and no lawyers allowed.
 
 
+6 # John Locke 2012-01-01 10:06
lin96: you have a good grasp of the problem, but the difference is that our system doesn't work simply because our founding fathers trusted to much in the integrity of our people, Jefferson warned that we would need a revolution periodically to keep a republic, No democracy has lasted, all fell from inside corruption and we are no different... how do we elect people with integrity when money controlls the game plan and death is the reward for trying to do the right thing. No, i fear it is over, we have been converted to a fascist form of governance like JP Morgan and Dupont inspired to achieve in the 1930's...only a revolution is left and that is unthinkable for the comman man to even visualize...and for which I will not advocate...yet i feel there is no solution short of that adventure
 
 
+7 # RCW 2011-12-31 20:58
Mr. Obama, I have defended you for the last time. This is an ultimate bretrayal. Unfortunately, there is so far no one else.
 
 
+16 # Kootenay Coyote 2011-12-31 21:07
If Obama had “serious reservations”, he should have kept his hand off the pen. It’s not that hard to do, you know....
 
 
+3 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-01 12:28
This is how Obama "double speaks" or talks out of both sides of his mouth. He will go down in history as the POTUS who brought America down and was known for making excuses every step of the way. It is so true that we have to get past left-right, liberal-conserv ative labels and ban together as Americans. If Obama did one good thing for his constituents, he taught us to see beyond these labels.He ran as a Progressive and just signed in a fascist bill many conservatives would think twice before signing.
 
 
+12 # barryg 2011-12-31 21:15
I was at a right wing meeting last night because it was about getting rid of smart meters which can monitor a lot of what you do at home as well as cause serious illness for some. They were talking about how we have to drop liberal and conservative, right and left and get our country back. They are ready to rock with us. I think this will activate everyone when the first murders start. Maybe people will ever wake up to the fact that these same people shot JFK, RFK, and MLK and start questioning 9/11 which was the final coup that gave them power. We better pray that the military does not back them but now it is a professional military. Drafted soldiers would not follow orders. Thats why we have a pro military..
 
 
+12 # futhark 2012-01-01 05:00
Thanks barryg. The reason America got rid of the draft is that professional soldiers are more likely to accept the military hierarchy of rank and power and are less likely to question the legality and legitimacy of orders. When their Commander-in-Ch ief shows so little disregard for the Constitution, its sets a very poor example for those under his command to adhere to their oaths of office when he explicitly does not.
 
 
+1 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-01 12:30
Great comment, futhark!
 
 
+7 # Billy Bob 2011-12-31 22:00
Obviously, he hates his job and really wants to be voted out of office. If only he could find a viable oppenent to relieve him of his authority.

Just when he almost had some of us fooled that, even though he had NO regard for the ideals of those who elected him, he was willing to do what they wanted because they elected him, he pulls this, last minute before the New Year, fast one. Did he think we'd be so busy with our noise makers and cute hats we'd stop paying attention? I hope the next brave citizen who hands him a note simply writes, "Mr. President, we are paying attention". I'm sure that statement is now enough to be tortured indefinately, but who knows? Maybe someone will let him know what he'll be in for when he occupies a seat next to nixon and the bushes in the afterlife.

As far as I'm concerned this is the worst display of political cowardice and/or duplicity I've ever seen. This makes the lies leading up to single-payer suddenly being "off the table", appear palatable in comparison.

Linda? Are you out there? Any thoughts, that don't involve "never vote repuglican"?

Exactly how are we supposed to avoid voting repuglican? It seems to me that that's all we have running for president right now.

SOMETHING TELLS ME CHENEY IS STILL THE "VICE" PRESIDENT.
 
 
+5 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-01 12:49
Billy Bob: You are right! The timing is all about Obama's arrogance and "dumbing down" the citizens. Mainly, the ones who voted him in. He has been condescending to us with his rhetoric and broken promises since day one. And... "the lies leading up to single-payer" insurance being taken"off the table" and replaced with Obamacare is one more example of Obama's "cowardice and/or duplicity". Too many Americans who think Obamacare is an answer to Universal HC have not read the fine print and don't understand the inherent problems.
 
 
+4 # Billy Bob 2011-12-31 22:10
I just had a vision of Obama running for President in 2008 promising to help us out of the giant hole that bush dug us into.

He was carrying a bigger shovel.
 
 
+4 # granny B 2011-12-31 22:31
Hey everybody....ti me to put Obama behind us and move forward....PLEA SE check out Rocky Anderson...can' t figure out why nobody will check him out...you'll LIKE him...I promise
 
 
+2 # Billy Bob 2012-01-01 08:38
I won't be voting for a third party candidate. If Anderson wants my vote he'll have to primary Obama as a Democrat.

Since that won't happen, we need to seriously figure out how we can get a 50 state referendum to change the electoral process to allow meaningful 3rd party participation.

We need:

1. ONE national intra-party primary
2. an automatic runoff between the top two vote getters.

If we had this, right now, Anderson would probably be the left-wing representative and Obama would represent the far right.

Instead, what we have is Obama representing the far right and the presumptive repug representing the lunatic fringe of the extreme far far far off the edge psychotic far right.

Oh... and people like Anderson sitting on the sidelines wishing they could somehow participate.
 
 
+3 # chinaski 2011-12-31 22:40
It's the lying two-faced betrayals like this from a President who promised us something wholly different in order to get elected that will keep Democrats away from the polls in 2012. The Republicans will offer us a brainless fascist fool and get this idiot elected.
Barack Obama coming full circle.
 
 
+8 # Jerry 2011-12-31 23:40
Let's just choose someone we want, and all agree to write their name in. Skip the parties. Personally, I think Elizabeth Warren, Sen. Jeff Merkley,Rep Peter DeFazio, Rep. Dennis Kucinichk, Greg Palast, and Ralph Nader are far superior to the lessor of two evils.
 
 
+1 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-02 15:32
Jerry: All good people but how pragmatic is it to vote for anyone of them when we know they are unelectable candidates and will ensure a Republican victory. The only electable democratic candidate is Hillary Clinton. She may be a centrist but she's stronger and more authentic than Obama and she will not bomb Iran as fast as a repug and will keep SS, MC and Medicaid intact and she will overturn the HL law. she and Bill are very smart politicians and exactly what we need right now to repair as much of our damaged government as is possible. Hillary has said she does not want to run but she happens to be what we need right now and she may rise to the occasion. It's very important to analyze all options and the reality of the situation. Bernie Saunders and Elizabeth
Warren, et al are not realistic options. Obama has betrayed the citizens of the US by signing ina fascist law. If not HRC, who and why? We are facing a bloody revolution. Let's stop it or at least try to detain it.
 
 
+5 # kitster 2012-01-01 00:12
once again, obama has disgraced himself. he is nothing but a rubber stamp of the financial-milit ary-industrial complex.

he knows, though, he's the only alternative to reactionary republican't craziness. if progressives sit out the election, then amerika will send in a clown.

hopefully, in 2016, we can fund a progressive that can stand up to the hypochristian, goose-stepping greedsters and economic know-nothings and end this madness. as we fall deeper and deeper into a black hole with no safety net in sight.
 
 
0 # LML 2012-01-03 01:49
Either way there will be an awful lot of "undoing" to be done by 2016....
 
 
+12 # hkatzman 2012-01-01 02:07
Yes, I am disappointed that the President signed this bill but what about the swine in Congress who wrote and signed this bill? You blame Obama for all these ills, but
DID YOUR REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS AND YOUR SENATOR VOTE FOR THIS? DID THEY FIGHT IT? ARE YOU GOING TO REELECT THEM? ARE YOU GOING TO WORK FOR THEIR DEFEAT? DO THEY KNOW IT?
Let's spread the blame in the numerous ways it also deserves!
 
 
+1 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-01 13:05
Truman who had a congress who fought him
pointed to himself and said:
"The responsibility stops here" and he was respected for doing so. Blaming others and continually making excuses for oneself is beneath the kind of character and dignity we have always expected in a POTUS. Signing a fascist bill is something many did not expect even from a spineless "empty suit" like Obama. Can you even imagine JFK, FDR or Bill Clinton signing a bill like that. If GWB had signed it, he would've been ridiculed and threatened with impeachment.
 
 
+2 # John Locke 2012-01-01 18:08
Dorian: GWB's part was to bring in the Patriot act which was in waiting for 10 years before being made law... Obama's part is to bring this bill in...and the next president will most likely finish off the republic.
 
 
0 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-02 15:33
John Locke: Please explain this. thanks
 
 
0 # John Locke 2012-01-02 20:27
Dorian The patriot act was prepared around 1990, but was not presented to congress because they were waiting for a time when "WE" would accept it, and that was after a serious event like a second Pearl Harbor, The WTC was an inside job, that is now all over the web and based on scientific and factual evidence, for one how the buildings came down, including one that wasn't even hit. and the three Pasports that conviently were found intact when even computers were turned to dust. After 9-11 a similar Bill was prepared for congress and on the day of the voting the former act was handed out to all congressmen and women, NO one read it and it was passed... This is also mentioned in one of Michael Moors documentaries. Its true... They have been concerned about a real revolution for some time, and decided now was an appropriate time to introduce this bill, the camps to hold us have been around since about the 1980's. I believe the Next president will begin the arrests, first will be the protestors. We are drawing heat to the Banks, and they don't like that.
 
 
+7 # Organizer 2012-01-01 03:22
Hey people, how about challenging this law in court? I am not a constitutional scholar but this law flies in the face of everything I ever understood the Bill of Rights to be about. I would support an organization that goes this route.
 
 
+4 # John Locke 2012-01-01 10:12
Organizer: The problem to challenging this law is the person so doing must have standing, that means he is a victim, but this law allows isolation of the victim, so they have placed many obsticles for us to overcome to even challenge it...without first being detained without a charge or trial...
 
 
+1 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-01 13:12
John Locke: The more that's revealed about this bill, the more frightening it is that Obama made it law. You should write an editorial about it. You seem to understand it very well. Obama taught constitutional law and knew exactly what he was doing.
 
 
+4 # John Locke 2012-01-01 17:46
Dorian: Thank you, I also have a law background with an emphasis on Constitutional law and know Johnathon Turley, I interviewed him when he was fighting for the workers at the Nevada Test sight...and I understand full well what is going on here...an interesting note, Johnathon faxed me his 9th circuit brief twice, and it was intercepted by the Government, I never did receive it...
 
 
+1 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-02 15:36
John Locke: Why? Are you a professor of constitutional law? Politician? You have a brilliant mind.
 
 
0 # John Locke 2012-01-02 20:13
Dorian, Thank you but no,I am neither. Just a thinking concerned American with a law degree and an aversion to corruption. I did for many years co-host a talk radio show, my Co-host was Ted L. Gunderson the former Agent in charge of the FBI field office in Los Angeles, California, recently deceased. He was my closest friend. I was involved with him in several cases relating to practicing satanists in the east of the country. He has great videos on the net and tried after he retired to wake up the nation to our criminal government especially the CIA and the New FBI.. On 9-11 we were to have dinner at his home the first thing he said "the Government did it" he had evidence which I saw. I am working on a series of articles now which I hope RSN will publish based on my knowledge and some based on his reports.
 
 
0 # noitall 2012-01-02 19:38
Congress has the right to sign their authority and responsibility over to the military...don' t know why they'd do it...suicidal, I guess. Its all the pressure. Perhaps we've been too hard on them.
 
 
+6 # walt 2012-01-01 06:44
Obama hasn't got an ounce of guts! He has caved on the most important issues. Now we see the possibility of the military being used against the civilian population. Reminds me on Kent State!

He boasts of getting Osama Bin Laden, but even that was accomplished in a cowardly manner.

We need a leader with some courage and stamina. It's sure not him!
 
 
+9 # RMDC 2012-01-01 07:09
Walt -- Obama is CIA. He was recruited into the CIA at Columbia. After college he worked for a year at Business Consultants International, a CIA front company. He is just an employee of the CIA and really your president in name only. He does what he is told to do. It is true that most of our presidents since Kennedy have been CIA but Obama may be the worst of them because he told us that the country was going in the wrong direction and that he would fight like hell to change it. We now see that he is fighting like hell to keep it going in the wrong direction -- the CIA's direction.
 
 
+4 # John Locke 2012-01-01 10:15
RMDC: I applaud you here, you are correct, and so was Clinton...Mena AK was a drug routs used by the Medellan cartel aiding the CIA Drug war known as Iran/Contra...
 
 
+9 # RMDC 2012-01-01 07:06
100 years from now when people look back on this period, this post 9-11 hysteria, the main thing that will stand out is just how stupid we were. Two ugly and old buildings got knocked down, so our elected representatives undertook to knock down the entire structure of legal rights and protections that once made America a model for the world. They converted America into Amerikkka. And the population accepted it because they were told it would make them safe.

The important facts in history will not be al Queda or the US oil quest, but rather the conversion of the US from a nation where people had civil and legal rights to one in which people have no rights. There government and the police can do anything to them it wishes, including killing them or disappearing them into secret prisons anywhere in the world.
 
 
+5 # Billy Bob 2012-01-01 08:33
You're assuming that in 100 years we'll be out of the mess we're currently creating. We're in a downward spiral right now with no end in sight. Some MAJOR things will have to happen in the next 100 years to revearse the trend and allow us to look back on all of this with disgust. Something tells me we're still at a tipping point and we'll soon be nostalgic for 2012. I hope I'm wrong.
 
 
+4 # John Locke 2012-01-01 10:22
RMDC and Billy Bob: Remember the victors write the history books, and our past in 100 years may well be depicted in a much different light then we would hope for. This will all be deemed necessare to save Democracy, and Democracy will have a totally different meaning by then, however, human kind is not meant to be enslaved, and in 100 yuears there will be an uprising, if not sooner...
 
 
+1 # Billy Bob 2012-01-01 20:57
Interesting comment. I think there will always be a left and right that represent pretty much the same respective philosophies. The left and right have changed party affiliations since the Civil War, but the basic philosophical differences between the two are primal and the struggle for dominance between the two can easily be illustrated at least as far back as the Middle Ages.

Just ask a right-winger, in a candid moment what he/she thinks of Native Americans, African Americans, Muslims, or various Christian denominations he/she disagrees with and you'll get essentially the same answer you would have gotten 500 years ago.

The only difference between victory and defeat is in how we fight the right-wing. The right is inherently (by definition) more violent and more spoiling for a fight. The left, however, has the upper hand by standing up en masse - if it dares.
 
 
+2 # Futilitarian 2012-01-01 08:03
Sigh... The flush handle has been pushed... We are swirling.
 
 
+5 # Billy Bob 2012-01-01 08:43
Do any of you think an Obama employee is actually reading any of this?

I wonder if anyone is bothering to listen. If a Democrat ran against Obama he'd be caught off guard.
 
 
0 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-01 13:17
Billy Bob: You made an interesting point. Please explain and elaborate.
 
 
+4 # Billy Bob 2012-01-01 20:46
It's not that complicated. Obama is unready for a serious primary challenger if one were to materialize. He's taking us for granted because he knows he only needs to be 5% more liberal than the repugnant party candidates.

In any real universe Obama would be the conservative candidate and would be far behind in the polls against a slew of left-wing challengers speaking for the majority against the interests of his puppeteers.
 
 
0 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-02 15:38
Billy Bob: so why would Obama staff be reading the posts?
 
 
0 # Billy Bob 2012-01-02 20:38
My point is that they probably aren't. Further, that they and he seem completely oblivious to the wishes of the people who voted them into office. That's precisely why he'd be caught off guard if he had a serious challenger from the left, i.e. someone who actually was listening.
 
 
+7 # doctoruth 2012-01-01 08:49
What can I say after reading all the comments. I can only keep my eyes open fro the next March/Demonstra tion/StopWallSt reet/StoptheCor porations/Stopt heBanks, etc. And give as much time/money/effo rt/energy to the causes of Peace, Freedom and The People - YES!!!
doctoruth
 
 
+5 # mwd870 2012-01-01 09:19
This was my reaction, too. The comments say it all. When I went to the RSN home page and saw the headline for this article, my first thought was no, I guess I had no doubts he would sign the bill. *sigh*
 
 
+5 # Huck Mucus 2012-01-01 09:02
Back when Cheney was President I warned that the Neocons would never, ever garner unto themselves the power they were seeking if they thought for one nano-second they would ever be subject to it with a simple change in administration. I thought they were going to pull another coup with McCain like they did over Gore in 2000. With the election of Obama, I thought that maybe, for the first time, I had been wrong. Turns out I was right again. Only they were smarter and deeper than I thought. They didn't need McCain. *They* are in control now (probably always have been). Voting is the new opiate of the masses. Makes you feel like you matter.
 
 
+2 # jimyoung 2012-01-01 12:03
Time for preferential ballots?
 
 
0 # Sandy 2012-01-01 09:26
Yes, Obama's a big disappointment, but he's a pragmatist and probably figures it's better for the country in the long run if he can get reelected. Heaven help us if he doesn't... There's be no caveats whatsoever if a Bush, Cheney or McCain were in the Oval Office. Let's face it, the only real solution is building on the Occupy movement to work for REAL and fundamental changes. The more we do to speak truth to power, the more room Obama (or who ever is in the govt) has to do the right right by the people.
 
 
+3 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-01 13:24
Obama is a pragmatist when it comes to his own agenda. It's clear by now he does not care what is best or better for the country. Anyone who cares about a democracy and human rights would not under any circumstances sign a bill that detains American citizens under arrest without due process. This is a fascist state. Obama has betrayed the people.
 
 
0 # gilda92 2012-01-01 11:02
How about Putin for President? We're closing in on Mother Russia
 
 
-1 # Huck Mucus 2012-01-01 11:45
"The Audacity of Me." Huck Mucus for President.
 
 
+3 # Kayjay 2012-01-01 12:08
I guess those that say Obama is the ultimate "bait & switch" candidate are right. The neocons have tied his balls to a short string and are constantly threatening to slam the door closed tied to the other end.
 
 
+2 # shortonfaith 2012-01-01 12:34
We need to build the OWS movement in the coming months. In 4 more years there will be nothing left of the peoples rights or commons. There is no reason to be nice to the citizens after these next elections. They need only solidify favors to corporate masters for future speaking engagements or collecting funds for their charitable en devours, i.e. Pres Clinton.

The rights of citizens were placed in the same bill as, who owns the oil flowing out of Iran? Which one is more important to corporate America, your rights or oil? Ownership of these rights & oil is not in question here, they own everything. You'll only retrieve them by prying them out of their cold dead hands.
 
 
+6 # Steve5551 2012-01-01 15:16
We the American working tax paying middle-class need another fascist lying hypocrit of the George W Bush stripe rather than a trojan horse traitor like Obama. Things are not going to change, preservation of the middle-class American lifestyle is not going to happen from the top down, these senseless wars and covert CIA activity is not going to cease until the American people wake-up, start paying attention and we collectively revolt agaist these lying crimminals who are constantly whittling away at our civil liberties and constitutional rights. I say call Mayflower. Get the Obamas out and bring in the fascist lying bastard which the Republicans deem best. That way we will not be surprised when he/she lies and deceives us. Whatsmore, the Republicans will hasten the revolt.
 
 
0 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-02 15:41
Good comment but rather scarey, don't you think, Steve 5551? There may be better options available.
 
 
+1 # minkdumink 2012-01-01 17:29
it was a great advance when the strong consented to eat the weak by due process of law
 
 
-8 # ganymede 2012-01-01 18:13
This thread is probably coming to an end and I am appalled at the extreme negativity about Obama. Certainly, we're all disappointed in many of the things he's done and not done, but he has accomplished much more than he's getting credit for. I also sense their are some provacoteurs at work here.

If you pull back for a moment and examine the negative hysteria about Obama it should occur that right now the Democrats stand a good chance of trouncing the Republicans next November. It seems to me to make more sense that we work hard at pushing for a complete Democratic takeover of the government for at least 2-4 years. This would be a saner and more practical way of saving our country from further chaos and strife. I'm really disappointed and upset at the nihilism and paranoia exhibited in much of this discussion.
 
 
+2 # dquandle 2012-01-01 19:26
what a goddamned despicable bastard.
 
 
+1 # Huck Mucus 2012-01-01 20:28
The Bill of Rights is inviolate, save CONSTITUTIONAL amendment. That fact crosses ALL party lines, all "lesser of two evil" arguments; that fact crosses everything. Everything.
Bush, et al, were traitors with Patriot Act. Obama is a traitor with the NDAA. There shall be no excuses. No exceptions. Especially from our "own." We are not like them.
I have read all the legal arguments in support of this travesty and each one is easily defeated by any first year law student. Any advocate of the Act could drive a semi-tractor trailer through the language which supposedly limits it's application to AQ.
There was no excuse for signing it. Obama could have *EASILY*, with NO adverse repercussions from the people, put his foot down and said NO, with a infallible argument for doing so; receiving a new and proper Bill. But instead, his original veto threat was solely based on a perceived loss of his discretion in matters of detention and persecution. His veto threat had nothing to do with defense of civil liberties for Americans.
Even Dianne Feinstein's proposed amendment to except American citizens on American soil was defeated. What does that tell you?
Along with the NSA placing child porn in your hard drive, or spooks finding your dalliance with young girls (ala Scott Ritter and Julian Assange) this is another arrow in the quiver of those who are out to silence YOU when you finally wake up. By then, it will be too late. When "they came . . ."
 
 
-2 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-02 15:49
Huck Mucus, You speak like a master orator until you get to your last paragraph with your creepy pedophilia metaphor as an example and you lose any scholarship or dignity that might have accompanied your post.
 
 
0 # Huck Mucus 2012-01-02 17:40
By your comment am I to believe that you doubt those tactics are used against those who oppose the 1%? Think about it. You and I can be rolled up under the NDAA and won't be missed, but high profile figures like Ritter and Assange can't just "disappear" without an uproar. The only way to silence them is with something the 99% agrees is evil.

In other words, you are correct about it being "creepy" but you are dead wrong about it being a metaphor.
 
 
+5 # Dion Giles 2012-01-01 20:58
I am quoting this from a cyber contact who will certainly not mind his comment being passed on:
======================
"I want to clarify that my administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens," Obama said in a statement Saturday. "Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a nation."

Obama lies when he speaks, tells truth when he signs legislation.
==========================
 
 
+4 # madp4400 2012-01-01 23:04
WTF is going on with this President. I voted for him and feel so completely bambuzzled. He surrounds himself with wall street fat cats; services up totally week financial regulations that were supposed to keep them from destroying the economy again and yet they are back to unethical business as usual. He escalated the wars and all of bush/rummy/rove dirty slimy executive manuevers to inhibit citizens rights, etc.etc. Why the F*CK is no one running against this dude on the dem ticket? We are sick of the status quo and Barack was just more of the same. "Change you can believe in". Bullsh*t!
 
 
+2 # patric0505 2012-01-02 11:41
You basically just typed out what I have been wondering and seriously stressing still to 100% Obama supporters. He has failed the middle-low income that bloody voted in majority for him....I am just lost for words...
 
 
0 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-02 15:55
patric0505: You said the same thing as madp4400 but so much better because you did not find it necessary to use four-letter words or make crude remarks which are so immature and undignified.
 
 
0 # colvictoria 2012-01-03 09:52
How does Michelle Obama put up with this charade? Have they done a mind control operation on her? Has she been drugged or just told to keep her mouth shut or else?
I feel for her and her daughters because Obama will go down in history as the president who allowed the 1% to take over this country, limit our civil rights and give free reign to the military industrial complex to colonize any country with resources.
If Mrs Obama were president I am not so sure she would go along with the status quo. Unfortunately TPTB have diminished her as a fashionista and a spokeswoman for military families families who have been torn apart because of Obama's policies.
 
 
+2 # Steve5551 2012-01-02 07:25
Hey Ganymede,
Personally, I find no comfort in Obama or "a complete takeover by the Democratic party of U.S. Government". The vast majority of the Democrats, not all, but most are just like Lindsey Graham, John McCain and Carl Levin. They are at the beck and call of big money, foreign cash-ladened-lo bbyists and the military-indust rial crowd. I do love and appreciate Dennis K, and those of his stripe but they are few and far between. Obama certainly isn't one. When Obama broke ties with his truth telling pastor, Jeremiah Wright, he said all we really needed to know about him. He wants to get elected no matter if he has got to sell his soul or our civil liberties. He will be hanging around the Bush Compound just like Billy Graham and Bill and Hillary once the Trilateral Commission dismisses him with a certificate saying, "Job well done there , BOY".
 
 
+2 # Margery 2012-01-02 11:57
It never matters what is said. It only matters what is actually done. Obama's track record of action serves only the 1%. De-colonize America.
 
 
0 # Billy Bob 2012-01-02 20:42
I think Obama serves the 2%. That's why conservatives who believe in only servicing the top 1% consider him a socialist.
 
 
0 # Olenska 2012-01-02 16:39
13 senators led by Feinstein, Franken and Udall of Colorado are drafting a Due Process Guarantee Law to undo the damage. It contains a rights-killing phrase "except pursuant to an Act of Congress", since the NDAA was an act of congress, the bill will be pre-nullified. That phrase has to be removed in order for it to have any use to us. Contact one of their offices on ?Tuesday and demand that the phrase be removed from the bill, then call your reps and demand that they sign it or you will never vote for them and do all in your power to get them unelected. The House has a companion bill. 45 Dems in the House voted NO on NDAA, so there is more support there. all Repubs except Rand Paul voted to kill the constitution
 
 
+1 # Barracuda87 2012-01-02 17:04
Obama is a Coward, a Liar, and a Sell-out... This was the last straw... I will NEVER vote for him ever again.
 
 
0 # ninya61@yahoo.com 2012-01-02 18:42
Does this also apply to illegal immigrants? It seems that they have more rights than citizens and now we have another law that could destroy our country from within. I think he should have refused to sign this bill.
 
 
0 # colvictoria 2012-01-03 09:16
@ninya61 Are you kidding? Obama's policy of rounding up and deporting 400,000 illegals a year is worse than Bush's! Please watch Maria Hinajosa's special with FRONTLINE on Obama and immigration.
 
 
0 # RnR 2012-01-03 04:06
Does this bill apply also to Congress itself? They would be the most anti-american group I'm aware of, and I can't even look at O anymore.

What traitors. But hey, oh well, BOA, CITIGROUP et. al. are smiling and we all know that's all that matters.
 
 
0 # colvictoria 2012-01-03 09:13
Wow I have read all of these posts (late I know)and I have to say it is deeply unsettling. Maybe we should all start packing our bags and find refuge in Canada or start buying land somewhere away from the US and start a homesteader movement.
Obama a CIA agent?(RMDC & J Locke post)That doesn't surprise me at all.
Like many people I feel betrayed, cheated, violated by Obama. What a deception! How well he convinced so many of us with his good looks, his amazing oratory skills, his intelligence and brilliance.
Lots of great ideas about what to do next but even though I agree wholeheartedly with Ron Paul's foreign policy I cannot help but feel that little tug in my belly telling me not to fall for the rhetoric.
I think this defense bill he just signed also considers the fact that there are many militia groups forming all across the country. To the gov't they are considered "terrorists" just like members of the OWS movement. Left, Right, atheists, fundamentalists etc..people are angry. How do we find common ground as Americans and save it from becoming a fascist state?
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN