ACLU: Obama signed one of the most controversial bills since the Patriot Act

When will the Obama-bots admit that Obama is worse than Bush?

Obama signs NDAA into law, dismantles Bill of Rights
http://www.examiner.com/independent...signs-ndaa-into-law-dismantles-bill-of-rights

 

This is a huge outrage. Good on you for calling attention to it. But Obama would have to be in office 100 years before coming close to being worse than Bush.

A lot of conservatives support this bill. So much for the "liberal" Obama canard. He is a moderate who leans right on some issues and leans left on other issues. His record shows this clearly. Of course I understand that Republicans have made it their game plan to consider any Democrat a liberal as it is the worst epithet they can imagine (along with "socialist", of course, which to them, means one and the same thing).

This should and WILL be challenged in the courts but don't look for the right-wing dominated Roberts SCOTUS to overturn this.

 

So much for Obama's 'transparency' promise..... "If you vote for me, I promise I'll give you the most transparent presidency in the history of this country! I promise that b/f any bill is passed, the Americans can read it on the internet for 5 days......" well, it sounded good and the gullibles sucked it up and voted him in and here we are - now having our rights shredded behind our backs...........

He sure is a sneaky little cockroach, isn't he?

Where's the ACLU when we need them?

 

Its nothing more then conservative hysterics; any "deliberate vagueness" of the laws are subject to the judicial process so there are checks and balances to see that a madman doesn't take it to extremes.

 

You have to understand that Obama is used to leading with a super majority. He's never had to deal with pesky things like dissent. Silly Bill of Rights. Who needs them?

 

no checks because of obamas stacking of the supreme court with feminists

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_Supreme_Court_candidates
and if he wins and gets another 4 years, there maybe more conservatives replaced

 

Liberals hate Freedom and always force their utopias to the free citizens.Once getting power Obama will not easy give it away. America is ongoing to became a communist prison, ask Palin or Cain to run, otherwise it will be too late.

 

In President Obama's defense I don't think this is a big deal.

This sounds like a very obscure provision that will never be used unless something like massive terrorist attacks strike the U.S.

 

It's called getting a dose of reality. All his and the leftist hype about Bush came to roost on him.

 

I have always been against this legislation and always will be. RWers are so bent on the invalid notion that 2nd Amendment rights are being taken away, capitulated to the 4th Amendment rights being taken away.

The precedence was set with the Patriot Act, RWers rationalized for it, now look at what is being done.

 

gamewell45 wrote: "... any "deliberate vagueness" of the laws are subject to the judicial process so there are checks and balances to see that a madman doesn't take it to extremes."

NEWS@TEN... The problem with your premise is that the power elite have already learned that lesson. There will always be the pretense of a democracy. So your "madman" scenario isn't apt to materialize or be so clear to see. As your faith in the status-quo is proof of! ... From the OP:

"The sad part is that neither the House nor the Senate nor Obama seemed to think it was all that controversial, as it passed overwhelmingly in both the House and the Senate, and the president just signed it (even though he had at one time threatened to veto)."

All your leader could do for us is acknowledge the vagueness of the bill's language:

"My Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens."

Whatever meaningful difference you think you see, I assure you, it's a mirage!

 

I agree. The problem is most Americans are indifferent to these atrocious actions.

 

If you have no faith in the system, then work within it to make the changes you feel the country needs.

 

Passed overwhelmingly in both houses? Then its safe to assume that those who voted for it did so based on their constituency's input. If the President threaten at one time to veto the bill, its quite plausible to assume that whatever he originally objected to was removed from the bill, whereby his objection was dropped.

 

You mean Washington establishment republicans. Not conservatives.

 

So now the ACLU is conservative?

 

How many constituent's even knew this was happening?

 

one liner thread please try again