TYT: Obama Signs NDAA, ACLU Disgusted

[pokerfan]

President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act into law despite 'serious reservations'. The Young Turks host Cenk Uygur breaks it down, including Obama's signing statements and finally, thoughts from the ACLU.

[tavalon]

1. Well presented Cenk

For shame, President Obama, for shame.

I know today is throw Cenk and Glenn under the bus day, but this was well articulated and quite correct. It wasn't okay when George Bush used signing statements and it isn't okay under President Obama. As well, signing statements really mean nothing, so by signing this into law, he is entrenching the worst of the Unitary Executive problem and it is a problem.

[tavalon]

2. Not to mention that OWS could easily

be categorized under this atrocity of a law. Indefinite detention. Sure, Obama says his administration won't use it and he's never reneged on a promise before.....

[Tx4obama]

3. Yeah well, someone needs to tell Cenk that some of us are disgusted with him ....

for saying that Democrats in Iowa should not support President Obama at the dem caucus.


Two related articles that are good reads:

Reality Check: Breaking Down Obama’s NDAA Signing Statement
http://www.politicususa.com/en/reality-obama-ndaa-signing-statement

Obama Signing Statement: The NDAA Doesn’t Apply To US Citizens
http://www.politicususa.com/en/obama-ndaa-statement

[truth2power]

4. So the ACLU has no cause to be concerned? n/t

[Leopolds Ghost]

5. So the law is a good one because it doesn't apply to US Citizens? Or because Obama signing statement

Just like we had a signing statement for the Patriot Act that used words to similar effect.

This law will be the first step in Alien & Sedition acts III (I being in the War of 1812 and II during World War I).

It Did Happen Here.

[Tx4obama]

6. Huh?

Where did you get all of that from?

The only thing that was commentary FROM ME that I typed was: "someone needs to tell Cenk that some of us are disgusted with him ...
for saying that Democrats in Iowa should not support President Obama at the dem caucus."

[ejbr]

20. Fair enough, but who's transgression is worse? n/t

[bowens43]

9. some here will sup[port obama

no matter how vile and disgusting his actions.

[ihavenobias]

13. It doesn't help Republicans and it might actually help Obama

At least that's what he honestly believes. So the question is, what specifically do you disagree with below (the bold in particular)?

"...But there is one thing we can do right now that doesn't really hurt the chances of the president getting re-elected and doesn't help Republicans one bit. It is an idea that Occupy Iowa came up with. In the Iowa caucuses you can vote for "uncommitted." In fact, since the 1970's "uncommitted" has won twice on the Democratic side and it beat Bob Dole in 1980. Of course, the Republican Party has shut down this option on their side. They say you can vote that way in the GOP field but they will not register those votes or send those delegates. Of course, they're the GOP; they have no interest in your dissent.

But if all of those people were to go and participate on the Democratic side, they might have an effect. If "uncommitted" beat President Obama on the Democratic side in Iowa, that would make some news. That might even get the attention of The Establishment. So far, he has only responded to right-wing pressure. He is the consummate politician, so if there was actually a little bit of pressure on his left he might have to respond to it, especially during an election season. Wouldn't it be amazing if President Obama acted like a progressive on some issue because he was worried about the voters?.."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/vote-against-obama-in-iow_b_1174314.html

[Tx4obama]

15. Here ya go

My post - comment #9 on another thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/100292080#post9

And a post by BootinUp comment #16: http://www.democraticunderground.com/100292080#post16

[ihavenobias]

16. The counterargument

1. Substantive criticism from the left creates pressure that can lead to better policies (and rhetoric). Better policies lead to an energized base and higher approval ratings in general. In other words, it helps win elections.

2. It helps politically by making the president appear more moderate in the eyes of the MSM and it fights the (laughable) right wing claim that President Obama is a radical leftist/Marxist.

[Tx4obama]

17. We will have to agree to disagree on this one ...

because telling Democratic voters in Iowa to not support President Obama in the caucus is only going to make it look like Democrats are not united, and the media will play it up as 'The Dems' turning on Obama.

Substantive criticism is one thing, not caucusing FOR the person that will be our nominee is something else.

Trying to put pressure on Obama DURING A STATE CAUCUS is a BAD idea,
there are better ways to get the point across other than refusing to show support for the president while the whole world is watching.
There is already too much badmouthing from the talking heads regarding Obama losing support,
there is no need for any more fodder to be tossed out to the GOP and to the talking heads of which they would gleefully giggle about and bash Obama about.
The GOP is already doing their best to make Obama look bad, WE Democrats should NOT do anything that helps them.

[Justice wanted]

7. +1000. Cenk lays it all out in simple English. Basically IF something happened to Obama today or

Tomorrow and Joe Biden became President HE and HIS Administration can ignore Obama's signing statement.

Take the Rose color glasses off for just one moment and ask yourself in a REpubican had sign this bill into law using this signing statement would you be happy with bill?

[pokerfan]

11. or Obama could simply issue another signing statement

reversing the position he took with the previous one. The signing statement is ultimately a meaningless gesture.

[Justice wanted]

12. exactly. People screamed when Bush did it and now Its okay when Obama does it.

[pokerfan]

14. now that it's law

all we can hope for at this point are benevolent presidents from now on.

[ScottLand]

8. This was my concern before over the torture issue. Obama didn't put an end to that either.

He simply categorized it as a difference in policy. The next administration may have another policy. Take a good look at the latest crop of GOP hopefuls - anyone there you suspect might torture or detain. Yes, we're screwed.

[phantom power]

10. Am I not merciful?

[Poll_Blind]

18. "I signed it into law, but I choose not to do it...unless I change my mind."

Too true. What a clusterfuck.

PB

[JJW]

19. It's 12 dimensional chess

Mr. O has a strategy to win. Calm down!

[independentLiberal]

21. why?

this goes against everything that Obama campaigned for.

[jennied]

22. Awesome, Cenk. As usual.