Latest Breaking News

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)

37. In a way, the outrage over this is a bit mis-directed though.

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 11:16 PM

Dec 2011

I think that no matter what Congress passes, it doesn't matter so long as we continue to give the powers of a king to the POTUS.

Far worse than detention without charges, indefinitely, is what has already happened, a US President ordering the assassination of US citizens without charges and trials, including an American teenager. I suppose we should be thankful 'for small mercies'. At lease those who end up detained indefinitely without charges, will still be alive, if you can call it that.

So does this bill really matter? Why do we need it? Congress has no power since the Patriot Act. When a president can order the killing of a US citizen and there is barely a peep from either party or their followers about it, we have already crossed a line that there may be no coming back from without some pretty drastic measures.

Thank you Kaleko, as always.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

62 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

White House issues statement saying it will not veto defense bill [View all] 99th_Monkey Dec 2011 OP

Gee, I wish this was a surprise. Zhade Dec 2011 #1

Your rule-breaking third-party advocacy aside, you're still wrong. TheWraith Dec 2011 #4

Supposedly bonnieS Dec 2011 #6

That's exactlly right, just ask Congress Woman Barbra Lee what she thinks of this teddy51 Dec 2011 #8

I'm afraid your right... midnight Dec 2011 #25

"...all the original bad and un Constituional policies remain." unkachuck Dec 2011 #34

It's not third party advocacy. Pab Sungenis Dec 2011 #9

I don't know about even that anymore. a simple pattern Dec 2011 #22

Not according to Barbara Lee, a woman whose word means something. sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #10

That response broke no rules, but your response is a clear threat to the poster and is repugnant. Warren Stupidity Dec 2011 #18

There is no third party advocacy in that post Bluenorthwest Dec 2011 #32

"rule-breaking", LOL. Go ahead and alert, then. Zhade Dec 2011 #52

If true, there go our rights fascisthunter Dec 2011 #2

This makes it officially no longer a democracy. a simple pattern Dec 2011 #21

Not suppposed to be a democracy but instead a constitutional republic 24601 Dec 2011 #31

And there's that 6th Amendment thingy. RUMMYisFROSTED Dec 2011 #43

The 6th Amendment is limited to criminal prosecutions - it does not apply to non-criminal 24601 Dec 2011 #57

It's no longer been a democracy, unofficially, since Nov. 22, 1963. Octafish Dec 2011 #44

The door to fear is wide open now. Sad. nt DocMac Dec 2011 #3

I think the door is open to the rest waking up.... midnight Dec 2011 #26

Gee, i am soooooooooo suprised... truebrit71 Dec 2011 #5

Yah! Someone quick, post that pic of Obama saying "I GOT THIS" ... puke ~nt 99th_Monkey Dec 2011 #39

That's it? dogknob Dec 2011 #7

"White House says no veto of defense bill"...associated press article chowder66 Dec 2011 #11

Thanks for the assist chowder 99th_Monkey Dec 2011 #42

Here's more: sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #13

I do have a link in the above post, but it is not showing as a link. sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #15

Is this the salient point... Kaleko Dec 2011 #23

It's very confusing. But what is NOT is that only seven Senators voted against the original version sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #24

Many thanks for your input. Kaleko Dec 2011 #30

In a way, the outrage over this is a bit mis-directed though. sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #37

That got my attn too ... not sure of the answer either. 99th_Monkey Dec 2011 #40

Where to Live ? Seriously marias23 Dec 2011 #12

Bouvet Island in the South Atlantic is now quite safe. AND remote. Claude_balloune Jan 2012 #59

Wow, what a surprise.... vi5 Dec 2011 #14

And thus the assembly of the Great American Police State continues ixion Dec 2011 #16

And that's why I posted this over a week ago, when several threads insisted the Prez would veto... markpkessinger Dec 2011 #17

Thank you.... midnight Dec 2011 #27

Not the same bill. joshcryer Dec 2011 #29

Also covered by CNN: White House drops veto threat on defense bill Poll_Blind Dec 2011 #19

Soooo . . . will there be waterboarding franchises in the future? colorado_ufo Dec 2011 #47

Waterboarding franchises now available! Claude_balloune Jan 2012 #58

But it remains very confusing what precisely it means emcguffie Dec 2011 #20

It sure does.... midnight Dec 2011 #28

"The provisions do not extend new authority to detain U.S. citizens," House Armed Services Chairman colorado_ufo Dec 2011 #48

Any bets on which way scotus is likely to weigh in on this? cstanleytech Dec 2011 #33

I haven't got a clue. emcguffie Dec 2011 #35

SCOTUS punted on the issue of indefinite detention in earlier cases. Vattel Dec 2011 #41

From the Huffington Post article dennis4868 Dec 2011 #36

So it doesn't apply to US citizens -- unless the prez wants it to. Zhade Dec 2011 #53

Third party not really third party, but second! karenbe111 Dec 2011 #38

Anderson is Nader-like clown with as many ex-wives as Gingrich Freddie Stubbs Dec 2011 #45

Anderson has been divorced two times -- several times fewer than Obama has broken campaign promises brentspeak Dec 2011 #54

Yeah, more campaign money! dmosh42 Dec 2011 #46

Oh, this is just wonderful! DeSwiss Dec 2011 #49

Hello Gitmo emilyg Dec 2011 #50

We will fight this. Civil disobedience is our weapon of choice. Jack Rabbit Dec 2011 #51

Right on! LadyInAZ Jan 2012 #60

of course not...and this is a democrat? katty Dec 2011 #55

The true irony is this. thescreaminghead Dec 2011 #56

If you don't speak out katsung47 Jan 2012 #61

+1 nt 99th_Monkey Jan 2012 #62