A Gut-Check Moment for Mr. Obama

[WilliamPitt]

President Barack Obama during a news conference in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, on November 28, 2011. (Photo: Doug Mills / The New York Times)

A Gut-Check Moment for Mr. Obama
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed

Wednesday 30 November 2011

When George W. Bush left office, and John McCain went down to defeat, there was a sense among a great many Americans that a tremendously dangerous nightmare was over, that years of wildly violent, constitutionally questionable, unbelievably expensive and morally appalling over-reaction to 9/11 were behind us, that an America which didn't use the NSA to spy on virtually anyone, an America that didn't indefinitely detain people without due process of law, that didn't torture, that didn't consign millions to death and maiming by way of wars based on lies and the desire to make money while winning elections...a lot of people thought that America might show its face again.

But that was Hope and Change and all that stuff. The dreary fact of the matter is that the slash-and-burn attitude taken towards the US Constitution by the Bush administration did such tremendous damage to the most basic underpinnings of this society that it was widely feared there would be no going back. After all, any politician who has gotten to the point where the office of the President is even a possibility is a politician absolutely drenched in hubris, ego, and a desire for personal power. It cannot be any other way; there are no angels flying in that rarefied atmosphere of American politics, and my rule of thumb for many years now has been that a politician most people have heard of is, to one degree or another, an utter and complete bastard, for only utter and complete bastards have the will and ruthlessness to achieve such heights...and when it comes to presidents and serious presidential contenders, multiply that by a factor of ten. I've met a great many of them on too many campaign trails, and trust me, almost none of them are people you'd like to be stuck in an elevator with, much less allow them to run the country.

The point is, there are not many politicians at that level of political power who have the kind of personal integrity that would allow them to walk away from the extraordinary powers the Bush administration laid claim to by Executive fiat. Those powers were still intact, just waiting for the next president, and it was to be hoped that Mr. Obama would turn out to be one who would actually lay aside the contra-constitutional "Unitary Executive" powers left for him by Mr. Bush, the kind of swell guy his campaign pitched to the country during the seemingly-endless 2008 presidential race. After all, Mr. Obama repudiated Guantanamo Bay, lamented America's ravaged international reputation, and swore not only to restore the rule of law to America, but that his administration would be the most transparent in American political history.

It hasn't quite worked out that way. There is honor, there is integrity, and there is this administration, the very living definition of "half a loaf." They haven't been so bad, but they've been very far from good. Sure, Mr. Obama hasn't lied us into wars that got hundreds of thousands of people killed, but he and his people have fallen far short of fulfilling the promises made to make right what had gone so wildly and conspicuously wrong with the manner in which American government goes about its business. Pressing questions have been raised regarding exactly what kind of man the president is, where his integrity lies, and why he has spent so much of his first term either in retreat, or fully embracing the very policies he campaigned against so eloquently.

Well, I'm not going to go so far as to say that one stroke of his pen can undo all that disappointment, but I am damned sure of one thing: this president has before him a gut-check moment of great significance. If he gets it right this time, a portion of faith will be restored. If he blows it, well...as Shakespeare reminds us, one may indeed smile, and smile, and be a villain.

The gut-check moment has been set in motion by Senators Levin, McCain, and the Senate Armed Services Committee...

The rest: http://www.truth-out.org/gut-check-moment-mr-obama/1322618578

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

1. Treason!

[DeSwiss]

44. Exactly.

- K&R

[Huey P. Long]

2. Diminished expectations call this a 'gut-check'. Anybody got a microscope? -eom

[DJ13]

10. .......

In the past we fell in love, and got hurt in the process.

[gkhouston]

43. I didn't fall in love, but I did expect a Democrat who taught Constitutional law

would want to roll back the abuses of the Bush Administration.

[MineralMan]

3. Unrecced for never getting to the meat of the issue at all.

The information is at the link, and the poster is the author. Why not include the actual measure the President says he will veto? Why not give us the meat, rather than just the gravy?

The post that follows yours in the Latest list has the information you omitted. It is by far the better post on this subject.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2404881

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

6. Snap!

You've been Served!

[GeorgeGist]

92. OP rec'd twice ...

to offset your intellectual laziness.

[emcguffie]

94. Thanks for reminding me to recommend it. N/t.

[Arctic Dave]

4. "half a loaf"

Yeah, that's him in a nutshell.

[tabatha]

5. He said he would veto it.

Did the author miss that?

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[WilliamPitt]

8. You have trouble clicking provided links?

[MineralMan]

12. Obviously not. I read the entire article, which is why I posted

what I posted. You included everything but the actual topic of the article. The result was a typical slam at Obama, without even revealing what it was that you were slamming him for. Why? Because he has said that he will veto this, and that's not convenient to your argument.

Because I read the article at the link, I know this. The other poster, who posted just before you, actually covered the real story. You did not in your post, even though you could have posted the entire article, since you wrote it and it is in the Commons.

See the other post for an example of how this sort of thing should be handled on DU, in my opinion:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2404881

[Name removed]

13. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ignis]

124. "but it doesn't serve to damn President Obama, so it's not included here"

So, did you confirm with Mr. Pitt that that was indeed his intention, or do you have some sort of magic Telepathy Hat?

[WilliamPitt]

9. Jesus.

Click the link.

[TheWraith]

11. I, for one, would never give a rag like Truthout the value of my traffic. nt

[WilliamPitt]

15. Well, thanks for kicking the thread.

[mmonk]

66. LOL

[WilliamPitt]

68. My favorite reply

:)

[mmonk]

69. Deserves another kick.

:thumbsup:

[WilliamPitt]

70. Thanks

old friend.

:hug:

[WillyT]

133. And Another Kick !!!

:hi:

:kick:

[sabrina 1]

77. Lol, and here's another kick!

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[WillyT]

73. Bwahahahahahaha !!!

Yeah... Sure...

:evilgrin:

:hi:

[Ignis]

123. Sticking to the WSJ Opinions page, are you?

[MineralMan]

14. Jesus!

Post the actual information. President Obama says he will veto the thing you did not even bother to describe in your DU post. I know what it is. President Obama knows what it is. You know what it is. Why post without making it clear to the reader? Again, see the better post that was made just before yours:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2404881

[WilliamPitt]

16. Thanks for kicking the thread.

[hifiguy]

22. Obama has said a lot of things

only to then roll over and cave in when nudged, much less pressed. I no longer trust the man any farther than I could throw him and just three years ago I voted for him with more enthusiasm than I had ever had for a presidential candidate. And my votes for president go all the way back to Carter in 1976.

[DocMac]

27. I agree! And this time...

...this time I am seriously drawing a line in the sand. He must veto this Bill. Or i'll....

[frylock]

35. word up

[a2liberal]

91. Exactly

Obama saying he'll veto it means about as much to me as all his other broken promises.

[sabrina 1]

78. Obama has said a lot of things only to turn around and do

something else. People have learned to take what he says with a grain of salt.

When he actually keeps that promise, then it will be a story. Meanwhile, 'Obama says' only reminds people of what he said about the FISA bill eg, or about Offshore Drilling, or the Mandate, or Deficit Commissions among other things.

People of integrity, and that was part of the OP, do not make promises they do not intend to keep, or at the very least they fight to try to keep them. The OP is correct, sadly we have learned, that there is very little integrity or honor in DC.

[U4ikLefty]

83. We heard this one before....public option anyone?

[emcguffie]

95. I think maybe you have control issues.

It really goes down much better when you let other people do the things they do the way they prefer to do them. Then you do the things you do the way you prefer to do them.

It applies in all kinds of situations, right on down to religion and what women do with their uteruses. I like Mr. Pitt's writing; I enjoyed reading it. But then my opinion is different from yours. So maybe you could go read the thread you like and enjoy it, and leave those of us who like this article to enjoy it? But actually it is entirely up to you to do what you choose to do yourself. Isn't it?

[frylock]

34. obama sez a lot of shit

[Bandit]

40. He said he would close Gitmo also...In fact he has said a lot of things

and I for one am still waiting for him to act upon those things...

[midnight]

47. I hope he will veto it too, but I suppose the author addressed that via

the hope phrase. That it was a euphemism that came and sadly went. I want to be wrong, in fact I hope I'm wrong....

[markpkessinger]

132. I think the author is waiting to see if the President fulfills that veto promise n/t

[KoKo]

17. K&R! Gut Check Moment, Indeed. eom.

[OhioChick]

18. K&R n/t

[hifiguy]

19. Great piece, Will.

:thumbsup:

[Hutzpa]

21. I'm confused

Why would Senator Levin betrayed us like this?

I sincerely believe this president is not part of this spying movement but some within his
administration are conducting business as usual with the hope that president will not find
out their misdeeds toward the American people, it is more than likely that some with the
administration are taking advantage of 'Chain of Command' everything in government is done
by chain of command and it won't surprise me the slightest that some are abusing their
power.

This is something the president has not really paid attention.

[wiggs]

23. Levin falling on his sword so that PObama can veto a highly visible bill

to protect americans and expose mccain and gop?

Political move to point out differences between gop and dems....goes to framing a message that Pitt discusses in first paragraph of OP. We hope that dems will govern differently and maybe this is a way to make that point.

[Blue_In_AK]

25. I'm sick of political games,

and what you describe is gamesmanship of the worst kind.

[KoKo]

29. Agree...if Levin would do that it would be a political stunt and not worth what

many of us thought of him.

[joshcryer]

55. No way, that's how the Republicans play. Remember when we forced the Republicans...

...to rush to vote no on their own laws?

[KoKo]

61. I guess I could look on it that if "Levin is pulling a Political Stunt," and it's good

to get the message out about how the MIC is manipulating us and these Endless WARS...then it could be seen by us Dems as a great COUP! A success by Levin.

Still, I see it as dirty tactics and not why I'm a Democrat...though. It's to dirty for me to think is a good thing going forward with "party building" for a NEW generation. :shrug:

[joshcryer]

54. Yep.

[emcguffie]

96. I have the same question.

What is Mr. Levin getting out of this? Why is he doing it? why are so many Dems going along with this? WHY??????

[BlueIris]

24. To me, the gut check moment is whether or not he should continue in office.

I mean that in the most respectful, but serious way possible. I am not advocating not voting for him or not voting Democrat 2012. I feel, as I have for more than a year, that he does not want this job, and therefore, that his ability to do it well is severely compromised.

[dtexdem]

26. This is one Obama had better veto.

And the vote against stripping the provisions showed that a veto likely could not be overturned in the Senate.

[AtomicKitten]

28. Pres O warned the Senate he would veto the bill if it contained the indefinite detention provision.

http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/164430/white-house-stands-up-to-senates-vote-for-indefinite-military-detention/

[KoKo]

30. Will Pitt has that in his article. You needed to read the whole article at the link...

or the thread which has pointed out that the whole article included the veto comment.

[AtomicKitten]

31. I read it and wonder why that germaine tidbit was virtually buried in the piece.

[WilliamPitt]

33. Building towards the conclusion.

Making sure the stakes are clear.

Etc.

[AtomicKitten]

37. With O's veto threat out there, how/why did this get past Senate Dems to begin with?

@joshtpm - How can the Dems stop the Republican agenda when they only control the Senate and White House?

[AtomicKitten]

42. The Senate shot down an amendment to exclude American citizens 61-38. WTF?!!

That took plenty of Democrats to block. I repeat ... WTF?

[KoKo]

56. I don't think Will Pitt "intentionally" deceived you with you not finding the quote..

all you had to do was read the whole article at the Link he gave to where he writes his blog. He's not obligated to "give for free" his whole article when he writes for a living at another Blog Site that pays him.

It's up to You...to do the work of reading the article and not to complain because it wasn't "force fed you" here on DU. :shrug:

[WilliamPitt]

60. +1

[KoKo]

63. Whatever...go over to the site and READ Pitt's Full article. Quote from Obama Veto is there...

What he said is a good read and thank him for saying it... Sheesh the folks "nitpicking" is disgusting.

I say this as a "huge nitpicker" myself...but this goes beyond...picking nits...it's absurd the folks thinking that Pitt wrote article without giving proper "quote" to Obama's great VETO PROMISE!

Blech.

[AtomicKitten]

82. I didn't imply he did; I questioned why the veto threat was given short shrift.

I wondered why the author didn't seem to grasp the crux of this story and that is the shocking number of Democrats joining with Republicans to pass this POS legislation in the Senate. I want to know why the fuck these Senate Democrats are trying to rewrite the constitution and instead got a passive-aggressive preemptive chastising of the guy that issued the veto threat. That may be good enough for some folks here and jeebus knows that Naomi Wolf article sure demonstrated that, but it's just not the story here.

[emcguffie]

97. I think maybe the main point wasn't the veto threat.

It was the stakes involved.

And most of us recognize that Obama doesn't always do what he says he will do. So yeah, big deal, he said he would. But will he? That's the gut check moment.

If the fact that he said he would meant he actually would, then the questions presented in that article -- the entire content and matter of that article -- would not exist in the first place, and we wouldn't be having this conversation.

And to add to that question, why in God's name are so many Dems going along with this?

[WilliamPitt]

98. It's an election year.

"Strong on Defense" still works.

:(

[AtomicKitten]

102. I wonder if you are aware

that many folks in this thread giving you a high-five call you a 'douche wannabe writer' elsewhere on the internet. It's true and easily verifiable. Keep that in mind when you snuggle up to their K&R and know that virtually anything negative about the president is rewarded here in that way.

[WilliamPitt]

106. I am well aware of my reputation here.

I'm also aware that I am among the 0.001% of DU posters who puts his name to everything I post here. It's easy to be a dick when you're anonymous. I am also aware of the value of my work, and how it extends beyond this fucked-up little sandbox. Opinions may differ, but that's the magic of it all.

I will live with the ignominy of people calling me names on DU.

And thanks for kicking my thread.

[trumad]

110. Allow me to jump in here and say...

that I call Pitt a douche on a daily basis simply because he's a Patriots fan.

Seriously--- I know Will Pitt---I've drank Whiskey with Will Pitt--- I've smoked Camel Cigarettes with Will Pitt 1400 steps away from Fenway park----I've met his beautiful wife---I've cussed with him, laughed with him... and trashed Republicans like they've never been trashed before...

I know the character of this Man....

SO LET ME SAY THIS IN SHOUTING CAPS---

WILL PITT COULD GIVE A FLYING FUCKING SQUIRRELS ASS WHAT SOME ANONYMOUS CHEETOS EATING KEYBOARD WARRIOR DOUCHEBAG SAYS ABOUT HIM.

NUFF SAID

[LaurenG]

112. I'll mannered post. Something a coward would do, I'd say you just

stabbed all your online buddies in the back while proving what a ill-mannered poster you are.

[AtomicKitten]

114. Correction: It proves what hypocrites people can be.

You know who you are ... and on edit none are my "on-line buddies," in fact quite the opposite. Your swerve into subterfuge falls flat because most DU'ers are aware of the swill coming from Site B.

[LaurenG]

115. Very cruel and un-necessary. nt

[WilliamPitt]

116. (headdesk)

People need fucking hobbies.

Seriously.

[RetroLounge]

121. Wow, example of Doucheosity

:puke:

RL

[WilliamPitt]

126. "Site B"?????

What is this, Jurrasic Park?

Gad zooks, what amazing asshattery.

Site B.

:rofl:

I think a lot of people here and on Site B need to go outside more often. Like once.

Jesus.

(facepalm x facepalm)

[myrna minx]

127. Perhaps she meant site B(ees)?

:D

[LaurenG]

128. What are you talking about "swerve into subterfuge"and what is site b

You seem to have me confused with someone else. I think that your nasty statement speaks volumes about you and you did a great job of showing this entire board what depths you'll sink to just to make a point.

[rtassi]

131. Wow! are you full of SHIT!

[AtomicKitten]

99. I didn't say that it was. I said ...

...the crux of this story .. is the shocking number of Democrats joining with Republicans to pass this POS legislation in the Senate

Regarding the veto threat, curiously if the president said he would sign the bill or if he had said nothing or if as in this case he said he would veto the bill, all earn him the exact same disdain here. But I digress.

I repeat and here's the story ...

why the fuck (are) these Senate Democrats .. trying to rewrite the constitution?

[emcguffie]

129. Maybe I posted in the wrong spot.

I agree with you entirely.

I had to step away and have kind of lost track here. But my reply was intended for someone who kept asking why the fact that Obama said he would veto this was "buried" in the article. I don't think that's the point of the article. But I said what I meant about that, so... never mind.

I agree entirely with you on the why the fuck are our Dems doing this? Are they making money hand over fist or something, from this eternal fake war business?

[Juneboarder]

32. Mr. Pitt

I thoroughly enjoy reading all of your postings, including this piece here. I don't understand what others aren't seeing, as the title is "A Gut Check Moment For Obama" and then goes into detail about the keypoints leading up to the gut check/veto moment. Seems pretty clear to me.

I do hope, for the sake of our country, that President Obama follows through with this threat/promise.

[frylock]

36. knr

[AntiFascist]

38. Well, at least he can get plenty of campaign funding from the corporations n/t

[sad sally]

39. Excellent piece with a burning question as to why hasn't the

President, who claims to want the most transparent government in history (which has proven to be a false statement), not questioned why "These provisions were added by Levin and McCain in secret and without a single hearing. What's the big deal?" Read Ralph Lopez's take on why it's a big deal:
#####

Why would Founders create a class of criminal, "domestic enemies" of the "United States Constitution," if there were no such thing?

If you think soldiers won't do it, think again. Some of the stupidest people on Earth join the Army, and they, in contrast to the many intelligent young patriots who join for the right reasons, will always be there. Reading blogs arguing about Posse Comitatus and martial law I've seen comments like "I expect I might be picking a few civvies (civilians) off the wire someday...but I like my home on base and my kids need the nice playground. Life is good."
----
The creation of a permanent state of war in the "war on terror" is precisely what the Founders warned of the most strenuously. McCain and Levin have treacherously undertaken to overturn the Bill of Rights of the Constitution permanently through this device. Since the Constitution, in the Oath of Office, essentially creates a class of criminal, a "domestic enemy" of the "United States Constitution," it is incumbent upon loyal senators to declare treason within their midst, and to direct the Sergeant at Arms to effect the arrest of John McCain and Carl Levin as such domestic enemies.

This has been a long time coming.

"Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. . . . inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and . . . degeneracy of manners and of morals. . . . No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare..." - James Madison

http://www.truth-out.org/arrest-mccain-and-levin-now-senate-vote-military-detention-americans/1322601515?du

An exception I take regarding "Some of the stupidest people on Earth join the Army" is that when in the Army or any other military institution, the drilled in message to to follow orders is there - no matter who insane or sometimes wrong they are..

[KoKo]

57. Truly...the questions mount and surely the Voters need to Know? That's Democratic Way...

Or so I thought. In the past years that thought seems to have gone "wayward"...but still..some of us keep asking the question. I commend Will Pitt for still asking the "questions."

[bertman]

74. I agree with most of what you wrote, Sally, but under the Uniform Code of Military Justice

it is the right of any military personnel to refuse to follow an unlawful order. Granted, the stupid ones may not even know it's unlawful, but the smart ones--and their are plenty of them--know the difference between lawful and unlawful.

Unfortunately, Levin and McCain are trying to make the unlawful lawful.

Indeed, they are traitors of the worst stripe.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

41. How long until he "compromises" with the fascists and settles for a "not as bad" bill?

Then, touts the bill as a victory for civil rights? And, of course, call it "necessary" to protect us from the bogeymen?

“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” H.L. Mencken

[bvar22]

45. Here is a video you will enjoy:

"Restore America’s Honor"
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-june-15-2010/respect-my-authoritah




You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[malthaussen]

49. It's a great video

Shame it's the truth.

-- Mal

[City Lights]

46. K&R.

Bookmarking, too. Some of the responses here are keepers.

[WilliamPitt]

48. Right?

(headdesk)

[spanone]

50. k&r...

[Autumn]

51. Excellent article Mr. Pitt. As always.

I'm bookmarking this just for the delight I have in some of the responses. You do know how to bring it out.:rofl: I believe it's a real gift, treasure it.

"There is honor, there is integrity, and there is this administration, the very living definition of "half a loaf."

I really do think he will veto it. No Democrat would ever allow this to become law. I hope so.

We shall see.
K/R

[WilliamPitt]

52. "We shall see"

Indeed.

:hug:

[tblue37]

53. Have you ever seen the movie _The Seduction of Joe Tynan_, with Alan Alda

as Joe Tynan?

The man enters politics as an idealist, meaning to do good, but at each step of his rise to power he must accept one or more compromises, until by the time he is in a position where he supposedly has the power to do the good he meant all along to do, he is so compromised that he cannot do anything at all except continue the status quo.

[KoKo]

58. To a lesser degree "The Candidate" is still a good watch. But, Obama must have seen same movies

...and he didn't LEARN? :shrug:

[KoKo]

59. There's also another political film...

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread694302/pg1

[krucial]

62. Obama

I was terribly sad disappointed from the time Obama said he was not going to look backward and investigate Bush/Cheney war criminals for their war crimes and treason,that led us into a war on an innocent Country,Iraq.
form that time i saw him as just the lesser of two evils.
But I also observed the fact that he was not going to be able to make much change form the get go when even before he formulated his first policy,the the GOP made it clear their main goal and purpose was to make sure Obama was a one term president and to see him fail,and so far they have successfully and have stayed true to their word,so I give him a little leeway,but I doubt he is going to get anything much done,for the last three years he has been bending over backward up and down,giving them almost everything they want,plus dissing and insulting those of us who have supported him,all in an effort in trying to appease the Republicans, so they might work with him on something to no avail.
Sometimes I feel he should never have run for that office,as an African american Man myself,i feel that most of the resistance he is getting from the Republicans and the right wing element of America,especially the Goodly godly Christian religious element,is because if his race,and his family background.
I don't think many Americans on the right ever got over, or accepted fact that he won the election,because they have felt violated,and is full of perpetual rage and anger because of it

[KoKo]

65. The best I can say and "hopeful" about Obama is that by just being himself

and not "rocking the boat" ....he's causing a whole "Hell of a Lot of Activism" out there because he seems so "compliant with the Wall Street Gang, Military Industrial Complex and Special Interest Think Tanks, that his very "inaction" has led to "revolt" which might in the long run be much better for moving America forward than if a "Rambo" type had won the election and came in hitting the ground running and prosecuting any and everyone who are of the vast "criminal class" on Wall Street, Government, Military Industrial Complex...and everywhere else these days.

I've not been a fan of his methods since he came into power...but...given what he was up against, I'm thinking that "laying low" and letting "WE, THE PEOPLE" take CHARGE...maybe was the best that could come out of it...and that might be the strongest part of his Presidency. That he knew to "Let THE PEOPLE DO IT"....because it was too overwhelming and corrupted already for him to be able to do it alone.

So...I'll give him that... Maybe it will work. Or, he is a "Placeholder" for the actions that will come after him. But, he couldn't have done it alone...and with the people he picked (or was told to pick) to run his administration before and after his inauguration.

Just saying...

[Jefferson23]

64. K&R, thanks very much. n/t

[mmonk]

67. Recommended.

[nashville_brook]

71. very well done. i'm bookmarking this too...

has Obama vetoed anything thus far?

[bertman]

72. Gut-check moment indeed. But, if past is prologue, well . . .

REC.

[JDPriestly]

75. Democrats in the House who voted for the bill are named at this website

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2011-375

[blackspade]

76. Good read.

[girl_interrupted]

79. K&R Excellent article, hope Obama does the right thing

The whole situation is frightening, to think of indefinite detention, it just boggles the mind. You want to think that couldn't possibly happen here, then you see the Senate voted in favor of it, so yes, yes it can. Just awful.

[burrowowl]

80. Obama, stand UP! and

VETO this Bill!

[Norrin Radd]

81. kr

[n2doc]

84. You undoubtedly remember the phrase defining insanity

And I think we have long passed the point where anyone can reasonably expect Obama to suddenly start to do the right thing in these matters. He is defined by his actions. And we have no real alternatives in 2012. Such is 'democracy' in the good ol' USA.

[Enthusiast]

85. President Obama has placed a lot of focus on national security.

Yet the greatest threats to our national security have gone un-addressed. There are several of these looming threats. We know them well.

One very serious threat is that American seniors and the disabled will lose their source of support and health care. This is much more tangible threat to millions of Americans than the threat from a group of ragtag terrorists in the mountains of Afghanistan.

Then, there is the very real threat that a Republican will be elected President. I can't emphasize enough the grave danger this represents.

A new Republican President will do everything we object to in Obama but five times over. For example, there is certain to be another war, this time with Iran. There will be wholesale environmental degradation because of relaxed standards and dangerous projects. And the above mentioned threat to medicare and social security will certainly come to fruition. If you want a preview of the threat a Republican President represents you only need to look at the arrogant bullying style of governance we see in Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio and Florida. Imagine a president like Rick Scott, Scott Walker or John Kasich. These guys are like Reagan on steroids.

Obama's greatest sin? His actions/inactions have placed us in this perilous position.

[stlsaxman]

86. Well done, Mr. Pitt.

K&R

[MissDeeds]

87. K&R

[chill_wind]

88. K & R.

[Samantha]

89. I liked this thread, WilliamPitt

Sometimes I feel you go a tad overboard in your language in some of your threads, but I can't say that with this one. You are exactly correct, and it will be very interesting to see how President Obama deals with this horrendous issue.

Sam

[Flora]

90. If this bill passes,

the very first "terrorists" arrested for threatening harm to this country should be the entire U.S. Senate.

[Owl]

93. K&R

[Douglas Carpenter]

100. knr

[loudsue]

101. There definitely needs to be hearings on WHY these men put that language in the bill

They both need to be put under a VERY PUBLIC MICROSCOPE, and questioned about their benefactors, and who in the hell is behind them trying to sabotage our constitution like that.

We really need to get to the bottom of what is happening to our freedoms. And THIS is one of the prime reasons why the bush administration should have faced justice.

[roman7]

103. you seem to have answered your your own questions

most of us believed that to be able to run for president the person would be the worst of the worst & then go on to say that president obama is serving with honor & integrity . i will vote for president obama. at 58 years old ive seen enough of the mind boggling horror the the repukes deal out 24/7.

[Vinnie From Indy]

104. LOL!

Obama has clearly traded any integrity he had in order to be allowed to hold the office. There is more of a chance that Jesus will suit up and play QB for the hapless Colts this weekend than Obama scaling back the Bush era assaults on our Constitution. I am amazed that anyone still believes that Obama serves anyone other than the same folks GW Bush served. Willfull ignorance seems to be the modern plague ravaging America today.

[roman7]

108. willfull ignorance is thinking there is no difference between bush & president obama

[Vinnie From Indy]

111. It seems to me that the differences are merely in style and presentation

Cheers!

[truedelphi]

105. The puppet likes the puppetty strings -

Those strings attach him to the MIC. And all its glorious campaign funds.

In return, during a huge deep Depression devastating over 35 states, with no relief from the banks that received Trillions, the Obama gubment has given over 200 Billions of dollars to UAE states to help with the coming war against Iran.

And included in that figure is a few "modernizing" weapons programs - programs our military commanders say must continue if we are not to become a second class military nation!

Just because we are more powerful then the next twenty five nations combined doesn't mean we shouldn't continue to spend money on weapons. Let the people eat the $ 89K Howitzers, if they don't have any cake!

[roman7]

107. oops two times

[defendandprotect]

109. Obama's record stands --

"fool me once" comes to mind quite a few dozen times --

If that isn't clear enough at this point, what would be?

Wow!

[Shining Jack]

113. Kick! Sorry to be late so I could rec.

Great article. :thumbsup:

[ZombieHorde]

117. Lack of thesis statement... hurts... my... poor.. little... sensibilities....

Aaaahhhhhh!!!!

[Major Hogwash]

118. Some of us knew this would be the price we'd pay for electing the first Black President of the U.S.

But, I guess after reading this article we gots to give back the White House to some whitebread cracker.
Probably from the South.
Have to go back to Texas and see if we can find another one as gawd damned dumb as Bush.

I guess this means that we have to vote for the other guy next year.
Even if he is named Willard.

"Half a loaf."
Geez, who wants that?

[WilliamPitt]

119. Your screen name suits your post.

And you know it.

[Major Hogwash]

130. The tv screens will soon be filled with scenes of our troops finally returning home from the war.

For the last time from Iraq and from Afghanistan.
For the holidays.
And for the next 7 months.

That's more than "half a loaf" to me.

And you know it.

[myrna minx]

120. Thank you for this article. Some of the responses here are astonishing.

Bookmarking.

[WilliamPitt]

122. Check out

#102.

My personal favorite.

;)

[Ignis]

125. Missed the R, but here's your K.

Nice one.

:kick:

[Solly Mack]

134. ...

bookmarking