Obama spent New Year’s Eve signing the National Defense Authorization Act

posted at 6:00 pm on January 1, 2012 by Tina Korbe

President Barack Obama is still in Hawaii on vacation, but, yesterday, he managed to sign the $662-billion National Defense Authorization Act — a bill that has generated a fair share of controversy in the Capitol city. Even as he signed the bill, Obama added to the drama; he included a statement with his signature to express that he still has “serious reservations” about it. The Christian Science Monitor reports:

President Barack Obama signed a wide-ranging defense bill into law Saturday despite having “serious reservations” about provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation and prosecution of suspected terrorists.

The bill also applies penalties against Iran‘s central bank in an effort to hamper Tehran‘s ability to fund its nuclear enrichment program. The Obama administration is looking to soften the impact of those penalties because of concerns that they could lead to a spike in global oil prices or cause economic hardship on U.S. allies that import petroleum from Iran.

In a statement accompanying his signature, the president chastised some lawmakers for what he contended was their attempts to use the bill to restrict the ability of counterterrorism officials to protect the country.

Administration officials said Obama was only signing the measure because Congress made minimally acceptable changes that no longer challenged the president’s terrorism-fighting ability.

The controversy that has surrounded the NDAA is similar to outrage about the Patriot Act, as civil liberties groups and noted libertarians (Ron Paul!) have said that the provision that would allow the military to indefinitely detain terror suspects — even U.S. citizens arrested in the U.S. — without charge deprives citizens of due process.

With his qualified signature, the president tried to play it both ways — to authorize needed funds for the military and yet address the concerns of opponents of the bill. But it doesn’t seem to have worked. Almost all the comments on the #NDAA Twitter stream are outraged — and the fact that he signed it New Year’s Eve, when revelers were highly unlikely to notice, just adds to the irritation.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Section 1021.e: Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other person who are captured or arrested in the United States.

Rod on January 1, 2012 at 7:09 PM

I’m not a lawyer but assuming you are correct about what that passage means then it would indicate that the law wouldn’t even apply to real illegal alien terrorists captured in America, which doesn’t make sense either.

FloatingRock on January 1, 2012 at 7:18 PM

Oh you do, do you? You’re going to be the first one they’re going to lock away. /just kidding, I know what you meant.

FloatingRock on January 1, 2012 at 7:04 PM

Yeah, caught that after posting. When will I ever learn to preview?

Archimedes on January 1, 2012 at 7:19 PM

Key West Reader on January 1, 2012 at 7:13 PM

No worries; sorry I was short. I’m reading this and trying to watch Margin call at the same time. apologies for my bad manners.

Rod also raises an interesting point, however, and a provision that the ACLU and others have not adequately analyzed, IMO. My concern is still about what ‘existing laws and authorities’ means. We now have a de facto habeas corpus court w/the DC circuit which appears to give the government expansive deference w/r/t withholding information (for national security purposes) that a defedant normally would have access to in preparing his defense.

Mike Lee believes the detention provisions to expand authority to detain and believes it to be unconstitutional — he explains his view on the NDAA here.

Firefly_76 on January 1, 2012 at 7:23 PM

With his qualified signature, the president tried to play it both ways

Oh so he has both Reggie Bush and the Mooch with him too huh ?

burrata on January 1, 2012 at 7:26 PM

Under the radar

Council of “Governors”

There are only 10

Key West Reader on January 1, 2012 at 7:27 PM

I couldn’t care less about indefinitely detaining terror suspects. Do what you need to do. With many of these people, we should just lock them up and throw away the key.

bluegill on January 1, 2012 at 6:09 PM

Of course you don’t, Comrade, until you are the one detained indefinitely.

Texas is the only Republic in our Nation.

Key West Reader on January 1, 2012 at 6:59 PM

Yep, it’s my favorite state.

Peppa Pig on January 1, 2012 at 7:31 PM

In a statement accompanying his signature, the president chastised some lawmakers for what he contended was their attempts to use the bill to restrict the ability of counterterrorism officials to protect the country.

These governmentistas do not protect the country they do the opposite.

RasThavas on January 1, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Firefly_76 on January 1

Thanks.

The Bucs stink on ice. But, we cannot fire the coach.

Key West Reader on January 1, 2012 at 7:32 PM

I’m from the government and I’m here to protect you. Give me all your money and bend over.

RasThavas on January 1, 2012 at 7:33 PM

Rational Thought on January 1, 2012 at 6:36 PM

Sad, but true.

CPT. Charles on January 1, 2012 at 7:34 PM

couldn’t care less about indefinitely detaining terror suspects. Do what you need to do. With many of these people, we should just lock them up and throw away the key.

bluegill on January 1, 2012 at 6:09 PM
Of course you don’t, Comrade, until you are the one detained indefinitely.

My grand parents were ‘detained’ by the Nazi’s.

The detention didn’t last because they were self reliant.

Hence, there is me.

Key West Reader on January 1, 2012 at 7:35 PM

Firefly_76 on January 1, 2012 at 7:23 PM

Archimedes on January 1, 2012 at 7:19 PM

Apparently, the section I quoted is an amendment that was to be inserted into the final bill. Whether it was is another question that, at this time, I can’t answer. I hope it was and will find out.

Rod on January 1, 2012 at 7:35 PM

Yeah, caught that after posting. When will I ever learn to preview?

Archimedes on January 1, 2012 at 7:19 PM

: )

I hardly ever proof read let alone preview anymore but I should try to be more consciousness about it.

I wasn’t trying to nitpick, BTW. It was more of a humorous way to point out that bloggers who say the wrong thing may be at greater risk now than before.

FloatingRock on January 1, 2012 at 7:36 PM

Wow, my Trigger fish is eating flakes.

fish on welfare.

Key West Reader on January 1, 2012 at 7:38 PM

The problem with this is that the definition of “terrorism” can change. Fundamentally, terrorism is anything along the lines of “I am going to make your life hell until you give me what I want”. It doesn’t have to be any act of mass destruction. OWS could be classified as “terrorists” for blocking access to shipping ports, for example. The idea is to make you afraid of them so you give in to their demands. The mechanism by which they make you afraid of them doesn’t have to be murder.

They could simply classify anyone belonging to a political party of political movement as “terrorists” and use this law to round them up and jail them without charges and without trial.

This is clearly unconstitutional. I would sooner see every able bodied American issued an M16 than have a law like this on the books. In fact, I think TSA could better ensure security on airplanes by simply issuing all passengers a rather large knife. It would make the people on the flight more polite, too.

Sure beats taking people’s nail clippers away from them.

crosspatch on January 1, 2012 at 7:38 PM

The controversy that has surrounded the NDAA is similar to outrage about the Patriot Act, as civil liberties groups and noted libertarians (Ron Paul!) have said that the provision that would allow the military to indefinitely detain terror suspects — even U.S. citizens arrested in the U.S. — without charge deprives citizens of due process.

And along the way a very massive and extreme costly ‘security’ infrastructure and bureaucracy was created.

All successful tyrannies need this. It’s like a fish needing water or a Kennedy needing lots of worship and/or lots of alcohol. They can’t long survive without it.

The Patriot Act authorized the broad use of enhanced surveillance techniques and intelligence gathering while including domestic terrorism under the scope of the intelligence services and the Ft. Hood massacre was officially classified by the White House recently as a workplace related shooting.

“Patriot Act”: successful tyrannies must always, at a minimum, name things something very different from what they really are (War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength – you all here should know the drill by now) , least the sheeple awake from their stupor before it’s too late, and if the Overlords can name something the exact opposite of what it really is, then they have achieved … perfection. BTW, if you don’t fly every chance you get and submit you children and wife to be sexually molested you are not doing your patriotic duty.

“Workplace related shooting”: this is see no Islam, hear no Islam, speak no Islam, know no Islam, in all it’s gory, I mean glory, which is total submission to tyranny.

You have now heard a wump-wump on the one side and a wump-wump on the other side and this traditionally means it’s time to bend over and kiss your arse (and what’s left of your nation) goodby.

RasThavas on January 1, 2012 at 7:45 PM

I would sooner see every able bodied American issued an M16 than have a law like this on the books.

crosspatch on January 1, 2012 at 7:38 PM

Just FYI, every hoiusehold in Switzerland is issued a fully auto FN-FAL as part of their Nat’l defense. Given the relatively low gun crime their I’ve often wondered why we have not used this to refute gun contrl advocates.

Archimedes on January 1, 2012 at 7:46 PM

President Barack Obama is still in Hawaii on vacation

Shocker! The President and his grifter family is spending millions in taxpayer dollars on their entertainment. 2012 looks just like 2011.

With his qualified signature, the president tried to play it both ways

Again, 2012 is looking an awful lot like 2011. Same incompetent pathetic socialist in the White House. Same political games (like trying to sneak through legislation unpopular with commies by signing it on New Years when Obama lovers are nursing the hangovers they got partying with the occupy DC crowd). New year but same worthless jug-eared idiot making the same decisions that are bad for the nation. 2013 is going to be better when this SOB is out of power, his party discredited, and adults are in charge instead of Chicago street thugs.

Happy Nomad on January 1, 2012 at 7:47 PM

US => GITMO + (somewhere in the middle of…) MONTANA

BobMbx on January 1, 2012 at 6:45 PM

Let’s narrow down the scenario, just for fun. /

CPT. Charles on January 1, 2012 at 7:48 PM

Ouch! The typos just keep getting worse and worse, watching Hawks vs Cards isn’t helping.

Archimedes on January 1, 2012 at 7:48 PM

If you put this together with the Patriot Act provisions on detention of “terrorists”, along with the context of our current media and the historical record of the U.S. Supreme Court, you can’t help but get really nervous.
If any group get’s to be too much of a threat to the current regime, their leadership can be declared “domestic terrorists” without publication and they can be apprehended and detained outside the continental U.S. without benefit of counsel or habeus corpus in complete isolation.
And if you expect the New York Times or the Washington Post to come to your rescue, or for that matter the Supreme Court, you have to be living on some other planet. The media only cares about your rights if you’re a liberal threatening a conservative administration (ala Daniel Ellsburg, etal.) and the Supreme Court will just as likely decide that the government has a “compelling interest” in your disappearance and let the Constitution slide for awhile (ala Koromatsu and Bollinger, etal.).
Do you REALLY want a Progressive to be wielding this kind of discretion in this context and with their history?? Seriously???

Lew on January 1, 2012 at 7:49 PM

The bottom line is they will pick your azz up and haul your azz to jail. Get used to that. You don’t have to be Black anymore.

Key West Reader on January 1, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Ouch! The typos just keep getting worse and worse, watching Hawks vs Cards isn’t helping.

Archimedes on January 1, 2012 at 7:48 PM

The Bucs stink on ice.

Key West Reader on January 1, 2012 at 7:53 PM

Seven Percent Solution on January 1, 2012 at 6:23 PM

Here is an analysis of the legislation, but from a libertarian point of view.

DFCtomm on January 1, 2012 at 7:54 PM

Do you REALLY want a Progressive to be wielding this kind of discretion in this context and with their history?? Seriously???
Lew on January 1, 2012 at 7:49 PM

I’d like the Obama apologists and human shields to flood the media defending their Emir Hussain , on his acquiring despotic powers against Americans ,
and then play those soundbutes against what these same people had to say about Bush wanting to do surveillance of library records of jihadies in USA and phone calls from foreign jihady countries

burrata on January 1, 2012 at 7:58 PM

The “Patriot Act” is Orwellian for “Destroy the Constitution Act” and is the opposite of patriotism.

RasThavas on January 1, 2012 at 8:02 PM

DFCtomm on January 1, 2012 at 7:54 PM

Thanks for the link. It’s disturbing listening to McCain tout the safety of our men and women in uniform while he actively works to undermine the freedom and liberty so many died to protect.

FloatingRock on January 1, 2012 at 8:09 PM

it is tragic that the Rs always fall into barry’s trap…they must be some seriously dumb people

barry has asserted this years ago…as in..don’t worry if KSM is found not quilty because the evidence can’t be given…we’ll keep him locked up forever anyway!

someone of barry’s personality type is very comfortable with that.

from ZH

Levin again stressed recently that the bill applies to American citizens, and said that it was president Obama who requested that it do so:

Pres. Obama and many Members of Congress believe the President ALREADY has the authority the bill grants him. Legally, of course, he does not. This language was inserted to keep proponents and opponents of the bill appeased, while permitting the President to assert that the improper power he has claimed all along is now in statute.

and now barry signs this *reluctantly*…with signing statements so he can blame congress.

barry is all about Plausible Deniability..day in…day out.

I mean really…he yelled about habeas corpus for non-US persons endlessly..then throws citizens under the bus. Rs are the party of Stupid every efing time

r keller on January 1, 2012 at 8:16 PM

THE INAUGURATION OF POLICE STATE USA 2012. Obama Signs the “National Defense Authorization Act ”
Jan 1 2011
**********

ANNEX

Transcript of Signing Statement by President Barack Obama on H.R. 1540, December 31, 2011
************************

Today I have signed into law H.R. 1540, the “National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012.” I have signed the Act chiefly because it authorizes funding for the defense of the United States and its interests abroad, crucial services for service members and their families, and vital national security programs that must be renewed. In hundreds of separate sections totaling over 500 pages, the Act also contains critical Administration initiatives to control the spiraling health care costs of the Department of Defense (DoD), to develop counterterrorism initiatives abroad, to build the security capacity of key partners, to modernize the force, and to boost the efficiency and effectiveness of military operations worldwide.
(More…………….)
=======================

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=28441

canopfor on January 1, 2012 at 8:18 PM

I’m not a lawyer but assuming you are correct about what that passage means then it would indicate that the law wouldn’t even apply to real illegal alien terrorists captured in America, which doesn’t make sense either.

FloatingRock on January 1, 2012 at 7:18 PM

It makes absolute sense when viewed from the viewpoint of past decisions of the Supreme Court. Established law says that when the civil courts are capable of functioning in an area of the United States, civilians are subject to those courts and not to any military courts which might be operating in the same area. These types of stare decisis often guide the writing of later laws — so that the Court will not find them unConstitutional.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_Milligan

This is an extremely strong decision, coming as it did while Reconstruction was still in place in the South.

It’s obvious that the problem libertarians view as troubling might occur overseas, were our forces to capture an American citizen serving the enemy on a battlefield. Since Ex parte Milligan only covers trial of Americans, and not holding them in the event of a suspension of the writ of habeas corpus.

unclesmrgol on January 1, 2012 at 8:19 PM

i’m so sorry about the terrible error in the blockquotes

from ZH

Levin again stressed recently that the bill applies to American citizens, and said that it was president Obama who requested that it do so:

Pres. Obama and many Members of Congress believe the President ALREADY has the authority the bill grants him. Legally, of course, he does not. This language was inserted to keep proponents and opponents of the bill appeased, while permitting the President to assert that the improper power he has claimed all along is now in statute.

and now barry signs this *reluctantly*…with signing statements so he can blame congress.

barry is all about Plausible Deniability..day in…day out.

I mean really…he yelled about habeas corpus for non-US persons endlessly..then throws citizens under the bus. Rs are the party of Stupid every efing time

r keller on January 1, 2012 at 8:19 PM

Just FYI, every hoiusehold in Switzerland is issued a fully auto FN-FAL as part of their Nat’l defense. Given the relatively low gun crime their I’ve often wondered why we have not used this to refute gun contrl advocates.

Archimedes on January 1, 2012 at 7:46 PM

Switzerland has taken an approach to civilian crime not unlike the effect nuclear weapons have on international warfare; upping the ante tremendously until nearly nobody wants to start anything. When everyone and his brother has a machine gun – literally – most criminal acts are basically suicide missions.

My favorite comparison is a nation fighting an epidemic of arson by putting a big keg of gunpowder in every home and business. Everyone is suddenly compelled to keep an eye on everyone else, especially those with a penchant for playing with fire.

MelonCollie on January 1, 2012 at 8:20 PM

In a statement accompanying his signature, the president chastised some lawmakers for what he contended was their attempts to use the bill to restrict the ability of counterterrorism officials to protect the country.

Riiiight. Cause trying to shut down GITMO, pulling out of Iraq so Iran and Al Qaeda can walk right in, and negotiating with the Taliban and their fanatical allies, is just what we need to protect the country and our counterterrorism efforts./

Buy Danish on January 1, 2012 at 8:24 PM

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012

Report of The
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

On

H.R. 1540
together with
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
************************************************************

http://www.ng.mil/ll/analysisdocs/FY2012/House%20Report%20112-74.pdf

canopfor on January 1, 2012 at 8:26 PM

Just FYI, every hoiusehold in Switzerland is issued a fully auto FN-FAL as part of their Nat’l defense. Given the relatively low gun crime their I’ve often wondered why we have not used this to refute gun contrl advocates.

Archimedes on January 1, 2012 at 7:46 PM

Actually, only the households of military members and reservists have ever kepy their individual weapons at home.
And that has changed since a deranged reservist picked off a civilian at a bus stop. Now, all individual weapons are kept in a community armory that is easily accessible to the reservists. (People still walk about with their rifles slung over their shoulder on match days, though, and no one worries about it.)
And, FYI, the Swiss do not use the FN-FAL (and never have) Their current issue is the Sig Stgw90 in 5.56NATO; though some reservists still use the Sig Stgw57 in 7.5 Swiss.

Solaratov on January 1, 2012 at 8:27 PM

Key West Reader,if you have a pet trigger fish you have to be from Key West. They are the bain of every yellowtail chumslick out there but truth is if you can get through the tough skin they are good eating…..
RG–Islamorada

rodguy911 on January 1, 2012 at 8:30 PM

Vell,I guessenzee herr paperanzee von’t herr verk
atz zee herr check pointenzee,vhen they demandenzee
your Id!!

All Hail da Fatherland,herr Leader Hopenzee/Changenzee!!

(snark)

canopfor on January 1, 2012 at 8:30 PM

I wonder where the 1,000,000 man National Civilian Security Forces
fit into Hopey’s Grand Progressive Socialist theme thingy!!

canopfor on January 1, 2012 at 8:34 PM

OT but well worth the read….if you don’t smash your computer. :(

….President Barack H. “Bubble Boy” Obama is currently in secret negotiations with the Taliban
Barack the Peacemocker: http://biglizards.net/blog/archives/2012/01/barack_the_peac.html

sicoit on January 1, 2012 at 8:42 PM

Pink Floyd Welcome to the Machine
*********************************

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1KXIaNbToQ&feature=related

canopfor on January 1, 2012 at 8:46 PM

The “Patriot Act” is Orwellian for “Destroy the Constitution Act” and is the opposite of patriotism.

RasThavas on January 1, 2012 at 8:02 PM

Nonsense. Commonsense measures taken to counter an unconventional enemy are encompassed within the Constitution and are in keeping with the intent of the Founders. The first responsibility of any legitimate nation-state is the protection of its people. One can’t declare war on Al Qaeda, which is not a nation-state, but one can adapt to the threat posed by it and those like it.

The opposite of patriotism is the Paulian delusion, a belief that a cabal of Zionist international bankers are secretly controlling our government; hence, by the lights of these crackpot, tinfoil-hat-wearing lunatics, we are pawns of the bad guys, bad guys ourselves, and sedition becomes the new patriotism. This is an old belief system, by the way, going back to the isolationist America Firsters just prior to WWII. In a strangely familiar instance of historical redundancy, the America First movement also attracted its share of antisemitic, conspiratorial bigots. Nothing truly new under the sun, I guess.

troyriser_gopftw on January 1, 2012 at 8:46 PM

Drudge headline

OBAMA: I have the power to detain Americans — but I won’t…

Wolfen on January 1, 2012 at 8:50 PM

President Barack Obama signed a wide-ranging defense bill into law Saturday despite having “serious reservations” about provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation and prosecution of suspected terrorists.

So Obama has reservations — excuse me, SERIOUS reservations — about the wildly unConstitutional things that he himself would be directly in charge of.

I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m sure going to be sleeping a lot easier knowing that.

BTW, does anybody remember how the liberals went completely apesh!t about the Patriot Act? And when pressed to point to a specific provision they were terrified of, the only section they could point to was the one that allowed the federal government to look at people’s library records?

Now we have detention, interrogation and prosecution of American citizens of American citizens, just for the “crime” of talking to the wrong person or about the wrong subject.

They all told me if I voted for John McCain, this would happen. And once again, they were all right.

logis on January 1, 2012 at 8:55 PM

This sounds alot like authorization to call for “marshall law” to me…..

sicoit on January 1, 2012 at 8:58 PM

This sounds alot like authorization to call for “marshall martial law” to me…..

sicoit on January 1, 2012 at 8:58 PM

[Just because I had to.]

Rio Linda Refugee on January 1, 2012 at 9:04 PM

Rio Linda Refugee on January 1, 2012 at 9:04 PM

*blush* Thanks buddy…. :)

sicoit on January 1, 2012 at 9:05 PM

Texas is the only Republic in our Nation.

Key West Reader on January 1, 2012 at 6:59 PM

Yep, it’s my favorite state.

Peppa Pig on January 1, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Not so quick, California is also a Republic.

JackofNoTrades on January 1, 2012 at 9:07 PM

….President Barack H. “Bubble Boy” Obama is currently in secret negotiations with the Taliban

Barack the Peacemocker:

http://biglizards.net/blog/archives/2012/01/barack_the_peac.html
sicoit on January 1, 2012 at 8:42 PM

sicoit:Happy New year,thanks for da linky,and yup,its all about a
greater Iranian,er,Persian Caliphate Expansion,and with Hap
less/Hopey Changey,Obama is helping out,in cutting down,that
timeline for an Islamic Utopia!!:)

Here’s the plan. We wait until Barack Obama begins strutting and chest thumping about how he has “ended two wars,” then we respond thus:

President Obama has discovered a super-easy way to end any war quickly: just surrender. We prematurely withdraw from Afghanistan at the same time we prematurely withdraw from Iraq, leaving the door wide open to an Iranian invasion; what a diplomatic masterstroke! Obama becomes the first president in American history to lose two wars… simultaneously!

canopfor on January 1, 2012 at 9:08 PM

The opposite of patriotism is [snip] … [snip] an old belief system, by the way, going back to the isolationist America Firsters just prior to WWII.

troyriser_gopftw on January 1, 2012 at 8:46 PM

Yeah, cuz there’s nothing more unpatriotic than putting America first. /s I see you had your latest edition of the Newspeak Dictionary issued.

Firefly_76 on January 1, 2012 at 9:10 PM

canopfor on January 1, 2012 at 9:08 PM

Happy New Year backatcha and to all here at HotAir! My bad…..

You hit the nail on the head canopfor. Everything this bastage does is a continuation of the destruction of this country. I pray we last until 11/12. :(

sicoit on January 1, 2012 at 9:12 PM

So if the TSA or DoJ don’t like you complaining about gunrunning or excessive groping, all they have to do is label you a terrorist and call the military to make you disappear forever.

This could come in very handy for any “dissidents” our elite emperor may want silenced in the future.

I guess he was right about how much easier it would be to rule in North Korea. So now he wants to bring it on home.

Oxymoron on January 1, 2012 at 9:16 PM

Digging a hole to hide my ‘Don’t Tread On Me’ flag as we speak. We’re going to need a secret handshake.

trish333 on January 1, 2012 at 9:16 PM

The bottom line is they will pick your azz up and haul your azz to jail. Get used to that. You don’t have to be Black anymore.

Key West Reader on January 1, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Not sure what you are saying there, but heres my take.

This is the key for Van Jones, Obama and his ilk to start his war on whites. If you resist you will be ‘detained’. The 1,000,000 man Civilian Security Forces will all be black. They all get a free pass, they will loot and pillage. All you have to do is look at any african nation to see whats to become of you. Particularly south africa.

orbitalair on January 1, 2012 at 9:18 PM

*blush* Thanks buddy…. :)

sicoit on January 1, 2012 at 9:05 PM

Not a problem, that spelling has been used more often than not around here in the last couple of days and even though I went to school in Rio Linda I knew it was incorrect.
Happy New Year my interweb compatriot.

Rio Linda Refugee on January 1, 2012 at 9:19 PM

THAT IT,I’ve had IT!!

I’m reporting POTUSA to Attack Watch!

canopfor on January 1, 2012 at 9:21 PM

orbitalair on January 1, 2012 at 9:18 PM

Thanks for your input Grand Wizard.

Rio Linda Refugee on January 1, 2012 at 9:24 PM

So,let me see if I have the narration correct,

the Lefty MSM,and Lefty Operatives have screamed,for over 8 years
on their errosion of their “Freedoms”,from Darth Cheney/BushHitler
and how manical,evil,and un-American,

only to find,

that the very/overly concerned,Superior Smart Power Pointy
Head’n Type,Holier Than Tho Liberals,are the one’s that dreamed
up this “Police State”thingy!!

And,heres a thing to ponder!

I’m thinking that these crazy Progressives who love the Social Justice theme,and OWS,and that when these nut jobs,get locked up,
they now,in their sick mindsets,would love to be in power,and lock
up at will,the very people and system,that threw them in jail!!

Just a thought!!!

Yes I know,crazy talk!!!

canopfor on January 1, 2012 at 9:31 PM

Unbelievable. 535 people control 310 million people. Really?

Key West Reader on January 1, 2012 at 7:13 PM

Only for so long as we acquiesce.

Who is John Galt on January 1, 2012 at 9:44 PM

Yeah, cuz there’s nothing more unpatriotic than putting America first. /s I see you had your latest edition of the Newspeak Dictionary issued.

Firefly_76 on January 1, 2012 at 9:10 PM

That’s what they called themselves, Ron Paul true believer, and–like you–the ironic contradictions integral to their views escaped them, too. And if you’re saying wretched, decidedly anti-American bigots like Father Coughlin and his ilk were patriots, you’re badly, sadly mistaken.

As an aside, each and every one of you clowns who ascribe to the Ron Paul theory of America as international bad guy can do us all a favor and take your Stormfront/Prison Planet lemming act on the road and off the nearest cliff. I couldn’t despise you more.

troyriser_gopftw on January 1, 2012 at 9:48 PM

Rio Linda Refugee on January 1, 2012 at 9:24 PM

You have a different take on the issues???

You don’t hear what Van Jones, Obama, and his buddies say? I didn’t put words in their mouths. They say them freely.

http://sharprightturn.wordpress.com/2011/09/30/van-jones-threatening-americans-with-his-version-of-arab-spring-in-america/

orbitalair on January 1, 2012 at 9:51 PM

Further proof this is the Bush III Administration.

libfreeordie on January 1, 2012 at 10:02 PM

Further proof this is the Bush III Administration.

libfreeordie on January 1, 2012 at 10:02 PM

I’ve had to conclude that either Obama wants much the same things Bush did, just for different reasons…or he’s as much of a puppet to people behind the scenes who do.

With him I suspect a combination of both. It’s no secret he and Jeremiah Wrong are planning a race war.

MelonCollie on January 1, 2012 at 10:12 PM

Unbelievable. 535 people control 310 million people. Really?

Key West Reader on January 1, 2012 at 7:13 PM

Only for so long as we acquiesce.

Who is John Galt on January 1, 2012 at 9:44 PM

Declaration, 2nd paragraph.

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on January 1, 2012 at 10:29 PM

As an aside, each and every one of you clowns who ascribe to the Ron Paul theory of America as international bad guy can do us all a favor and take your Stormfront/Prison Planet lemming act on the road and off the nearest cliff. I couldn’t despise you more.

troyriser_gopftw on January 1, 2012 at 9:48 PM

Wow. You are a venomous poster. So Gerald Ford, and staunchly anti-FDR journalists and publishers like Garet Garrett, Robert McCormick and otehr non-interventionists like Robert Taft are all anti-American “clowns” and neo-Nazis? You need some remedial history.

Firefly_76 on January 1, 2012 at 10:40 PM

. The 1,000,000 man Civilian Security Forces will all be black.
orbitalair on January 1, 2012 at 9:18 PM

yo,does this mean no more ” brown sugar”?

svs22422 on January 1, 2012 at 10:55 PM

Our nation really is at a crossroads, as evidenced by the signing of this bill and the authoritarian mandates in Obamacare and Romneycare that grant the government enormous new power over our lives.

I really hope that the not-Romney voters don’t give up, ever.

FloatingRock on January 1, 2012 at 6:24 PM

Does it ever get through your head that it was a state issue and the state legislature wanted it? It was not a federal gov mandate.
What is wrong with people?

Bambi on January 1, 2012 at 11:00 PM

was the autopen involved in this one/?

ted c on January 1, 2012 at 11:02 PM

Under the radar

Council of “Governors”

There are only 10

Key West Reader on January 1, 2012 at 7:27 PM

This and the recent formation of NORTHCOM I find unsettling.

One would think that all of the disaster measures necessary would have been in place by the time of the Eisenhower administration at the height of the Cold War, so why all these new entities being formed and various legislative acts that have come along since then?

It would seem that the precedent of the suspension of the Writ of Habeas Corpus under the Lincoln administration, and the way the Federal government handled German saboteurs during World War II show some kind of legal weakness in the protection of our country?

Dr. ZhivBlago on January 1, 2012 at 11:06 PM

Soon as the government starts executing this “authority”, which is EXTREMELY UnConstitutional on political opponents (which it is clearly designed for), that’s it. Civil War 2.0 has begun.

wildcat72 on January 1, 2012 at 11:11 PM

It would seem that the precedent of the suspension of the Writ of Habeas Corpus under the Lincoln administration, and the way the Federal government handled German saboteurs during World War II show some kind of legal weakness in the protection of our country?

Dr. ZhivBlago on January 1, 2012 at 11:06 PM

In both cases our nation was fighting for its very existence against very real threats, one of which involved half our homeland acting like cancer and going against the other half. I know this doesn’t fit with your fairy-floss views, but the middle of a civil war is no time to be a constitutional nitpicker, and the Nazis dug their own grave.

MelonCollie on January 1, 2012 at 11:13 PM

Soon as the government starts executing this “authority”, which is EXTREMELY UnConstitutional on political opponents (which it is clearly designed for), that’s it. Civil War 2.0 has begun.

wildcat72 on January 1, 2012 at 11:11 PM

Unless the right finally puts 2+2 together and realizes THEY are in the crosshairs here & now…not bloody likely.

MelonCollie on January 1, 2012 at 11:16 PM

As long as they grab “students” coming to and from the middle east. I could care less. Enough with the former alter boys at St yahoo guy who decided to become muslim and has a yearning to go to Islamabad.

As the guy said earlier. We cant go into an airport anymore normally. We cant also appear to be racist and check the obvious ones. Our freedom of travel is screwed up, and you’re worried about this?

The problem is Islam. Of course thats a no no to say. But lets look at who is doing the terrorizing. Even the EU doesnt want to admit thier problem is allowing to many immigrants from the middle east.

Gedge on January 1, 2012 at 11:23 PM

Further proof this is the Bush III Administration.

libfreeordie on January 1, 2012 at 10:02 PM

Not even close.

If Bush had even hinted he would sign something like this bill the story in the press would have been treated like Abu Ghraib x100.

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on January 2, 2012 at 12:02 AM

Wow. You are a venomous poster. So Gerald Ford, and staunchly anti-FDR journalists and publishers like Garet Garrett, Robert McCormick and otehr non-interventionists like Robert Taft are all anti-American “clowns” and neo-Nazis? You need some remedial history.

Firefly_76 on January 1, 2012 at 10:40 PM

You’re attempting to hide the disreputable and despicable behind the respectable and honorable–which is typical, since that sleazy anti-Semite Ron Paul has the gall to call himself a Republican. The America Firsters counted the German-American Bund as close allies and kindred spirits. I don’t see an appreciable difference between a Depression Era front group for the Third Reich and your typical, modern-day Stormfront enthusiast–or, for that matter, your typical hardcore Ron Paul follower and an old-school America Firster.

Where does Gerald Ford come into this? Are you referring to some passing interest in the America First movement in his youth? Young people believe and do stupid things, and they are–as a general rule–easily deceived. Is that why you’re invoking the name of that good man? Try again. A President who retains Henry Kissinger as Secretary of State cannot by any measure be considered isolationist or antisemitic.

And of course I’m venomous where barely closeted neo-nazis are concerned, especially when they’re trying to sneak into the GOP by calling themselves conservatives and libertarians. All it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing. A little venomous spit aimed their way may not be much, but it’s something.

troyriser_gopftw on January 2, 2012 at 12:08 AM

This is the key for Van Jones, Obama and his ilk to start his war on whites. If you resist you will be ‘detained’. The 1,000,000 man Civilian Security Forces will all be black. They all get a free pass, they will loot and pillage. All you have to do is look at any african nation to see whats to become of you. Particularly south africa.

orbitalair on January 1, 2012 at 9:18 PM

See what I mean? Reads like a chapter out of William Pierce’s Turner Diaries.

This isn’t Stormfront, Fritz. Take it elsewhere.

troyriser_gopftw on January 2, 2012 at 12:14 AM

Hey, remember when Barry laced into Bush for his constitutionally suspect “signing statements, and, as a result, pledged that he would NOT to do that because he was a former Constitutional Law professor!

Remember?

And remember further that he promised he believed in and would obey the Constitution if he was elected?

Message to all of you on the left:

Suckers!

Apparently, as Mel Brooks repeated three times in another “historical” context, “It’s good to be the king!”

Trochilus on January 2, 2012 at 12:19 AM

In both cases our nation was fighting for its very existence against very real threats, one of which involved half our homeland acting like cancer and going against the other half. I know this doesn’t fit with your fairy-floss views, but the middle of a civil war is no time to be a constitutional nitpicker, and the Nazis dug their own grave.

MelonCollie on January 1, 2012 at 11:13 PM

So, if some spokesman from the Federal Government says that we are indeed in the middle of some kind of national emergency, and that all of these powers can indeed be enacted with impunity, you’re fine with that?

Interesting.

one of which involved half our homeland acting like cancer

Er, which half are you referring to?

Dr. ZhivBlago on January 2, 2012 at 12:28 AM

Er, which half are you referring to?

Dr. ZhivBlago on January 2, 2012 at 12:28 AM

The half that institutionalized and promoted the enslavement of human beings. And yes, the cause of the Civil War was slavery. Save the neo-confederate apologia for your like-minded pals.

troyriser_gopftw on January 2, 2012 at 12:43 AM

The half that institutionalized and promoted the enslavement of human beings. And yes, the cause of the Civil War was slavery.

But then the Union stopped being all good and sunshiny right after the war when they went out West and raped and butchered Indians (actually during as well-Sand Creek for example), and of course we know how well the Chinese were treated on the west coast bastions of northern Liberty.

Also, I can’t see how much worse certain Southern landowners were compared to the Chicago and New York political machines that sought to keep European immigrants under their thumbs.

Dr. ZhivBlago on January 2, 2012 at 12:57 AM

Governments always say we can do with less. Less money through taxes. Less freedom through legislation. While we can do with less, the Government never can.

Friday night, a friend asked if I would join the Army today. My answer was no. Not a qualified no, just plain no.

In 1988, when I went through basic. We were taught that the Russians were evil because they abused the rights of their citizens. They did not have the protections of law we had. We were better because we had freedom.

Yet today, Homeland Security is taking the place of the KGB. Their power is without limit. No need for a warrant, a letter will suffice. If you don’t co-operate, or confess as they wish. They’ll hold you indefinately without access to council based upon their belief that you are a threat to homeland security.

Now, they can ship you to the formally POW/Enemy Combatants camp.

Would I fight for that? Not even close. I was willing to fight and even potentially die to defend the freedoms our nation had. I would not fight for this. This should not be defended. We have become that which we hated. Old words certainly, but in my opinion, all too true.

Snake307 on January 2, 2012 at 1:39 AM

Dr. ZhivBlago on January 2, 2012 at 12:57 AM

Don’t give him material Doc. He’s already seeing nazis under the bed.

DFCtomm on January 2, 2012 at 1:53 AM

Up next, HR 3166?

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h112-3166

“To add engaging in or supporting hostilities against the United States to the list of acts for which United States nationals would lose their nationality.”

oryguncon on January 2, 2012 at 4:30 AM

And yes, the cause of the Civil War was slavery. Save the neo-confederate apologia for your like-minded pals.

troyriser_gopftw on January 2, 2012 at 12:43 AM

I don’t think Lincoln’s attempts to “preserve the union” at any cost had anything initially to do with slavery.

It’s complicated.

BigAlSouth on January 2, 2012 at 7:25 AM

Now if we were only as concerned about the permenant detenton of abortion – we wouldn’t have to worry about lesser things like this minor freedom issue.

Besides, Haley Barbour told us not to fret about “social issues” (life, freedom etc.?)this election. We need to concentrate on important things like jobs-as if they didn’t all have jobs in the gulogs.

Don L on January 2, 2012 at 8:17 AM

even U.S. citizens arrested in the U.S. — without charge deprives citizens of due process.

Do not want
We already have treason and sedition laws thank you

“To add engaging in or supporting hostilities against the United States to the list of acts for which United States nationals would lose their nationality.”

After and only after applying above laws, OK

OTTO on January 2, 2012 at 8:21 AM

The term “terrorist” has been thrown around a lot lately, including our Vice President who applied it to Republicans involved in budget negotiations. The Animal Enterprise Protection Act was replaced by the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act in 2006, so it appears that citizens involved in exposing the abuses of factory farming could be subject to the NDAA.

Not to worry, though, according to Dear Leader, because the power rests in his blessed hands. Even the Left is disgusted with that approach, since the power will someday pass on to a mere mortal successor.

Sowell Disciple on January 2, 2012 at 9:13 AM

Obama: I have the power to detain Americans–but I won’t. Until I get back from Hawaii. OK, now I’m officially going to start worrying about my personal safety. Where can I get a bumper sticker that reads Stock Up/Lock & Load? That part about keeping us detained indefinitely seems a little unconstitutional. But, then it’s also OK to kill Americans citizens without due process now, too. How bad can a little jail time be, 3 hots and a cot.

Kissmygrits on January 2, 2012 at 9:18 AM

I was willing to fight and even potentially die to defend the freedoms our nation had. I would not fight for this. This should not be defended. We have become that which we hated. Old words certainly, but in my opinion, all too true.

Snake307 on January 2, 2012 at 1:39 AM

absolutly!!

i want to say sorry for an earlier post.as the fraud limbaugh would say.i was being ” absurd ” to expose the ” absurd ”.i was tring also to be funny,but after futher review…..

svs22422 on January 2, 2012 at 11:10 AM

I don’t think Lincoln’s attempts to “preserve the union” at any cost had anything initially to do with slavery.

It’s complicated.

BigAlSouth on January 2, 2012 at 7:25 AM

Not that complicated. Look, I served with good Southern men in my unit, men whose great-grandfathers probably stood opposite and shot at my great-grandfather and great-uncles. They are as proud of their heritage as I am of mine, but not a single one of them would argue the rightness of slavery–or, for that matter, argue Jim Crow segregation in the decades following the war was somehow justified.

The thing that really sticks in the craw of the neo-confederate crowd is that Lincoln, a prairie lawyer from a poverty-stricken, backwoods background, out-thought and out-fought the aristocratic, high-born Davis, Lee, and all the rest. Another thing, too: the Republican Party is the party of Lincoln. If you think the first and best president to lead as a Republican is some kind of low-rent villainous dictator who crushed the flower of the South under his iron heel, then vote for another party’s ticket and stay out of my party’s primaries.

Vote Libertarian instead. I understand Gary Johnson needs all the help he can get. And take the white trash Stormfront crowd with you.

troyriser_gopftw on January 2, 2012 at 11:23 AM

BRIEFLY: Whomever equated America’s reluctance to enter the War in Europe with “Stormfront”, needs a history lesson. More than one.

As for the Black Narcissus with his “Chamberlain Charm”, that “qualified signature” means nothing. It’s just another ChicagØbama ploy to play it both ways: “Yes, I oppose this, so I’ll note my opinion”.
LOL

“This is the logic of a political crack addict, always begging for just one more election fix to make everything alright.”

Lead, follow, or get the hell outa the way, ØbozØ, real men have work to do … Like cleaning up the mess you’ve created.
I was “waterboarded” as part of my training. I dare the COMMANDER IN CHIEF to undergo the same treatment – the way it used to be done. Even back in the day (when it was actually brutal), no one, including me, considered it “torture”.

It will be hilarious to watch ChicagØbama and his paid thugs, er, talking heads, try to spin keeping intact the terrorism SOP of GW Bush.
What a hoot!
ØneAnDöne – God Save America!

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on January 2, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Would I fight for that? Not even close. I was willing to fight and even potentially die to defend the freedoms our nation had. I would not fight for this. This should not be defended. We have become that which we hated. Old words certainly, but in my opinion, all too true.

Snake307 on January 2, 2012 at 1:39 AM

‘We have become that which we hated’? Yeah, right. Testify, Audie Murphy, testify.

Since you only mentioned basic training, I strongly doubt you held a combat arms MOS. Most former US Army armor, artillery, and infantry guys let you know they were combat arms right away, first thing: it’s a point of pride. I typically do if I’m communicating to other veterans. Marines will just say ‘Marine’, since they’re pretty much all combat arms.

I doubt you’ve ever been in a position to fight for anything, REMF. So what were you, Clerk First Class in the Remington Raiders?

troyriser_gopftw on January 2, 2012 at 11:42 AM

For crying out loud. I have read the bill and it doesn’t apply to citizens.
Nice to see we have the delusional paranoid crowd posting on HA.

Hard Right on January 2, 2012 at 1:27 PM

Hard Right on January 2, 2012 at 1:27 PM

Here is a fairly good legal analysis. It has been updated to reflect changes in the bill during the process. Here is the current update. If this updated analysis is right, then I’m satisfied that this legislation will protect the rights of citizens on U.S. soil, but not those fighting the U.S. on foreign soil, and that is about right.

DFCtomm on January 2, 2012 at 2:26 PM

I doubt you’ve ever been in a position to fight for anything, REMF. So what were you, Clerk First Class in the Remington Raiders?

troyriser_gopftw on January 2, 2012 at 11:42 A

http://walterzoomiesworld.blogspot.com/2012/01/flashback-twenty-one-years.html

oryguncon on January 2, 2012 at 4:20 PM

Seriously, so many “conservatives” are okay with this? LOL at those who defend Obama’s signing of this because they think the wording protects them. So will the next Democrat president decide to use these powers against political enemies? How about the one after that? Okay, what if it’s a generation from now and it’s some risen Americans Elect party or something that’s even worse?

Does anybody have any idea the impact that resuscitated FDR-era anti-free market legislation had on the ability of the Fed and the Treasury to carry out the last couple bailouts without any need for transparency?

Okay, here’s the real test – Would you want a hypothetical Nancy Pelosi administration of 2024 to be able to detain political enemies indefinitely? If you’re cool with that, then no problem with NDAA.

TXGOP on January 2, 2012 at 4:31 PM

I don’t understand why there isn’t more of an outrage over this! Michael Savage: “greatest assault on American liberty since this republic was founded”. Supported by liberal Senators John McCain & Carl Levin, where the Senate voted 86 – 14. Yes, U.S. citizens can be held in military detention.

Here’s Montana talking about recalls related to this.

Belle on January 2, 2012 at 7:09 PM

oops, I hit the link button, added my link, but it didn’t come up.

Belle on January 2, 2012 at 7:10 PM

Comment pages: 1 2