You cannot help but find this absolutely chilling. Given Obama’s background on Constitional Law, there is NO SINGLE REASON that can be reasonably provided to support this. NONE. NOT ONE. I don’t give a shit about being “soft on terror” or practical reasons. Obama lied, pure and simple, regarding the protection of civil liberties and is now signing this piece of shit legislation, after EXPRESSLY PROMISING he wouldn’t.
If you can offer a single, rational explanation for this, I’d like to hear it.[/quote]
I find it chilling also. But what you and I think really doesn’t matter.
Fox news has 60% of the country.
What % does it take to win an election?
He broke a promise? All politicians do that. He’s going to run against Gingrich for cricksakes!
American voters forgive liars. They don’t forgive weaklings.
I remember the 1980 election. Carter kept “negotiating” with Iran and Reagan was going to nuke ’em, right? These “facts” were the reason why many people voted for Reagan.
“Weak” American presidents are single-term Presidents.
The rational explanation: Obama has read a few history books.[/quote]
Pri: So, if I understand you correctly, its perfectly okay for Obama to do this, because its in the best interests of the country?
