pri_dk wrote: 2) He could

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=pri_dk]
2) He could have done more to protect civil liberties. Again, however, I think there are reasons why he is going along with the status quo. Perhaps not admirable reasons, but practical reasons. Being “soft on terror” in the age of Fox news is a guaranteed single-term presidency.

[/quote]

Pri: You need to read Glenn Greenwald’s piece in Salon today regarding Obama and the indefinite detention bill:http://www.salon.com/2011/12/16/three_myths_about_the_detention_bill/

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.