The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) is a crime against our constitution. It allows for the indefinite detention of US citizens by the military inside the US -- without a trial. It's one of the worst laws ever passed in the US and it passed with nary a peep of opposition. I'm positive that a huge percentage of the population is not even aware of it, partly because the establishment media didn't even bother covering it.

But it appeared for a while that the one guy fighting against it was President Obama. I was incredibly encouraged by that. I shouldn't have been. It turned out at the end that he was threatening to veto the bill because he wanted it to have even more executive power, not less. This president has been a disaster for civil liberties. Every time I think about the fact that he used to be a constitutional law professor, I don't know whether to laugh or to cry. Indefinite detentions, summary executions of US citizens abroad without a trial, warrantless wiretapping and much, much more. All of the things we were outraged Bush did -- and then some. Honestly, it makes me feel a little sick that I voted for him. At least, I could say that I fought tooth and nail against Bush.

And civil liberties abuses are the tip of the iceberg in disappointment with this president. Then there is the comedy of financial reform which doesn't reform a damn thing. There are the zero prosecutions of the top bankers who destroyed our economy through their fraud, took our money and now spit in our face with it. There is the extension of the Bush tax cuts. There is the cave in on nearly every negotiation (the payroll tax cut being the exception that proves the rule (by the way, he "won" on more tax cuts, a profoundly Republican idea). His crowning achievement of healthcare reform was a proposal originally written by the Heritage Foundation. There isn't a Republican idea that President Obama didn't want to cuddle with and adopt as his own.

Now, the argument goes that he might be bad, but the Republicans are worse. Of course. Right now, Newt Gingrich is on the campaign trail arguing that Mitt Romney isn't kind enough to the rich. I'm not kidding. He is trying to make hay out of the fact that Romney takes capital taxes down to zero percent for only people making below $200,000. Newt thinks that's discrimination against the rich and he would take it down to zero for everybody. Then he would make your kids clean the rich kids' toilets in school.

I follow politics for a living; I'm not unaware of how hideous the Republican choices are. But that doesn't mean that we should pretend that President Obama has been brilliant because we're scared of the big, bad Republicans. That would be fundamentally dishonest.

And to be honest, I'm really disappointed that he does not have a primary opponent. This country is dying for someone who is going to take on the establishment. Who is that going to be on our side -- Barack Obama? On that, I know whether to laugh or cry. Every time I think about the idea that President Obama might be against the establishment, I laugh and laugh and laugh. There is never been a guy who was this enamored with the establishment. If he had wrestling nickname it would be The Establishment.

The guy who appointed Tim Geithner, Ben Bernanke, Larry Summers, Rahm Emanuel and Bill Daley (and a list of hundreds of others, including two new Fed appointments, one of which is a Republican who worked for the Carlyle Group) is not a guy who is interested in changing the system at all. Change was a cutesy slogan he used to trick us into thinking he was on our side.

I would have loved a progressive alternative, but apparently we are not going to get one (except for Rocky Anderson running on the Justice Party ticket). Primaries are the perfect place to send a message without taking away votes in the general election. But it didn't happen because the Democratic establishment says we must fall in line because we wouldn't want to hurt the agenda of the president. The agenda of the president sucks and is deeply Republican. I'd love to at least get him to reconsider that agenda for a second.

But there is one thing we can do right now that doesn't really hurt the chances of the president getting re-elected and doesn't help Republicans one bit. It is an idea that Occupy Iowa came up with. In the Iowa caucuses you can vote for "uncommitted." In fact, since the 1970's "uncommitted" has won twice on the Democratic side and it beat Bob Dole in 1980. Of course, the Republican Party has shut down this option on their side. They say you can vote that way in the GOP field but they will not register those votes or send those delegates. Of course, they're the GOP; they have no interest in your dissent.

But if all of those people were to go and participate on the Democratic side, they might have an effect. If "uncommitted" beat President Obama on the Democratic side in Iowa, that would make some news. That might even get the attention of The Establishment. So far, he has only responded to right-wing pressure. He is the consummate politician, so if there was actually a little bit of pressure on his left he might have to respond to it, especially during an election season. Wouldn't it be amazing if President Obama acted like a progressive on some issue because he was worried about the voters?

By the way, this strategy also has the benefit of being accurate. I am "uncommitted" toward Obama. I'm uncommitted from supporting a guy that has walked all over our civil liberties, that thinks tax cuts are the only answer, that gave all of the money to the bankers and asked for nothing in return, that thinks the right-wing establishment has all of the answers. Uncommitted is the kindest word I have.

If you live in Iowa, please send a message to the president for the rest of us. We voted for change last time, apparently you didn't hear us. If you don't hear us soon, you might be the one that gets changed.

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/cenk-uygur/40471/vote-against-obama-in-iowa

it goes with the territory

some say he loves muslims because he supported the NYC proposal

in spite of the fact that a major muslim figure, OSAMA , was taken out on his watch

some say he is pro establishment, in spite of the fact that any number of wall street and business moguls and public figures in the establishment complain that he is against them


some say he is walking on their civil liberties, in spite of how often he has supported them and CONGRESS has not agreed to support them,,,,



I would never want his position, but I am proud to have voted for him and have all the SAME reasons to do it again


number one: that I like where he wants to take the country(even though I realize he has very LIMITED power to do so and the power lies with congress,,,its better than someone whose direction I dont agree with who might get a congress to support that direction)


number two: only one opponent , Ron Paul, would not completely embarass me as representative of america to the international world

and Ron has too many ideas about small governing of such a large country for my tastes,,,,

I agree with alot of what you say here however I also think that if the freaking dems and repugs wanted to fix this country it could be accomplished in a year.

They brey at each other point fingers and blame each other all the while we creep towards a survalience police state.

We are going to reach a certain point and that will be it we will be liveing in an Orwelian world and there will be no turning back and comments like the ones we leave here will be enough to get you on some type of watch list.

At each and every sporting event I am finding it harder and harder to rise for the national anthem and I can sence in the crowd many many others are of the same mind.

Land of the free home of the brave my @ss

I am a patriot, a vet and an American! I will ALWAYS rise and cover my heart, or salute, during the National anthem.

I believe in America, I believe in the constitution, I believe in Ron Paul!

I will also rise against tyranny and we are on the short road!

Patriot Act, NDAA, SOPA, I can't believe EVERYBODY isn't in the streets protesting!

Owe-Bummer is what is called a menace.... part of the problem NOT the solution. What can one man do in the face of opposition? TRY! He doesn't, he bows! He is a true servant, but NOT of the people!

Follow the campaign money! If it leads to banks and corps (in large measure) you have a pretty good idea of where it will take you!

Romney is getting more this year to fight the $1B owe-bummer machine because the bankers need a new face on their boy! They can't even count on the uncontrolable Grinch, so he's OUT! Ron Paul? They will fight with everything at their disposal to keep him from even the slightest recognition....and are failing, dispite their efforts.

Media blackouts of a "fringe" candidate with "no electability" by the media? Meaningless slurs and 20 year old newsletters they admit he didn't write (if they could prove it the news would sure be different. You can count on that!)

Anyone should ask why! Why all of a sudden media and establishment politicos are saying that if he gets the vote "it doesn't matter" but any other candidate would get lauded for a good job? lIKE SANTORUM?...GIVE ME A BREAK! HE AND BACHMAN ARE WAR MACHINE CANDIDATES! Ok with the bankers, but NOT their choice!

Sounds to me like JUST what people want....REAL CHANGE...like we were promised 4 years ago!

Thank you for dining at Mc Stablishment! HEY! WHERE'S MY CHANGE?!

People think they are immune....
"If your innocent, ya don't have to worry about it"

Which is disturbing...

the fact is these fuques could move mountains in minuets if they really wanted to.

That they could and they could do it without killing social security, unemployment and alot of the basic safety nets we have that make this a descent society.

It almost seems to me they are deliberatly killing this country both damn parties are guilty.

I dont have to ask why,

I Remember a similar support behind Ross Perot,,but the numbers just didnt imply the possibility that he would win, even though he had more support than was expected it wasnt enough of a majority to expect a win,,,

I dont have to ask why,

I Remember a similar support behind Ross Perot,,but the numbers just didnt imply the possibility that he would win, even though he had more support than was expected it wasnt enough of a majority to expect a win,,,

Huckabee WINS!

Am I seeing things.

In 2008, I believe, the OP was pushing big bad Barry to get all the votes and win big.

Here's his change the Liberals demanded and now, the I want change group wants it all back like it was.



Next time, vote for the one who the press doesn't want put out there for folks to see.

Well hell yes Obama was far far better than Pallin Mccain and I would say he is going to be better than any one of t hose nutters the republicans are running, with the exception of RP.

If Obama suddenly turned to the left or is it right and declared enough of this homeland security nonsence Osama is dead the threat is small considering the price we pay in our freedons I would swing back.

To get that RP is the only one saying that, can he actualy do it?

I wont cry if RP wins he seems to be more in line with my beliefs than any other candidate at this point.

You my friend get it clearly!