it can be checked out here

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:HJ00064:@@@L&summ2=m&


this is a great site to research and review bills, their text, their timelines, and who voted what on them,,,

I think I got lost somewhere..

What are you's actually arguing about?

Im not arguing really.

But there is dispute about a bill called the NDAA which President Obama has signed. There is talk about how its raped us of our rights and how its going to result in citizens possibly held indefinitely in detention if deemed to be 'terrorist'

There is talk about how he may somehow individually be trying to 'destroy' the country as a consequence and how Ron Paul is a candidate that would never do such things.


THe discussion often implies that this administration has done something newly disruptive or could have done something to prevent such disruption.


I am informing people of the bill titled AUMF which existed right after the 9/11 attacks that is already LAW And already gave the president the right to detain.


a Bill which Ron Paul, at the time voted for

I saved that site and yes, I saw on Sept 14,2001 that there were 420 yays and 1 nay with only 10 people not voting. The paragraphs below make a good point if anyone cares to read it. I think so many were caught up in wanting to get those "evil-doers" who were to blame for 9-11. Had the smoke and debris even cleared from the air yet at that point? Things have changed since then all in the name of keeping us "safe from terrorism"!!


http://www.aclu.org/blog/tag/AUMF Partial article below

In emotionally intense debates on the floors of the Senate and House 10 years ago, members of Congress discussed the need for the AUMF, and their determination to give President Bush the authority to go after the plotters and planners of the 9/11 attacks and those who were harboring them. If you go back and read the debates, the focus was on apprehending or killing bin Laden and his co-conspirators and taking away their refuge in Afghanistan.

"Since 9/11, there has been no more dramatic or consequential development than the contention by both the Bush and Obama administrations that the United States is engaged in a global armed conflict against loosely defined terrorist entities and undefined 'associated forces.'"

Read the Report »


In those long ago debates on the 2001 AUMF, no one said the president should send the military or the CIA into places like Yemen, Somalia, Kenya, or Thailand, and certainly no one said the government should consider the AUMF to be a green light to kidnap terrorism suspects off the streets of places like Italy and send them to torture cells in places like Egypt, or to kidnap innocent people in places like New York's JFK Airport or while vacationing in Macedonia and send them off to places like Syria or to the Salt Pit prison in Afghanistan. No one said the U.S. should set up secret prisons in places like Poland and use the same torture tactics that we prosecuted other people for using. No one in Congress in the days after 9/11 thought a sleepy and long-ignored Naval base at Guantánamo would be set up as "the legal equivalent of outer space" or that the government would start eavesdropping on Americans without search warrants. And certainly no one at that time thought we would have a president drawing up lists of people slated for "targeted killings." But all of these things have happened by presidents claiming war authority under the post-9/11 AUMF.

Whatever one thinks of the need for the military to have responded forcefully in the days after the 9/11 attacks, it is now past time to say enough is enough. It should be up to Congress to decide, with clear objectives, whether and where the president can use America's military might. The answer cannot be anywhere and everywhere that any president thinks a terrorism suspect resides, even when there is no real threat to the United States. As Americans, we owe more to our own legacy and values than to be a country that makes war wherever any president decides on his or her own to make war, and we certainly owe more to the men and women serving our country and to the people here and abroad whom we claim to protect than to have a war with no end.

those things will continue to be worked out,,,


there have been abuses, but it has also lead to some successes, so they need to figure out the 'middle' that will lessen the abuse without sacrificing the successes,,,

I havent had time to read the actual law and compare it to the new law that Obama signed but did we not vote for change?

It was my understanding that these 911 laws that virtualy striped us of our rights had a sunset clause.

I trust some pundits especialy those who label themselves progresives and in the past have supported Obama.


Like it or not Msharmony Obama continues the same draconian policies of the Bush criminal gang he was not the hope and change we all voted for.

I worked for his campaign last election I had doors slammed in my face and endured name calling etc etc.

I wont do it again because I feel like Bush won the last election because his wacked out war mongering police state still exists he was never investigated for the war crimes he clearly commited and its business as usualy in Washington.

That being said its back to work after a couple weeks off thanks to all for the interesting discussions.

I faced the same and will face it again, I dont like that CONGRESS continues to hold the government hostage and disrupt the business of government putting the president constantly against the wall to either further disrupt or compromise to keep things going...

but i vote congress members during different elections, and I will be supporting Obama again, in spite of the congress,,,and perhaps even BECAUSE of it,,,

If I put any real time energy in it will be for this group.


Our politicians are bought. Everyone knows it. Conservatives know it. Liberals know it. The Democrats are bought. The Republicans are bought. They don’t represent us. They represent their corporate donors who fund their campaigns and promise them well paying jobs after they leave office. We have taxation without representation. Our democracy is in serious trouble.

What happened? CLICK HERE to find out.

So what can we do to regain our ability to make our votes count and take back our democracy? We have to concentrate all of our resources into one single attack – making sure we take corporate money out of politics. The only way to do that is to bypass the corporate owned Congress and the Supreme Court – and pass a Constitutional amendment. We must pass an amendment saying that corporations are not people and they do not have the right to spend money to buy our politicians.

The objective of Wolf PAC will be to raise money and raise an army for the sole purpose of passing this amendment. We need a Constitutional revolution to get unlimited corporate money out of politics. Please join us and help retake our democracy.

CLICK HERE to read our proposed amendment.

Join the Fight

The objective of Wolf PAC is not theory, it is results. We will pass the amendment and we will regain our democracy. Here is how we're going to do it.

We must gather up a fighting force. We need programmers and organizers and lawyers and leaders. We need this movement to be in all 50 states. So, first we are doing a call for generals in this army. Please write into us and tell us what your expertise is and how you can help.

Our Congress is completely infected with the virus. So proposing an amendment through Congress seems hopeless. But luckily there is another way. We can do this purely at the state level. The states can call for a constitutional convention and they can ratify an amendment that comes out of one. And there is nothing our corrupt federal government can do about it.

We are hoping that the first wave of volunteers help us organize at the state level. Let's go occupy the states!

http://www.wolf-pac.com/

Cenk Uygur- You may know him from the Young Turks and I think he has a tv program as well.

I think the obstacle here is the idea of no taxation without representation and the reality that corporations are indeed responsible to pay taxes

So...

Basically...

Politics still blow. The government, in my opinion, is still pointless to have; because it isn't now, nor has been for a while, been led by what it was even remotely close to be founded for.

Obama's just dumb. It's sad so many voted for him just for 'change', or just because he was black (eff you Oprah), but in reality; things are just the same as they were before. Depressing and hopeless.

Don't get me wrong, McCann was even worse; like seriously you picked the dumbest Governor in the history of Governors to be your VP? Wow man.. dumb, just frikkin dumb.

Obama was, is, and will always be overrated. His wife irritates me every time I look at her. Like seriously, I understand you believe America has an issue with obesity, but you go after Ronald McDonald and Cookie Monster? Are you frikkin serious?!?

They say we shouldn't be racist, but the year Obama stepped in, that was one of the most racist elections I ever saw.. People voted for him cause of his color, while hundreds voted against him for the same dayum reason..

*sigh*

No wonder I don't bother with politics. :/

of course it was the most racist, it was the only one that had more than one race to consider,,,lol


and 'quite some time' is an understatement, as is evident by the 'amendments' to the constitution

it has never been led (in any strict sense) by what the outcasts from Britain founded it for and thank goodness, our country and its issues have grown quite a bit sense then and needs to be able to have a government that can grow with it,,,