NDAA passage perfect way to sully Bill of Rights Anniversary with a black eye.

Denver Examiner ^ | December 16, 2011 | Sunana Batra

[cold666pack]

What a way to celebrate the 220th Anniversary of the Bill of Rights. Each member of Congress, before assuming office, took an oath swearing to protect the Constitution, yet here we now have a Congress which has instead decided to ignore the fact that they are guardians of the Constitution. Instead they have approved an act which now permits indefinite detention of anyone deemed a terrorist in America.... Essentially, Congress has granted the President the power to ignore the Bill of Rights and detain Americans without due process.

So, a brief recap, since terrorists threaten the lovely liberties we wrap ourselves up with at night to keep warm, we now must rip this liberty blanket off or the terrorists win.

(snip)

Conservatives love to wax poetic about having a healthy disdain for big government. Yet, there has been not a single peep about this handing even more power over to this President, even though President Obama has presided over the greatest growth of big government since FDR. Why should we believe that a president under whose watch we now are dealing with Fast and Furious, a president who has been perfectly fine ordering the dissemination of guns to Mexican drug lords, that have eventually killed American citizens, all in an effort to institute gun regulation, suddenly has a problem with being given the power to indefinitely detain anyone who he deems is a terrorist?

Americans fail to identify the irony of what just happened yesterday. That to protect the freedoms the terrorists hate us for, we must shred them, one by one. Yesterday, Congress assured a remarkable double feat of ensuring America will never do anything to avert terrorism while breathing life into the illusion that eroding the constitution in order to keep Americans safe will.

[moovova]

John McCain sponsored it.

He's a sorry excuse for a politician.

[Windflier]

ILS21R is already on their list?..ohhhh boy...

We all are, FRiend.

[DugwayDuke]

Wonder how many of those also demand military trials for terrorists which this law ordains? While it does not specifically doesn’t rule such trials out for US citizens, this is nothing new. US citizens have been tried in military courts in the past. See Ex Parte Qurin.

I think the problem is, too many folks do not understand that certain actions may be handled by military courts even for those who have never served. But even when a citizen is detained, he still retains habeus corpus and can require the government to justify his detention.

Another problem. Those who think our military would detain US citizens because Obama demanded that do our military a grave injustice. Such a demand would be unconstitutional and would be rejected.

[emax]

Well, i know this is an unpredictable and downright creepy time for a lot of us, but dman dude, I would think “support our troops” means understanding that they are citizens like us, citizens who joined to fight for our Constitutional Rights and know these rights-in short, that these are not a bunch of idiots and mindless droves that can be made to carry out any adminsitrations whims. I thought presuming our troops to be moronic was for the hard leftists.