http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/31/obama-defense-bill_n_1177836.html So it appears that Obama issued a signing statement along with signing the bill. As far as I can tell, it's not much and doesn't address most people's problems with the bill - but it does include this: "My administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens," Obama said in the signing statement. "Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a nation." I'm not familiar with the logistical process of signing a bill, but if he vetoed and had it overridden, I assume the President doesn't sign the bill, which means he can't have any type of signing statement. Not really sure if that's true or not.
I would have voted for your golden boy Ron Paul... If he wasn't such a religious extremist. Ron Paul is AGAINST separation of church and state. We are all doomed if he is elected...
Allen West reads from the bill. <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/w5KJPm2b-v8#t=2m18s" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Sometimes you gotta laugh... President Signs Controversial Defense Bill JANUARY 3, 2012 | ISSUE 48•01 Despite having fought against many of its provisions, President Obama signed a defense appropriations bill that allows the military to detain American citizens indefinitely. What do you think? "I don't see why this even matters. Why would we need to detain American citizens indefinitely when we already have the authority to shoot missiles at them from drones?" Frank Mikulak Hand Nailer "Yes, but to be fair, he gave up because it was easier." Amanda Watson Plumbing Drafter "I wonder what all those guys Obama beat out for the Nobel Peace Prize are doing now." Sean Almeida Uptwister Tender
I think most people don't really care because it relates to "terrorists" and at this point that's a group of people called Muslims. Eventually though that'll change, there will be some other threat that will emerge and when this gets used on someone you can relate to better, then people will then realize its already too late.
He signed the bill. A "signing statement" is so much mumbo jumbo, with no affect on the next administration. If he truly believed the bill was wrong, he should have vetoed it. I know that you know that, Major. I'm simply venting. I'm very disappointed.
I understand your point. But his veto was going to be overridden regardless. So his choices were to veto and get the bill anyway without his statement, or sign with his signing statement. I know you don't like it, but this President doesn't do things for symbolic purposes. He does what gets, in his mind, the best possible real world outcome. Again, I'm not defending the decision - just explaining how Obama operates.
It looks like Ron Paul took some time off from campaigning in South Carolina to fight for the repeal of Section 1021 of the NDAA. http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/204811-ron-paul-slams-sen-graham-calls-on-house-to-repeal-detainee-language I really hope his effort succeeds...
