Do you think the NDAA would have been passed no matter who was president?

I agree, ANYONE in power like to consolidate it and create even more rights that they get to use.....they may NEVER do so, but like to have the "right" if something new comes up. Personally, I think that USA has hugely over-reacted to 19 dead guys "getting" lucky one day. Sorry about the death and destruction, but it wasn't worth giving up your personal rights and freedoms and being TSA'd for the next hundred years.......

Yes. Even if he had vetoed it, the vote was high enough that he knew his veto would be overrun by a two-thirds majority. The cons pretending this is not true haven't done their homework. 97 out of 100 voted for it in the Senate. That means almost everyone, not just the Democrats.

But what puzzles and amuses me is their belief that only a law keeps the powerful from doing what they want to. With or without NDAA, people would still be arrested, sent to GITMO, held without an attorney, just as they were since 9/11. Just as FDR did to the Japanese in 1942. Just as Lincoln did in the Civil War.

Ron Paul is trying to repeal NDAA so....

2 angry Obama supporters I guess, it's true Libertarians are the only ones fighting NDAA and NDRP

The republicans want a cop in every house and a camera in every bedroom, so I think if it was a republican president, the NDAA would be much worse.

It passes every year.

[he National Defense Authorization Act is a United States federal law specifying the budget and expenditures of the United States Department of Defense.[1] Each year's act also includes other provisions.]

I don't see it being any differenct under any past president or any likely future president.

In an environment where Ron Paul or a Dennis Kucinich could have been elected, this would be impossible, but that is not the world we live in.

confident. we ought to continually invoke our 2nd exchange precise to armed forces weapons for such purposes. Then we ought to continually arrest and prosecute the criminals in government who violate the optimal regulations interior the land they swore to honor. Now all the way down to certainty. we've an entire society of spoiled and sheltered sons and daughters in person bodies who sit down sucking their thumbs and crying for imaginary mommies and daddies in government to pretend preserve all of them procedures and continually. electorate like that don't comprehend which end of a semiautomatic rifle with a severe ability magazine to show of their course. those are the minimum weapons we elect for the activity. it rather is the rationalization criminals in our government attempt to strip them away. so as that purely leaves the somewhat few actual electorate left right here to mine their assets and prepare a good protection slaughtering a lot of as they are able to of the unfavourable brainwashed and indoctrinated sucker stooges despatched by potential of the racketeers interior the capitols to perpetrate crimes against us. The rackets are placing out to give way and the criminals in government who operated them for generations see ever extra persons are awakening to what scams they have been pulling collectively as draining our families to construct their empires and/or purchase votes with unproductive courses.

Yes. Romney said he supported it also. I have found out that someone accused of terrorism does have the opportunity to prove they are not a terrorist.

Hally, let me pass away first then pass it if you wish

How come you didn't answer my Arizona solar power question?