The 86 Senators who Voted to Pass NDAA need to #Occupy the Unemployment Line

December 16, 2011
By

This year’s National Defense Authorization Act has just passed through the Senate. The only obstacle is President Obama and historically he caves into vocal opposition, and looking at the lengthy list of Senators voting Yea, this abomination this could very well pass.

 

The 13 Senators that voted Nay on this year’s version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), with 86 voting Yea:

Cardin (D-MD)
Coburn (R-OK)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Durbin (D-IL)
Franken (D-MN)
Harkin (D-IA)
Lee (R-UT)
Merkley (D-OR)
Paul (R-KY)
Risch (R-ID)
Sanders (I-VT)
Wyden (D-OR)

One was apparently too busy to vote: Moran (R-KS)

 

Although the most tyrannical part of the Act has been restructured, this is a tell:

Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities, relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.”

As PoliticusUSA’s Ray Medeiros points out:

What does EXISTING law say about the detention of American citizens. That is what we need to be concerned with. If existing law states American citizens can be detained indefinitely, by the military, that is the law or laws that need to be changed, rather than this current appropriations act.

 

Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director at ACLU, said Wednesday night that the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2012 was still highly problematic despite changes to the bill. “It was an awful bill before and it is an awful bill now,” he told MSNBC host Rachel Maddow.

The restructured version of the bill kept the provisions but exempted U.S. citizens to be held in military custody and included language stating that the bill did not extend new authority to detain U.S. citizens. If we need to dissect this swiftly passed Act to this degree, warning signs should be blaring in your head and the fact that, that particular provision was even contained in the bill should alarm you. Why was that provision contained in the bill to begin with?

 The NDAA will stifle our Constitutional Rights and most probably will pass, and most definitely without the approval of Americans. This is reminiscent of the Patriot Act. Our government is now allowed to spy on their citizens. We are not supposed to fear our government, and now, regardless of any restructuring done in this Act, it’s a step in a very wrong direction. Did any of us believe that detainees held in Gitmo without being charged, some of them most assuredly were  innocent, would not happen to any of us?  As advocates of torture applauded this, most of us knew, this was an infringement upon their rights. If that sounds bleak, it’s meant to because now we’re being threatened with the same scenario. 

 Regardless of how politicos spin the passage of NDAA, it opens the door to invasive tactics which infringe upon our freedom. It’s one step in a direction America should never venture into. President Obama could possibly veto it but that’s doubtful. We’ll see, but meanwhile keep your eye on this list of Yeas, and vote them out. Sure, some of the 13 Senators possibly came to the realization that Americans will retaliate at the voting booth if they allow the passage of NDAA, but whether it’s out of conscience or political posturing, those opposing the Act should be held up, while those passing it, should pay a stiff price by occupying an unemployment line.

Occupy NDAA. Gain our freedom back, and ignore the spin doctors and bots who are attempting to make this into something healthy for our country. It is not.

 

The lengthy list of the Senators who passed this bill:

YEAs —86
Akaka (D-HI)
Alexander (R-TN)
Ayotte (R-NH)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Baucus (D-MT)
Begich (D-AK)
Bennet (D-CO)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Blunt (R-MO)
Boozman (R-AR)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Brown (R-MA)
Burr (R-NC)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coats (R-IN)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Coons (D-DE)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hagan (D-NC)
Hatch (R-UT)
Heller (R-NV)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Inouye (D-HI)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (D-SD)
Johnson (R-WI)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kirk (R-IL)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lugar (R-IN)
Manchin (D-WV)
McCain (R-AZ)
McCaskill (D-MO)
McConnell (R-KY)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Portman (R-OH)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Rubio (R-FL)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Shelby (R-AL)
Snowe (R-ME)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Thune (R-SD)
Toomey (R-PA)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Vitter (R-LA)
Warner (D-VA)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wicker (R-MS)

 

Image: Mother Jones

Tags: , ,

  • Monkeyweather8

    Incredible how one rarely sees Democrats and Republicans wholeheartedly agreeing on a subject, but they both support stripping the citizenry of the US of their rights under the Constitution and bill of Rights. How many of the evil 93 are up for re-election?

    • David Loper

      Incredible how one rarely sees Democrats, Republicans and Independents standing together as a minority to oppose this treachery. There are good people on both side of the aisle but they are outnumbered by the establishment elite. Perhaps the people can support and latch on to these last few patriots and they can reform their parties. This is my hope for the nation.

  • Monkeyweather8

    Incredible how one rarely sees Democrats and Republicans wholeheartedly agreeing on a subject, but they both support stripping the citizenry of the US of their rights under the Constitution and bill of Rights. How many of the evil 93 are up for re-election?

    • David Loper

      Incredible how one rarely sees Democrats, Republicans and Independents standing together as a minority to oppose this treachery. There are good people on both side of the aisle but they are outnumbered by the establishment elite. Perhaps the people can support and latch on to these last few patriots and they can reform their parties. This is my hope for the nation.

  • http://www.facebook.com/mirela.monte Mirela Monte

    Only 7 Senators voted against the actual bill. The vote you’re presenting here is the final vote for the finished product, the adjustment between the House Bill H.R.1540 and the Senate Bill S.1867 before being sent to the President for signing.

    The vote of utmost importance was the vote on the actual bill, not this final adjustment. On that, only the following seven Senators voted against it:

    Coburn
    Harkin
    Lee
    Merkley
    Paul
    Sanders
    Wyden

    Incidentally, six of these senators also voted against The Patriot Act Extension earlier this year:

    Harkin
    Lee
    Merkley
    Paul
    Sanders
    Wyden

    These, my dear Americans, are the only Senators who work for us… all six of them!

    • Don McAdams

      I was thinking the same thing. When I read this, I remembered the 93-7 vote from Dec. 1st, too. However, upon looking for more vote details of that vote, I discovered 2 amendments to NDAA that passed with crazy majorities, 99-1 and 100-0. The 99-1 was good, “Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities, relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.” Sen. Graham said on the floor that it would limit interrogations of Americans who support terrorism, but Sen. Kyl was the only one who voted against this amendment.

      http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r112:1:./temp/~r112WyAmfg:e224443: (If the link doesn’t work, try copy/paste, and don’t forget the “:” at the end, some site’s truncate it for some reason, but it needs to be there). Scroll down to the paragraph that starts with “SA 1414. Mr. LEVIN (for Mr. Menendez (for himself and Mr. Kirk)) proposed an amendment to the bill S. 1867…”

      This amendment to NDAA passed with all 100 Senators voting yea, and is basically a list of more stringent sanctions on Iran.

      “Iran, is designated as of primary money laundering concern… because of the threat to government and financial institutions resulting from the illicit activities of the Government of Iran, including its pursuit of nuclear weapons, support for international terrorism, and efforts to deceive responsible financial institutions and evade sanctions.” Not too surprising until I read the part about “efforts to deceive RESPONSIBLE FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS?! Where are those? Are they referring to the Rothschild banks all over the world? The IMF? I almost lost my coffee lol!

      So, there’s a section authorizing the President to freeze all of Iran’s assets “in the United States, come within the United States, or are or come within the possession or control of a United States person.” And as if the Citizen’s United case wasn’t clear enough, Levin goes further to define a US person as, well a US person, but also as “an entity that is organized under the laws of the United States or jurisdiction within the United States.”

      There are exceptions for food, medicine, and medical devices, but the oil sanctions are the core. The goal is to stop the whole world from buying oil from Iran. “The President shall… conduct outreach to petroleum-producing countries to encourage those countries to increase their output of crude oil to ensure there is a sufficient supply,,, from countries other than Iran and to minimize any impact on the price of oil resulting from the imposition of sanctions under this section.”

      If Iran were really capable of attacking US, I’d say get ready for war. This is, at the least, 100% approval from ALL of our worthless Senate congresscritters to start the war with not only US citizens, but also explicitly Iran. It’s all about the oil, they pose no real threat to US, probably not Israel neither.

      My conclusion would be that there are NO Senators who work for US, but I’m left wondering why these 7 would vote for the amendment but against the bill itself. Regardless, these 6 get a pass this time, the rest need tried for treason, because the 93 that voted for it last time may not have gotten a chance to recant – it could’ve passed the House as is and went straight to Obomber’s desk – and Coburn needs to pay for the unPatriot Act vote (thanx for connecting the 2 votes, extremely relevant IMO). Now to examine the House votes and hold them accountable, and Obomber too if he signs this pos bill – and he said he will, surprise surprise…

      • http://www.facebook.com/RealisticPC Don McAdams

        So, although 6 Senators are against the unPatriot Act and NDAA, ALL of’em are ready to go to war with Iran. This is a big deal to me (obviously lol) because I don’t believe that Ahmadinejad poses a real threat, and who are WE to say that Iran can’t develop nukes” – We’re the only ones who’ve ever used’em! Anyways, rights trampled, including those of foreign countries, the war on freedom, er I mean terror, rages on…

        • David Loper

          Amendment 1414 was done by UC (unanimous consent) meaning it can be added to the bill without an actual vote. If no Senator was there to refute the language or call for a roll call vote (for example they were at lunch at the time when the traitors were talking) they can easily add the portion to the bill with the clerk recording the vote as 100-0, unanimous. The finality of the bill is what is in question here and these 7 senators (3R 3D 1I) voted against it.

        • http://FreakoutNation.com Anomaly 100

          Thanks for reminding me how screwed we are;-)

        • Unknwos

          Iran doesn’t even want nukes. The IAEA document as no backing and it doesn’t make since that the Iranians would hire a Mexican drug cartel member to kill a Saudi ambassador on US soil! Did you know that Iran has a mandatory death penalty for drug trafficking.

      • http://www.facebook.com/RealisticPC Don McAdams

        Alright, last comment to add to this book I’ve written here. I did find a direct link to the amendment I’m talkin’ about on the Government Printing Office’s website if anyone cares to read it themselves. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2011-11-28/pdf/CREC-2011-11-28-pt1-PgS7912.pdf#page=22 .

      • David Loper

        You usually see those sort of numbers with a voice vote or when parts of a bill are procedural. The majority of this bill is to fund the troops. It’s the sticky bits that toss the Constitution on its ear that is the problem.

        • http://www.facebook.com/RealisticPC Don McAdams

          The increased sanctions on Iran are an act of war. The nerve of our government and President to encourage other countries to produce more oil to make up for the loss created by our sanctions is incredibly arrogant, not to mention that We aren’t supposed to be telling the rest of the world what to do. While I agree I was going overboard in explaining the details of this last night, and sanctions on Iran are nothing new unfortunately, this is just as significant as the rest of NDAA. What happens when Ahmadinejad gets pissed and starts funding others more and working harder against US? We’ll have a 6th or 7th country to add to the list of places we’re currently bombing. Time to overthrow another regime? No, this is not insignificant, IMHO, nor is the fact that it passed 100-0. The unanimous consent is standard procedure, but they can’t do that with nobody in the room. I’m obviously not sure of the rule, there’s probably a minimum number of Senators required to proceed, but to assume that not one Senator objected because all the good ones were at lunch is giving them more than the benefit of the doubt, IMO. There’s not one of’em that isn’t ready for a US-friendly regime in Iran that will sell US cheap oil. Remember, Iran doesn’t owe money to the IMF or the World Bank and is therefor immune to our global financial enslavement. Like Gaddafi, Ahmadinejad can charge US whatever the Hell he wants for his oil, and our government doesn’t like that. Perhaps a few Senators missed this particular vote, but not one of’em that was there is against the idea of another alleged preventive war, which actually have been and probably always will be quests for more coal and oil.

  • http://www.facebook.com/mirela.monte Mirela Monte

    Only 7 Senators voted against the actual bill. The vote you’re presenting here is the final vote for the finished product, the adjustment between the House Bill H.R.1540 and the Senate Bill S.1867 before being sent to the President for signing.

    The vote of utmost importance was the vote on the actual bill, not this final adjustment. On that, only the following seven Senators voted against it:

    Coburn
    Harkin
    Lee
    Merkley
    Paul
    Sanders
    Wyden

    Incidentally, six of these senators also voted against The Patriot Act Extension earlier this year:

    Harkin
    Lee
    Merkley
    Paul
    Sanders
    Wyden

    These, my dear Americans, are the only Senators who work for us… all six of them!

    • Don McAdams

      I was thinking the same thing. When I read this, I remembered the 93-7 vote from Dec. 1st, too. However, upon looking for more vote details of that vote, I discovered 2 amendments to NDAA that passed with crazy majorities, 99-1 and 100-0. The 99-1 was good, “Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities, relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.” Sen. Graham said on the floor that it would limit interrogations of Americans who support terrorism, but Sen. Kyl was the only one who voted against this amendment.

      http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r112:1:./temp/~r112WyAmfg:e224443: (If the link doesn’t work, try copy/paste, and don’t forget the “:” at the end, some site’s truncate it for some reason, but it needs to be there). Scroll down to the paragraph that starts with “SA 1414. Mr. LEVIN (for Mr. Menendez (for himself and Mr. Kirk)) proposed an amendment to the bill S. 1867…”

      This amendment to NDAA passed with all 100 Senators voting yea, and is basically a list of more stringent sanctions on Iran.

      “Iran, is designated as of primary money laundering concern… because of the threat to government and financial institutions resulting from the illicit activities of the Government of Iran, including its pursuit of nuclear weapons, support for international terrorism, and efforts to deceive responsible financial institutions and evade sanctions.” Not too surprising until I read the part about “efforts to deceive RESPONSIBLE FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS?! Where are those? Are they referring to the Rothschild banks all over the world? The IMF? I almost lost my coffee lol!

      So, there’s a section authorizing the President to freeze all of Iran’s assets “in the United States, come within the United States, or are or come within the possession or control of a United States person.” And as if the Citizen’s United case wasn’t clear enough, Levin goes further to define a US person as, well a US person, but also as “an entity that is organized under the laws of the United States or jurisdiction within the United States.”

      There are exceptions for food, medicine, and medical devices, but the oil sanctions are the core. The goal is to stop the whole world from buying oil from Iran. “The President shall… conduct outreach to petroleum-producing countries to encourage those countries to increase their output of crude oil to ensure there is a sufficient supply,,, from countries other than Iran and to minimize any impact on the price of oil resulting from the imposition of sanctions under this section.”

      If Iran were really capable of attacking US, I’d say get ready for war. This is, at the least, 100% approval from ALL of our worthless Senate congresscritters to start the war with not only US citizens, but also explicitly Iran. It’s all about the oil, they pose no real threat to US, probably not Israel neither.

      My conclusion would be that there are NO Senators who work for US, but I’m left wondering why these 7 would vote for the amendment but against the bill itself. Regardless, these 6 get a pass this time, the rest need tried for treason, because the 93 that voted for it last time may not have gotten a chance to recant – it could’ve passed the House as is and went straight to Obomber’s desk – and Coburn needs to pay for the unPatriot Act vote (thanx for connecting the 2 votes, extremely relevant IMO). Now to examine the House votes and hold them accountable, and Obomber too if he signs this pos bill – and he said he will, surprise surprise…

      • http://www.facebook.com/RealisticPC Don McAdams

        Well, the link doesn’t work on the Library of Congress website, search link timed out. It’s a chore to actually find it, I started here, http://www.govtrack.us/congress/amendment.xpd?session=112&amdt=s1414 . First click is either of the “Thomas” links. Next page I clicked the link in this sentence at the top, “TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S7933-7934.” Then scroll to the bottom of that page and click “Page: S7934.” That’ll take you to the amendment that I was quoting in the previous comment. Now I see why a lot of political news and blogs don’t link to the wording directly, what a pain in the ass! Makes me wonder if there isn’t a direct link to page S7934, but it would probably still be a search link that would just time out again.

        • David Loper

          Amendment 1414 was done by UC (unanimous consent) meaning it can be added to the bill without an actual vote. If no Senator was there to refute the language or call for a roll call vote (for example they were at lunch at the time when the traitors were talking) they can easily add the portion to the bill with the clerk recording the vote as 100-0, unanimous. The finality of the bill is what is in question here and these 7 senators (3R 3D 1I) voted against it.

          • http://www.facebook.com/RealisticPC Don McAdams

            The point was that not one Senator that was present voted against the Iran sanctions, which will lead to war, so they directly support war with Iran – ALL of them. Okay, minus those that may have been at lunch or in the bathroom, but surely that wasn’t all of’em… probably not many at all. I will not give them the benefit of the doubt, they don’t deserve it, and it is dangerously naive, IMHO.

        • http://FreakoutNation.com Anomaly 100

          Thanks for reminding me how screwed we are;-)

        • Unknwos

          Iran doesn’t even want nukes. The IAEA document as no backing and it doesn’t make since that the Iranians would hire a Mexican drug cartel member to kill a Saudi ambassador on US soil! Did you know that Iran has a mandatory death penalty for drug trafficking.

      • http://www.facebook.com/RealisticPC Don McAdams

        Alright, last comment to add to this book I’ve written here. I did find a direct link to the amendment I’m talkin’ about on the Government Printing Office’s website if anyone cares to read it themselves. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2011-11-28/pdf/CREC-2011-11-28-pt1-PgS7912.pdf#page=22 .

      • David Loper

        You usually see those sort of numbers with a voice vote or when parts of a bill are procedural. The majority of this bill is to fund the troops. It’s the sticky bits that toss the Constitution on its ear that is the problem.

        • http://www.facebook.com/RealisticPC Don McAdams

          The increased sanctions on Iran are an act of war. The nerve of our government and President to encourage other countries to produce more oil to make up for the loss created by our sanctions is incredibly arrogant, not to mention that We aren’t supposed to be telling the rest of the world what to do. While I agree I was going overboard in explaining the details of this last night, and sanctions on Iran are nothing new unfortunately, this is just as significant as the rest of NDAA. What happens when Ahmadinejad gets pissed and starts funding others more and working harder against US? We’ll have a 6th or 7th country to add to the list of places we’re currently bombing. Time to overthrow another regime? No, this is not insignificant, IMHO, nor is the fact that it passed 100-0. The unanimous consent is standard procedure, but they can’t do that with nobody in the room. I’m obviously not sure of the rule, there’s probably a minimum number of Senators required to proceed, but to assume that not one Senator objected because all the good ones were at lunch is giving them more than the benefit of the doubt, IMO. There’s not one of’em that isn’t ready for a US-friendly regime in Iran that will sell US cheap oil. Remember, Iran doesn’t owe money to the IMF or the World Bank and is therefor immune to our global financial enslavement. Like Gaddafi, Ahmadinejad can charge US whatever the Hell he wants for his oil, and our government doesn’t like that. Perhaps a few Senators missed this particular vote, but not one of’em that was there is against the idea of another alleged preventive war, which actually have been and probably always will be quests for more coal and oil.

    • Anonymous

      I’m proud to say Merkley and Wyden are both from my state of Oregon. However I believe they both voted for the first round of the Patriot Act, and I believe they both also voted for CISPA, or one of the other anti-privacy / censorship bills.

      Should we forgive them?

      I’m not sure.

  • http://twitter.com/UBIEE UBIEE- 8 Solutions

    You real do no deserve much better. You went into the Wars for bringing US Democracy to the people of other nations, and since most us citizens are so ignorant about the true fact and truth why you go out and bring hunger, disaster and killings under the name of democracy. Now you get a fair portion of what your rules have giving other nations as their remedies. It is US Citizens time to get lifted to the next level of Civil obedience. You get what you do in most countries. It is not Treason just that your country leaders do not consider you worth much more than being a Terrorist if you think different.

    Gob Bless your Nation. We left if many years ago when people got treated like in Nazi Germany. Just this is not Germany. Get rid of your leaders you get rid of your problems.

  • http://www.facebook.com/william.stillings William Stillings

    TREASON

  • http://www.facebook.com/rraznikov Richard Raznikov

    The names of House and Senate members who voted to eviscerate the Bill of Rights should be widely circulated. The American people should target them for defeat in the next election, regardless of party or ‘ideological orientation’. The only way to reverse this sickness is to punish it and the only way to punish it is to defeat these people. My Senators, Boxer and Feinstein, in casting their votes, have violated their oaths of office. I am ashamed of them both.

  • http://www.facebook.com/rraznikov Richard Raznikov

    The names of House and Senate members who voted to eviscerate the Bill of Rights should be widely circulated. The American people should target them for defeat in the next election, regardless of party or ‘ideological orientation’. The only way to reverse this sickness is to punish it and the only way to punish it is to defeat these people. My Senators, Boxer and Feinstein, in casting their votes, have violated their oaths of office. I am ashamed of them both.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1481937034 Tara Rick McIntyre

    traitors. with all of the anti goverment sentiment going around does anyone really believe they will only be targeting al quida in the u.s.? does everyone remember the memo from homeland security warning law enforcement to be on the look out for returning veterans and right wing groups that could be domestic terrorist ? this is nothing more than a lawyer move to word it properly to violate rights. the key word being terrorist

    • Frances13

      Now occupiers are on the terrorist watch list in the UK, so that would pretty much categorize OWSers as worthy of detainment in their eyes.

    • Rjfilm

      Yes and all of us that are objecting to what they have done and commented on here are now considered terrorist!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1481937034 Tara Rick McIntyre

    traitors. with all of the anti goverment sentiment going around does anyone really believe they will only be targeting al quida in the u.s.? does everyone remember the memo from homeland security warning law enforcement to be on the look out for returning veterans and right wing groups that could be domestic terrorist ? this is nothing more than a lawyer move to word it properly to violate rights. the key word being terrorist

    • Frances13

      Now occupiers are on the terrorist watch list in the UK, so that would pretty much categorize OWSers as worthy of detainment in their eyes.

    • Rjfilm

      Yes and all of us that are objecting to what they have done and commented on here are now considered terrorist!

  • Tsaskm

    Who did not vote is no material but the majority. The senate is one body and readily pretends that the vote is made in due process. Real patriots will walk out instead of voting when they know their votes do not work.

  • Yyowza

    democracy has been forgotten about when corporate mobsters are allowed to threaten the lives and families our vulnerable elected officials if they dont follow thier commands and accept thier bribes. thank you

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Glenn-Stephens/896590471 Glenn Stephens

    Our Founding Fathers had great respect for John Locke. Indeed Jefferson called him one of the three greatest human beings.

    Locke’s Second Treatise lays out a simple test for determining whether your government has gone astray, ceased to be legitimate civil government, broke its contract, and can be resisted, if need be, violently.

    The test – whether the government is trying to get you total control over you. What more signals a desire and design to have total control over dissidents (no one seriously believed they will stop with terrorists) than giving the executive-branch military the power to judge, detain, and punish, without counsel, jury trial, charges, or speedy civilian trial.

    Put simply, they want to have their way with us. This puts us in a state of war with them and we can resist as we see fit. Our Founders would agree.

  • Jevans1

    The purpose of government is to protect liberty, when the government tries to do anything else (no matter how noble) it always threatens liberty. This NDAA and Patriot Act are a wakeup call to all Americans. Freedom or Tyranny? We must stand united on this! All great leaders have skeletons in their closet (Ghandi, MLK Jr., Kennedy, even Jesus) its what they stand for when it counts that matters, not whether you can find a flaw. It we can’t stand together against NDAA then we get what we deserve!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_JKLLPVKKSWYRHLZH3LDQMZRW6A dean

    Damn Idiots voting YEA!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EFVVN4ILMQ42UE3ZEKHNDTZ3J4 Jim F.

    Why is Allen West’s name missing?

  • freedomchamps

    The government of the United States needs to be overthrown. The Occupy protests have a very good reason to be protesting.

Related Posts