The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Another Under-Bus-Toss For The DOD?

Posted on | November 29, 2011 | 18 Comments

by Smitty

Apparently the ACLU is feeling stretched by the Defense Authorization Bill, emphasis original:

The Defense Authorization bill is now on the Senate floor with troubling provisions that would give the President — and all future presidents — the authority to indefinitely imprison people, without charge or trial, both abroad and inside the United States and would mandate military detention of some civilians who would otherwise be outside of military control. The indefinite detention without charge or trial provisions are so harmful that the Obama White House has threatened to veto the bill if they are not removed from it.

#OccupyWallStreet, that fount of reliability, says:

The Udall amendment, eliminates these unconstitutional elements. Supporters of the National Defense Authorization Act: Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) explained that the bill will “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield” and people can be imprisoned without charge or trial “American citizen or not.” Another supporter, Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) also declared that the bill is needed because “America is part of the battlefield.”

Past the heavy breathing, Udall’s site offers a link to the amendment in question, which looks straightforward, for a quick glance.

National defense is a no-kidding Constitutional job of the POTUS. We can and do argue that #OccupyResoluteDesk is shanking that job into fail bunker more or less daily.

And yet, the POTUS is given that power to protect and enhance liberty. We have a Bill of Rights intended to prevent overachievement. To prevent allergic reactions to healthy citizens from our Executive immune system, if you will.

After the Stupor Committee fiasco, the politics get flakier still. The President appears to sound like he’ll reject additional power. Yet power seems to be what BHO understands. The Stupor Committee gambit raised the debt ceiling early this year, pointed a spear at the heart of military funding, and provided finger pointing opportunities, so that #OccupyResoluteDesk can claim to run against a broken Congress.

Is there something like that afoot here? We really do not want the federal government doing any more policing inside the country than is already going on. Expanding federal power means admitting that state and local government are impotent. Also impotent: our Ruling Class, for demagoguing their way down the Greecy slope.

The Underpants Gnome theory of this Administration seems to be:

  1. Trigger crisis.
  2. Demagogue crisis to advantage.
  3. ???
  4. Profit (albeit not yours).

I really can’t tell what the preferred answer is here. What I do know is that whatever pleases BHO least is likely to be most in accordance with the spirit of the Constitution.

via Troglopundit


18 Responses to “Another Under-Bus-Toss For The DOD?”

  1. Ladd Ehlinger Jr.
    November 29th, 2011 @ 11:57 am

    Obama’s only against it because, to his mind, the amendment smells like Bush. Otherwise he’s all for it and in fact gave some speeches about prolonged internment that even the wacky Rachel Maddow found troubling. This is a bad, bad provision.

    Edit: Please note the capital “B.”

  2. Anonymous
    November 29th, 2011 @ 12:02 pm

    We all know what a staunch defender of our constitutional liberties Lindsey Graham is.

  3. BigGator5
    November 29th, 2011 @ 12:10 pm


  4. dad29
    November 29th, 2011 @ 12:13 pm

    Expanding federal power means admitting that state and local government are impotent.

    Deleting Posse Comitatus (which is what’s being proposed) would not only ‘admit’ that States/Locals are impotent; it would MAKE them so by force of arms.

  5. Anonymous
    November 29th, 2011 @ 12:47 pm

    There is a bright line between going after Americans overseas who have repeatedly said things showing they’ve joined the enemy, or non-citizens as a group, and allowing this against American citizens domestically.

  6. Anonymous
    November 29th, 2011 @ 12:47 pm

    “The Stupor Committee gambit raised the debt ceiling early this year, pointed a spear at the heart of military funding”

    Not really. The “across the board cuts” aren’t actual cuts — they’re merely reductions in projected spending increases.

    DoD — and everything else — will continue to grow if they’re allowed to kick in.

  7. edward royce
    November 29th, 2011 @ 1:08 pm

    Thank you John “fucktard” McCain for again attacking the fundamental rights that we as citizens are supposed to have.

    Anybody remember the bullshit that got spouted about how “conservative” John McCain was in 2008?

    Yeah.  All of you go hide under a rock somewhere.

  8. Ima Wurdibitsch
    November 29th, 2011 @ 1:22 pm

    The Udall Amendment (#1107) would help.  Rand Paul’s proposed Amendment to the NDAA would eliminate Section 1031 (Detainee Matters) and solve the whole problem.

    I understand the arguments about protecting our country from terrorists but the definition of terrorist seems to change depending upon who you ask.  Democrats have denounced Tea Party activists as terrorists.

    I’m not comfortable AT ALL with Section 1031. I have no desire to see a HMMWV pull up in my driveway because someone didn’t like my “Tyranny Response Team” bumper sticker.

  9. Ima Wurdibitsch
    November 29th, 2011 @ 1:24 pm

    Forgot to add to the above that Paul’s Amendment is #1062.

  10. DaveO
    November 29th, 2011 @ 1:50 pm

    Looks like there’s no coverage of Udall being a Democrat, only that RINO-6 McCain and RINO-5 Graham are pushing this. As always, Preibus is MIA. 
    Here’s the core of the problem: this amendment codifies Obama’s proven position on Due Process, Habeus Corpus, and enforcing law – which is used to protect his friends, and destroy his personal and political enemies. Military and police officers are forced to set aside the Constitution in order to follow a usurping law.
    Due process and Habeus corpus are enshrined in our Constitution. Due process is found in the 5th Amendment; and habeus corpus is found in the Suspension Clause (Clause 2), in Article 1, Section 9. (Wikipedia).
    Obama’s policy on Due Process is to negate Due Process whenever doing so serves the POTUS’s interest. This was evidenced by the SCOAMF’s remarks concerning Ahmed Ghailani’s trial, and Obama’s subordinates actions on the NBPP trial, and the new gerrymandering going on in the states due to the census. 
    Big questions:
    1. Why now?
    2. If the Dems were so all-fired against the US tapping and listening to terrorists abroad coordinate their support with US citizens here in CONUS, why are they suddenly okay with throwing away Habeus Corpus en toto?

    3. Who are the targets of this law? Are we going to see DHS re-revive its animus against all (mostly white) veterans of the campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq?

  11. Adjoran
    November 29th, 2011 @ 2:45 pm

    It is a terrible idea to begin specifying in great detail these broadly defined powers.  If it is codified, we shall surely come to regret it.

  12. Anonymous
    November 29th, 2011 @ 3:07 pm

    The whole debt deal stupor committee was a sham, a charade of unenforceable commitments made on behalf of politicians not yet elected, who are under no obligation to honor even those minimal promises.

  13. Anonymous
    November 29th, 2011 @ 3:13 pm

    OTOH I find some comfort in knowing how we are meant to meet our end. It radically simplifies one’s choices going forward.

  14. Anonymous
    November 29th, 2011 @ 3:48 pm

    That’s true — but if Obama sticks to his guns on vetoing any re-negotiation of the “automatic cuts” schedule, it’s a no-lose proposition for him politically. Any good that comes of it makes him look like a deficit hawk, any bad that comes of it gets blamed on the Republicans.

    The Republicans got gamed.

  15. Anonymous
    November 29th, 2011 @ 4:07 pm

    They have a knack for that.

  16. Anonymous
    November 29th, 2011 @ 4:59 pm

    Underpants Gnome theory of this Administration

    Underpants Gnome theory of the Perry Campaign

    Step 3. ???

    See! Perry’s been right all along.

  17. Anonymous
    November 29th, 2011 @ 5:05 pm

    “…indefinite detention without charge or trial provisions…”

    Seems like more than a trivial matter even if endorsed by SCoaMF. Maybe the clock is striking the second time today.

    That is some very dangerous language.

  18. Indefinite detention for American citizens
    November 29th, 2011 @ 5:19 pm

    […] Another Under-Bus-Toss For The DOD? ( […]