Do your little dance because Santorum dropped out.
Meanwhile the guy who beat him holds exactly the same views, with a slicker package.
And your oh so liberal president is a multiple war criminal.
cool beans Umrika.
(Source: theyoungradical)
—
Barack Obama
(via loveyourchaos)
And I don’t understand why people hate Obama-he clearly has the right mindset.
(unlike fucking Rick Santorum)
(via sorrowsinsand-blessingsinstone)
(Source: gaywrites, via katheriners)
But you can most certainly deny the rights of individuals of all sexes and ages in the Middle East and pretend it’s about your “national security”!
(Source: atheiststardust, via madrigogged)
Ethics, huh?
Talking with self-professed ~liberal~ roommate about politics, specifically the presidential elections:
Me: I don’t think any of the candidates are valid options.
Her: Yeah, but Obama will do better than any of the rest of them, especially when it comes to keeping his election promises…
Me: Oh yeah, with his escalation of costly wars overseas after having run on an anti-war campaign ticket.
Her: Yeah…. [No, really. This is all she had to say.]
![thesubversivesound:
sinidentidades:
Obama to sign indefinite detention bill into law
In one of the least surprising developments imaginable, President Obama – after spending months threatening to veto the Levin/McCain detention bill – yesterday announced that he would instead sign it into law (this is the same individual, of course, who unequivocally vowed when seeking the Democratic nomination to support a filibuster of “any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecom[s],” only to turn around – once he had the nomination secure — and not only vote against such a filibuster, but to vote in favor of the underlying bill itself, so this is perfectly consistent with his past conduct). As a result, the final versionof the Levin/McCain bill will be enshrined as law this week as part of the the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). I wrote aboutthe primary provisions and implications of this bill last week, and won’t repeat those points here.
The ACLU said last night that the bill contains “harmful provisions that some legislators have said could authorize the U.S. military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians, including American citizens, anywhere in the world” and added: “if President Obama signs this bill, it will damage his legacy.” Human Rights Watch said that Obama’s decision “does enormous damage to the rule of law both in the US and abroad” and that “President Obama will go down in history as the president who enshrined indefinite detention without trial in US law.”
Both groups pointed out that this is the first time indefinite detention has been enshrined in law since the McCarthy era of the 1950s, when — as the ACLU put it — “President Truman had the courage to veto” the Internal Security Act of 1950 on the ground that it “would make a mockery of our Bill of Rights” and then watched Congress override the veto. That Act authorized the imprisonment of Communists and other “subversives” without the necessity of full trials or due process (many of the most egregious provisions of that bill were repealed by the 1971 Non-Detention Act, and are now being rejuvenated by these War on Terror policies of indefinite detention). President Obama, needless to say, is not Harry Truman. He’s not even the Candidate Obama of 2008 who repeatedly insisted that due process and security were not mutually exclusive and who condemned indefinite detention as “black hole” injustice.
He really got you all hook line and sinker with his “CHAAAANGE!” campaign, and by change he meant tyranny.
“Change” must have really meant “upgrading the police state.”](http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lwf4ut7E5R1qcujoko1_500.jpg)
Obama to sign indefinite detention bill into law
In one of the least surprising developments imaginable, President Obama – after spending months threatening to veto the Levin/McCain detention bill – yesterday announced that he would instead sign it into law (this is the same individual, of course, who unequivocally vowed when seeking the Democratic nomination to support a filibuster of “any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecom[s],” only to turn around – once he had the nomination secure — and not only vote against such a filibuster, but to vote in favor of the underlying bill itself, so this is perfectly consistent with his past conduct). As a result, the final versionof the Levin/McCain bill will be enshrined as law this week as part of the the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). I wrote aboutthe primary provisions and implications of this bill last week, and won’t repeat those points here.
The ACLU said last night that the bill contains “harmful provisions that some legislators have said could authorize the U.S. military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians, including American citizens, anywhere in the world” and added: “if President Obama signs this bill, it will damage his legacy.” Human Rights Watch said that Obama’s decision “does enormous damage to the rule of law both in the US and abroad” and that “President Obama will go down in history as the president who enshrined indefinite detention without trial in US law.”
Both groups pointed out that this is the first time indefinite detention has been enshrined in law since the McCarthy era of the 1950s, when — as the ACLU put it — “President Truman had the courage to veto” the Internal Security Act of 1950 on the ground that it “would make a mockery of our Bill of Rights” and then watched Congress override the veto. That Act authorized the imprisonment of Communists and other “subversives” without the necessity of full trials or due process (many of the most egregious provisions of that bill were repealed by the 1971 Non-Detention Act, and are now being rejuvenated by these War on Terror policies of indefinite detention). President Obama, needless to say, is not Harry Truman. He’s not even the Candidate Obama of 2008 who repeatedly insisted that due process and security were not mutually exclusive and who condemned indefinite detention as “black hole” injustice.
He really got you all hook line and sinker with his “CHAAAANGE!” campaign, and by change he meant tyranny.
“Change” must have really meant “upgrading the police state.”
