Top Leaderboard, Site wide
September 18, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Help us grow by sharing
and liking Truthdig:
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Newsletter

sign up to get updates


A New Way Insurers Are Shifting Costs to the Sick
Climate Action and Economies Can Grow Together




On the Run


Truthdig Bazaar more items

 
Report

Truthdiggers of the Week: NDAA Dissenters in Congress

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Dec 16, 2011
Wikimedia Commons

Democratic Sen. Al Franken, left, voted against the NDAA while Republican Sen. Mark Kirk supported it.

Though they couldn’t stop the freedom-crushing National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 from becoming law, Truthdig salutes the efforts of the members of the U.S. Congress who took a stand against the NDAA in the final round of voting this week. There are too many of them to list by name here, but unfortunately, there weren’t enough of them to block the bill’s passage, which a flip-flopping President Obama was slated to sign Friday. Nonetheless, for doing their part to protect our civil liberties, even in the face of formidable political pressure, the 149 senators and representatives who said nay to the NDAA get our vote as our Truthdiggers of the Week.

First, a little background. We have been watching this process with growing incredulity and concern as the bill climbed higher on Congress’ priority list, and for a while it seemed that two troubling clauses in H.R. 1540—specifically, Sections 1031 and 1032—would make the NDAA veto bait for Obama if it actually made it to that point in the legislative process. But this appears to be one of those issues that escapes the kind of public attention (read: outrage) it deserves because of a dismaying lack of information and discussion in the mainstream media, as well as some spin on the part of supportive legislators and a sneaky timeline for the voting process: just in time for the holidays!

By the end of last month, though, the Senate had successfully ushered the measure through to the next stage of deliberations on Capitol Hill. This despite the president’s concerns, expressed as follows in a “Statement of Administration Policy” about the bill on Nov. 17: “The administration objects to and has serious legal and policy concerns about many of the detainee provisions in the bill.”

On that note, let’s take a closer look at the objectionable aspects of the 2012 NDAA. These “detainee provisions” to which Obama’s camp was referring enable the indefinite detention, without trial, of U.S. citizens suspected of terrorism (Section 1031), and Section 1032 stipulates that the U.S. military detain suspected noncitizens. The New York Times broke it down thusly after the Senate’s initial vote on Nov. 29:

The New York Times:

Advertisement

Square, Site wide
The most disputed provision would require the government to place into military custody any suspected member of Al Qaeda or one of its allies connected to a plot against the United States or its allies. The provision would exempt American citizens, but would otherwise extend to arrests on United States soil. The executive branch could issue a waiver and keep such a prisoner in the civilian system.

A related provision would create a federal statute saying the government has the legal authority to keep people suspected of terrorism in military custody, indefinitely and without trial. It contains no exception for American citizens. It is intended to bolster the authorization to use military force against the perpetrators of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, which lawmakers enacted a decade ago.

Read more

The next troubling moment in this scary saga happened Wednesday, when President Obama reneged on his veto threat and the bill sailed through the House with 65 percent of its members voting in favor of the NDAA with the detainee provisions intact. (Click here to see a series of handy pie charts documenting the bill’s progress.) Regardless of the efforts of organizations like the ACLU and the horror broadcast by “alternative” media outlets, many of them online, this story failed to have the impact it should have registered in the MSM and the public at large. Truthdig’s own Robert Scheer decried these developments in his column after Wednesday’s vote, interpreting the bill’s most objectionable portion and warning that it “assumes a permanent war against terrorism that extends the battlefield to our homeland.”

Even if President Obama couldn’t listen to the words of caution coming from the likes of Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and FBI chief Robert Mueller, 136 members of the House of Representatives registered their disapproval of the bill in its final go-round, and 13 senators joined them. Six Republican senators dissented, including Rand Paul and Jim DeMint, and an equal number of Democrats, including Al Franken and Dick Durbin, along with Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders. As for the House, the breakdown was 93 Democrats and 43 Republicans. Good to know they were pushing back against this alarming, and ultimately successful, assault on Americans’ most sacred rights, even when the president failed to do his part.  —KA

 

 

 


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Napolean DoneHisPart's avatar

By Napolean DoneHisPart, January 5, 2012 at 9:43 am Link to this comment

Be careful Denise, the hacks on TruthDig are supporters of the empire / Nazi totalitarianism and NOT freedom, for look at the attempt of censorship they sent me:

( and please let me know someone NOT an agent nor hack working to misinform others if you read anything NOT true in my response )

—————-

Hi Napolean DoneHisPart,

It has come to our attention that you have posted comments (pasted below) that are not in keeping with our comment policy. Please review our policy (also pasted below) and help us keep Truthdig’s comment community a respectful and enjoyable place to post for everyone. Thank you.

Your Comment-

TruthDig writers, not only “SHAME ON YOU” but you too will be occupied, bunch of sold-out hacks. Go ahead and block my account for three months again, it is a waste of time to post anything worth reading since most responders on here are agents spreading disinformation. And you think you will escape the Nazis? HA! You are simply the tools, suckers. At least I will go out in dignity and telling the truth. Bunch of stenographers…

Truthdiggers of the Week: NDAA Dissenters in Congress

Comment Policy-

Truthdig will not tolerate:

* personal attacks on our writers or readers
* excessive profanity
* racist, sexist or other discriminatory or hateful language
* statements that may be construed as urging attacks on political leaders, officials, security forces or civilians—American or otherwise
* comments that are off-topic or irrelevant to the story or discussion at hand
* comments disclosing personal information about Truthdig writers or fellow commenters
* entries “signed” by someone other than the actual author
http://www.truthdig.com/about/comment_policy/

—————-

Report this

By DeniseJ, January 5, 2012 at 2:38 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

ANY conservative who voted for this NDAA should hang their head in shame, better yet resign!  The Constitution has been shredded, anyone who doesn’t realize this is unfit to hold office. Obama’s support explicitly of the offending passage is no surprise - he reserved the right to order a “hit” on Awlaki who was scum but non-combatant and due process eligible.  Let not Ron Paul be the only visible protester of this abandonment of our civil rights!!  NO I don’t support Paul, AND I’m more conservative than Reagan…....but the FACTS remain that with NDAA in effect, NO AMERICAN has the 4th amendment rights at all, already weakened by Patriot Act and TSA, this is the last nail in the coffin for liberty. UNITE AND FIGHT IT!!!!

Report this
Napolean DoneHisPart's avatar

By Napolean DoneHisPart, December 20, 2011 at 4:22 pm Link to this comment

I also saw a blurb on teevee or an online video of Feinstein or Boxer ( can’t remember which hag it was ) talking about how terrible it is that the bill passed.. and BOTH of these hags voted in favor of it!

Again, shame on ME for not researching…. all of them.. OUT!  Yesterday!

Report this
Napolean DoneHisPart's avatar

By Napolean DoneHisPart, December 20, 2011 at 4:04 pm Link to this comment

Good job Ed… to my shame I didn’t research the accuracy ( seems like not only Scheer is the shill, but every contributor on Truth Dig - burying the truth - are as well ).

Good thing I don’t even give credence to any of the hired hands… but you are correct.

Here are those who said nay:

NAYs—-7

Coburn (R-OK)

Harkin (D-IA)

Lee (R-UT)

Merkley (D-OR)

Paul (R-KY)

Sanders (I-VT)

Wyden (D-OR)

Report this

By Ed, December 20, 2011 at 2:11 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Your article, Truthdiggers of the Week: NDAA Dissenters in Congress, is not accurate—Al Franken voted for the NDAA.  Please show the link to something that shows that he didn’t.

Here’ my link: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=112&session=1&vote=00218

Al Franken voted yea.  He also did so when the text of 1032/1033 was even more controversial as shown with this link for the vote on 11/29/2011: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=112&session=1&vote=00210

Ed

Report this
Napolean DoneHisPart's avatar

By Napolean DoneHisPart, December 20, 2011 at 11:13 am Link to this comment

This is how we can ALL dissent from this Nazi regime.

http://www.truth-out.org/why-iceland-should-be-news-not/1322327303

You’re welcome.

Report this
David J. Cyr's avatar

By David J. Cyr, December 20, 2011 at 8:48 am Link to this comment

To keep (D) hope alive, where no real hope exists, the corporate party employs a few “progressive” Democrats to disingenuously vote against extraordinarily evil legislation, while their corporate party partner Republicans and Democrats corporate money compliantly vote in genuinely evil solidarity together to ensure passage.

If Democrats were the Solution,
we wouldn’t have the Problems.

Jill Stein for President:

http://www.jillstein.org

Voter Consent Wastes Dissent:

http://chenangogreens.org/home/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=498&Itemid=1

Report this
Oceanna's avatar

By Oceanna, December 20, 2011 at 6:11 am Link to this comment

Dude, do you read articles beyond the headlines in Fluffington’s?

Do you have the ability to address your POV beyond waving them (headlines)?

Do you get the bill passage process 101 or know the difference between the US
Senate and the House of Representatives? 

Do Obamabots have the ability to think critically and independently?

Rhetorical questions of course—NO,NO,NO, NO, NO!

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, December 20, 2011 at 2:49 am Link to this comment

My bad, Oceanna…..prolly you wanted this link:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/al-franken/why-i-oted-against-the-n_b_1154327.html

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, December 20, 2011 at 2:43 am Link to this comment

Why G..o..l..l..y, Sgt. Oceanna you done dint unnerstan
nit no how. I SAID (and I quote a quote, highlighted no
less):

“they’re simply wrong.”,

Whaz zat? You’d like the link agin, no problemo…!

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/12/defense-bill-passed-so-what-does-it-do-ndaa

Report this
Oceanna's avatar

By Oceanna, December 19, 2011 at 7:19 pm Link to this comment

Al Franken was obviously for the NDAA before he was against it. 

His stated reasons for voting against it in the second Senate round weren’t
about specifics or changes made to it.  Granted, they (the reasons against it)
were soundly philosophical, but it’s hard believe he had a major epiphany or
change of heart from his previous aye vote from roughly 2 weeks ago. 

Franken wants credit for opposing the NDAA without admitting that he very
recently voted for it.  His specific objections and reasons for the change can
only be speculated about.

Was the primary reason because of its increase in executive power after the
final changes in the bill, where only the president can decide if a detainee who
is an American citizen has the right to a trial?

Are we on the road to martial law and being treated like the citizens of the
countries that the US has invaded?  Can we be swept up in a dragnet similar to
the TSA’s and be indefinitely detained under a very lose definition of terrorism
that’s already been invoked in suppressing OWS?

A this point, I have more patience for the denial of conservatives than I do for
the Democrats who persist in it.  This is a very scary development, especially for
those of us who underestimated how quickly civil liberties have been
systematically destroyed and have communicated their convictions too freely.

Report this
Oceanna's avatar

By Oceanna, December 19, 2011 at 7:10 pm Link to this comment

Al Franken was obviously before the NDAA before he was against it. 

His stated reasons for voting against it in the second Senate round weren’t
about specifics or changes made to it.  Granted, they (the reasons against it)
were soundly philosophical, but it’s hard believe he had a major epiphany or
change of heart from his previous aye vote from roughly 2 weeks ago. 

Franken wants credit for opposing the NDAA without admitting that he very
recently voted for it.  His specific objections and reasons for the change can
only be speculated about.

Was the primary reason because of its increase in executive power after the
final changes in the bill, where only the president can decide if a detainee who
is an American citizen has the right to a trial?

Are we on the road to martial law and being treated like the citizens of the
countries that the US has invaded?  Can we be swept up in a dragnet similar to
the TSA’s and be indefinitely detained under a very lose definition of terrorism
that’s already been invoked in suppressing OWS?

A this point, I have more patience for the denial of conservatives than I do for
the Democrats who persist in it.  This is a very scary development, especially for
those of us who underestimated how quickly civil liberties have been
systematically destroyed and have communicated their convictions too freely.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, December 19, 2011 at 5:07 pm Link to this comment

Yep. They are simply wrong.

That’s what the facts show. Besides, I like Al Franken, while I’m not familiar with Amy Klobuchar, I have a sneaking suspicion I’d like her too. But mostly cause I despise hacks.

Report this

By Michael Cavlan RN, December 19, 2011 at 4:53 pm Link to this comment

Amy Klobuchar- Al Franken’s senior member of the US Senate from Minnesota. There is simply no explaining that. Which is is why some refuse to answer that point and try and change the topic.

Having said this, a much deeper question must be asked. Why is this tripe and other tripe like it even here at Truthdig? I mean apart from Chris Hedges, the vast majority are simply Dem apologist nonsense.

Are you all getting played? Or more important. Are you all staring to awaken to the fact that you are getting played?

Now that is truthdigging my friends.

Report this
Oceanna's avatar

By Oceanna, December 19, 2011 at 3:58 pm Link to this comment

There is no “disinformation campaign” about Franken’s vote on the NDAA!  It’s
more a glaring lack of clarity in its reporting.


Hello. Franken is NOT in the congress, he’s in the senate!! 129 members in
Congress?!? 


He voted for it initially this month!  Then against it after it went though
Congress and then passed back through the US senate.

BTW if you think Obama is going to veto it, then I have the Delaware Bridge to
sell to you, along with the 149 members of Congress which includes Franken. 
smile

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, December 19, 2011 at 11:52 am Link to this comment

It is apparent the misinformation campaign rolls
on:

Sen. Franken voted against the NDAA:

” the Senate passed a bill that includes
provisions on detention that I found simply
unacceptable. These provisions are inconsistent with
the liberties and freedoms that are at the core of
the system our Founders established. And while I did
in fact vote for an earlier version of the
legislation, I did so with the hope that the final
version would be significantly improved. That didn’t
happen, and so I could not support the final bill.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/al-franken/why-i-voted-against-the-n_b_1154327.html

The AUMF already allowed indefinite detention of
“terrorists” and the NDAA only reafirms this. The
change is in the definition of the “battlefield”, however since the AUMF was passed it has already been interpreted and used to mean America itself.

From Wiki:
“Pursuant to the AUMF passed in the immediate
aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks, the NDAA
text affirms the President’s authority to detain, via
the Armed Forces, any person “who was part of or
substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or
associated forces,” under the law of war, “without
trial, until the end of hostilities.” The text also
authorizes trial by military tribunal, or “transfer
to the custody or control of the person’s country of
origin,” or transfer to “any other foreign country,
or any other foreign entity.”[13] An amendment to the
Act that would have explicitly forbidden the
indefinite detention of American citizens, without
trial, was rejected.[14]
Addressing previous conflict with the Obama
Administration regarding the wording of the Senate
text, the Senate-House compromise text also affirms
that nothing in the Act “is intended to limit or
expand the authority of the President or the scope of
the Authority for Use of Military Force.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Authorization_Act_for_Fiscal_Year_2012

From MoJo:
“It says that the president has to hold a foreign
Al Qaeda suspect captured on US soil in military
detention—except it leaves enough procedural
loopholes that someone like convicted underwear
bomber and Nigerian citizen Umar Abdulmutallab could
actually go from capture to trial without ever being
held by the military. It does not, contrary to what
many media outlets have reported, authorize the
president to indefinitely detain without trial an
American citizen suspected of terrorism who is
captured in the US. A last minute compromise
amendment adopted in the Senate, whose language was
retained in the final bill, leaves it up to the
courts to decide if the president has that power,
should a future president try to exercise it. But if
a future president does try to assert the authority
to detain an American citizen without charge or
trial, it won’t be based on the authority in this
bill.

So it’s simply not true, as the Guardian wrote
yesterday, that the the bill “allows the military to
indefinitely detain without trial American terrorism
suspects arrested on US soil who could then be
shipped to Guantánamo Bay.” When the New York Times
editorial page writes that the bill would “strip the
F.B.I., federal prosecutors and federal courts of all
or most of their power to arrest and prosecute
terrorists and hand it off to the military,” or that
the “legislation could also give future presidents
the authority to throw American citizens into prison
for life without charges or a trial,” they’re simply
wrong.

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/12/defense-bill-passed-so-what-does-it-do-ndaa

The real issue is indefinite detention in the original AUMF. How “safe” to you feel you need to be…? Some people think that we can’t take ANY chances, I disagree. Remember Cheney’s “one-percent doctrine”...?  We should not hold anyone indefinitely.

Report this
Oceanna's avatar

By Oceanna, December 19, 2011 at 9:18 am Link to this comment

Al Franken is not a STATE senator or congressional one, but a US senator. 

He most assuredly did vote for the NDAA as a US senator:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2011-218

Rhetoric for or against something doesn’t reflect senate voting and clearly,
executive decisions! 

Please fact-check better, TD.  You are a news site, after all, that claims reporting
the truth.  FWIW.

Report this

By bramdruckman, December 18, 2011 at 5:01 pm Link to this comment

Dear Mr. Sheer:

I submitted this the other day and your associates withdrew it. I may never be
able to comment again on Truthdig but I feel what I have to say needs to be
said again:

Please print in an adjacent column the names of those elected representatives
in Washington that have undermined our Constitution and recinded our civil
rights by voting for the Defence Authorization bill that enables U.S. citizens to
be arrested and held indefinitely without trial so that we can remind ourselves
every day for the rest of our lives just who and what kind of people we have
elected to run our government.

Thank you

Bram Druckman

Report this

By Michael Cavlan RN, December 18, 2011 at 1:27 pm Link to this comment

Outraged at the Outrage

Grin. That piece is a long time smear. I am pretty sure I even know who is doing it. A long time dedicated Democratic Party apologist in Minnesota. Which is now irrelevant in Minnesota. It is also a lie. Folks who were at that particular Green Party endorsing meeting know what really happened. Again, it is now irrelevant.

What my Outraged Democratic Party apologist refuses to look at or even bring up is that Senator Amy Klobuchar (D) is known as one of the most Republican Senators in the country. Even though she is a Democrat. Her latest in a long list of betrayals is her voting Aye to the Defense Authorization Bill. Which, apart from the $660 BILLION OK for Military spending has much worse provisions in it.

Like the ability for the Executive office to detain and hold anyone, even American citizens, anywhere even here in the US for any time. All without trials.

In other words Democratic Party Senator Amy Klobuchar just gave the green light to allow INTERNMENT.

Something which I happen to know about personally. Having lived in northern Ireland when the British Government did to the Irish. Or indeed the US Government did to the Japanese in WW II or to Native Americans here in Minnesota during the Dakota wars.

Now Outraged, where is your outrage and why is it NOT directed at this complicity?

Report this

By Pat DiLorenzo, December 18, 2011 at 2:51 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

According to the official roll call, Franken and Kirk both voted yes.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, December 18, 2011 at 1:53 am Link to this comment

Re: Michael Cavlan RN

“Cavlan’s first attempt at electoral politics was
a run for the state legislature in 2002 as a Green
Party candidate. He almost failed to achieve party
endorsement when he refused to disavow support for
the use of violence by the Provisional Irish
Republican Army. But the issue was quickly moot,
because Cavlan’s run ended almost as soon as it began
when he lost the contested Green primary”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Cavlan

Apparently…. you’re not a very green…..
“GREEN”. More of an opportunist if you ask me.

Senator Franken is fine, YOU however are to be
questioned. Yep, a vote for the “greens” is a vote for the Repuglicans…. and you my friend are the epitome of it.

Report this

By Michael Cavlan RN, December 17, 2011 at 11:55 pm Link to this comment

Maani

First, Al Franken was very open about his support of the Iraq war, before it began. Second, can you tell me which war funding bill Franken voted nay to? When it really mattered? You see, we know who he really is in Minnesota. That is why he received 350,000 less votes than Obama. That was when people actually fell for the Hope and Change lies and manipulations of the current war criminal, mind you.

People are waking up to the fact that they are being lied to by their elected officials.

This is a good thing.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, December 17, 2011 at 8:59 pm Link to this comment

This whole thing has been blown out of proportion and
used to fear monger.

“Obama the socialist”

“Obama the authoritarian”

“Obama the rightie”

Get real. ALMOST every bit of this legislation
was ALREADY codified. Through the AUMF the government
could already detain AMERICANS indefinitely,
as well as foreigners. To claim Obama is trying to
eat your babies is abject NONSENSE. We’ve had this in
place for nearly ten years with nary a peep. Suddenly
the “outrage”, it’s laughable.

I have issues with the AUMF, most likely ANYONE
would. And I believe we should use this moment to
turn the trajectory of our government. In this sense,
I agree. But the outright bogus “Obama’s gonna get
us” mantra is not only misplaced, it is glaringly
IGNORANT fear mongering.

“Impeach Obama!”....... c’mon…..get a life.

For a more REAL ASSESSMENT consider Chris Hayes’ story:

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/12/17/chris-hayes-explains-whats-wrong-with-the-ndaa/

Report this

By Michael Shaw, December 17, 2011 at 8:31 pm Link to this comment

Looks like this small group of dissenters are all that’s left of any integrity and respect for the Bill of Rights! What began as “Give me liberty or give me death” has become “,take my rights to keep me safe!” As Ben Franklin once pointed out, anyone willing to give up their rights to be safe deserve neither. Clearly they will get neither now and thanks to a bunch of store bought politicians in the pockets of big oil, defense contractors and private security corporations. By now it has become obvious that the only people this current regime wants to keep safe are the criminals on Wall Street and the Merchants of Death, who of course are one and the same. At least a few republicans had the audacity to stand against this abomination. But if anything at all this reaction proves beyond reasonable doubt that this is the worst legislation ever signed into law. Even worse than citizens united!

Report this

By Maani, December 17, 2011 at 7:08 pm Link to this comment

Michael:

“Secondly, the ‘brave’ Senator Al Franken from Minnesota is well known as being a war monger.”

His actual votes, per Project Vote Smart, do not reflect this.

Report this

By Mouseytongue, December 17, 2011 at 1:49 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

What? The overseas wars didn’t work out so well so now
they want to instigate one here?

Report this

By Will Malven, December 17, 2011 at 10:20 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Okay, first I’m a conservative, so I doubt many of you will agree with most of my positions and if you visit my website, you will probably be spitting blood, but here we have solid common ground.

This is the most egregious assault on the Bill of Rights I can recall and most frightening of all is the fact that is passed with such a majority—283/136 in the House and 86/13 in the Senate.

Even more disturbing is the fact that President Obama not only pulled back on his promise to veto, but specifically requested that the language which explicitly exempted American Citizens from being subject to these “detentions” be removed.

Senator Levin clearly stated this fact during the floor debate with Senator Mark Udall. 

http://rt.com/usa/news/obama-detention-defense-levin-635/

Why does Obama want the power to detain American citizens and why did so many in Congress agree? 

Very disturbing, indeed.

My thanks go out to those few honest, brave souls in Congress who dared stand against this gross abrogation of our inherent, “endowed” rights.

It is one thing to have a President, like FDR or Bush to arbitrarily pull a “Korematsu,” “Ex Parte Quirin,” or a “Padilla,” but it is an entirely different matter for Congress to put its imprimatur on such actions.

Report this

By Michael Cavlan RN, December 17, 2011 at 10:01 am Link to this comment

Oh and Truthdigger of the Week Award my ***.

Report this

By Michael Cavlan RN, December 17, 2011 at 10:00 am Link to this comment

First

Senator Amy Klobuchar (D) in Minnesota voted Aye. She is my opponent. Secondly, the “brave” Senator Al Franken from Minnesota is well known as being a war monger. It is the reason that Barack Obama received 350,000 more votes than Al Franken in Minnesota. Not a very well known fact, is it?

This during the time that many were fooled by the Hopey-Changey Democrat.

A LOT of people have woken up in Minnesota. We just do not get air time on Air America or MSNBC. Or ink space at the “progressive” professional blogs. When we call, we get hunng up on, in mid sentence. While right wingers get five minutes of air time to express their views.

Can ya truth-dig it? We are getting played but many now know that. Thank you Obama for exposing not just the Dem Party but also the legion of apologists and pretenders.

We are building and organizing.

ROCKY ANDERSON FOR PRESIDENT

Michael Cavlan
Candidate US Senate 2012
Minnesota Open Progressives

Report this

By Fred, December 16, 2011 at 11:38 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I sent my thanks after the vote, and had a response back the same day.  This makes me very sad for many people, and the future of this nation.

Report this

By bobthecats, December 16, 2011 at 11:26 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Sorry the link to the Library of Congress I posted before does not work.  You can get any vote on the Library of Congress use the link

http://www.thomas.gov

The Senate Bill is S1867 and House Bill is HR1540 - You can find major actions and how each member voted.

Report this

By Tom, December 16, 2011 at 9:56 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

you should change the name of your website. Al Franken spoke against NDAA on the senate floor but actually voted YES on it.

Report this

By Maani, December 16, 2011 at 8:26 pm Link to this comment

I am very fortunate to have been friends with my Congressman (Nadler) since he was an assembly member in NYS.  I get to thank him personally for all the good work he has done over the years.  (Among other things, he was one of only six Congressman - in either party - to vote against the Patriot Act…)

Bravo to those elected officials who still maintain at least a modicum, if not alot, of integrity.

Peace.

Report this

By bobthecats, December 16, 2011 at 6:04 pm Link to this comment

I don’t understand how you say 13 Senators voted against the bill.  According to
Library of Congress, the roll call vote shows 7 Senators voting against it.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?
d112:1:./temp/~bdUrvy:@@@R|/home/LegislativeData.php|

Report this

By Jerry, December 16, 2011 at 5:56 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

How is it that one republican can put a hold on a bill. Just claim he/she will filibuster and that’s it, the bill can’t come to the floor.  But all these opposed could do nothing?

Then on the other hand Obama can’t get anything he wants because of the mean Republicans won’t play ball. 

So they are cutting fuel assistance while increasing military spending, while they claim the war is over in Iraq?  So where is all that money going to go now?

Report this

By ardee, December 16, 2011 at 5:29 pm Link to this comment

It does seem that our usual democratic apologists are absent from the several threads that show Obama and so many democrats in such a bad light.

Who can blame them?

Report this

By Dr Bones, December 16, 2011 at 5:14 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Time to impeach the fraudster.  He left the criminal banksters get off.  He let the war criminals go.  And now he wants to indefinitely detain without trial US citizens.  He is as insane as Bush.

Report this

By Civil Liberties Matter, December 16, 2011 at 2:45 pm Link to this comment

The detention provisions of HR1540, the 2012 appropriation for the Department of Defense are a fundamental violation of America’s founding principles that nobody may be detained without trial on the unsupported word of the “King”.

  The words of the Declaration of Independence now become real because the President of the United States has just been crowned King by congress. The President now has the power to say to any citizen of the United States: “You are an Enemy Combatant” and have him imprisoned forever without trial, without evidence, and without any recourse of law from any court.

  For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
  For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
  For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
  For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
  For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
  He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
  He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
  He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
  He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
  He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.


Everybody should send a note of thanks [with contribution] to one of the Senators or Congressmen who were brave enough to oppose H. R. 1540.

The Congressmen who voted NAY on HR1540:

Amash
Baldwin
Bass (CA)
Becerra
Blumenauer
Braley (IA)
Bucshon
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Campbell
Capuano
Carson (IN)
Chaffetz
Chu
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coffman (CO)
Cohen
Conyers
Costello
Cummings
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
DesJarlais
Doyle
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellison
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Flake
Forbes
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garrett
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Griffith (VA)
Grijalva
Hahn
Harris
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Holt
Honda
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hurt
Jackson (IL)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Jones
Kaptur
Kucinich
Labrador
Lee (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lofgren, Zoe
Luján
Lummis
Mack
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McClintock
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Mulvaney
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Pallone
Payne
Pence
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Posey
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Ribble
Richmond
Roe (TN)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Simpson
Slaughter
Speier
Stark
Stutzman
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tipton
Tonko
Towns
Van Hollen
Velázquez
Walberg
Walsh (IL)
Waters
Watt
Welch
Woodall
Woolsey
Yarmuth

Report this

By Douglas Godfrey, December 16, 2011 at 2:08 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Everyone who reads this article should send a thank-you [with contribution] to one of the senators or congressmen who opposed this bill. I just sent one to my congressman, John Tierney, who voted against the conference report.

  Thank you for opposing HR1540. The detention provisions of HR1540 are a fundamental violation of America’s founding principles that nobody may be detained without trial on the unsupported word of the “King”.

  The words of the Declaration of Independence now become real because the President of the United States has just been crowned King by congress.

  For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
  For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
  For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
  For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
  For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
  He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
  He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
  He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
  He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
  He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

Report this

By ironboltbruce, December 16, 2011 at 2:06 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“Though they couldn’t stop the freedom-crushing National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 from becoming law, ...”

B*LLSH*T!

These fence-riding sellouts should - and will - be judged along with the rest of them.  They had a million ways and a million chances to force the mainstream media to tell the Sheeple what is really going on, and they did nothing.

Justice is coming - and let justice be done.

Report this

By gerard, December 16, 2011 at 1:41 pm Link to this comment

Good idea to list all the names so Truthdiggers could write their appropriate members and thank them and help uphold democracy?

Report this
 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.

Like Truthdig on Facebook