From the candidate who promised to get rid of Gitmo in a year:
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-signs-defense-bill-despite-reservations-200818531.html
^That One BilllTM is now law. The President expressed severe reservations about it but still signed it into law anyway. To me if he really expressed reservations about it and did not want to object to it becoming law he could simply have refused to sign it or to return it and thus let it become law without his signature. Signing it indicates President Obama's objections to this as a law are a mite bit.....hypocritical. I also think that the practice of including provisions like this in bills where the overall thing includes other, necessary actions is one reason why there should be a constitutional amendment to permit a line-item veto. I also view the further extension of the government's coercive power since the first attempt at a Patriot Act in the 1990s to be a deplorable and worrying trend and hope we can all agree on that much. Your thoughts?
^That One BilllTM is now law. The President expressed severe reservations about it but still signed it into law anyway. To me if he really expressed reservations about it and did not want to object to it becoming law he could simply have refused to sign it or to return it and thus let it become law without his signature. Signing it indicates President Obama's objections to this as a law are a mite bit.....hypocritical. I also think that the practice of including provisions like this in bills where the overall thing includes other, necessary actions is one reason why there should be a constitutional amendment to permit a line-item veto. I also view the further extension of the government's coercive power since the first attempt at a Patriot Act in the 1990s to be a deplorable and worrying trend and hope we can all agree on that much. Your thoughts?