Ah, so its ok to blame Bush for everything that happened during his presidency, but Obama not using his executive power to block a modified yet still bad law he had stated he would block earlier isn't his responsabiity. Got it.
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
Sure, I said in the other thread that it's a legitimate complaint to say he didn't veto it.
Saying that Obama's signing of a bill he had weakened is "worse" than Bush essentially writing his own provisions for Congress to stamp out for him though is pretty asinine. If you think the bill is some horrible breach of liberty, maybe you should first heap blame on the guys who wrote it. In both circumstances, it's the same guys.
Oh I do blame the ones who wrote it. The entire point here, which you are apperently missing is the guy in the top spot is supposed to be the guy in at least some theoretical control of the government. Obama has presided over the arguably largest decline in civil liberties in United States History, or at very least second largest. The democrats also control the senate and should have been able to strip all the asenine provisions out in committe. The provision allowing the United states President to deply U.S. troops to the United States in a combat deployment stance without declaration of martial law, which survived the passage of the bill intact is a huge potentially problematic legal precident. Tell you what, I'll go take that civics class, but why don't you go take a few history lessons at the same time here...