Citizens too.

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Aulaqi

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul-Rahman_al-Awlaki (16 y.o. minor US citizen)

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

All grand jury proceedings are secret. This is a normal part of the US legal system.

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

I am not arguing with your statement (you have said nothing wrong) but I'd like to head off the potential "Obama/Democrats is/are the problem!" rants.

The only major difference is that Obama always really wanted to catch Bin Laden and Bush -- openly -- didn't care. Now that that's over, he seems to want to run for Bush's fourth term.

Obama tried to close guantanamo for years (see politifact) before giving up. He tried to end the trickle-down economics that Bush had (such as ending tax cuts for the rich) but conceded to the opposition somewhere around the US debt ceiling crisis.

His administration's technology initiatives are far ahead of Bush's (witness http://data.gov for instance, and requirement for all agencies to have an API).

His social programs are better thought out and actually save us money. Compare for example Bush's Medicare act in 2003 vs the CBO's assessment of Obama's Affordable Care Act which actually will save a trillion dollars over the next 10 years. Or compare Bush's "gotta go cya later" bailout to the TARP that happened under Obama. His administration even set up http://recovery.gov to "track the money". Or compare the success that they had in bailing out the automakers. I would say that this administration is much more conscientious than the one with Dick "Deficits Don't Matter" Cheney and co.

Where Bush basically attacked Iraq with no emergency or multinational support ("coalition of the willing" was a sham), US involvement in Libya under Obama is closer to a Just War in that there is an emergency (dictator bombing his citizens), and it was also merely part of a multinational response, including a UN resolution, to a situation decried by human rights groups.

Where I agree with you is Obama's cavalier attitude toward executive privilege and rights granted by the NDAA. This represents an erosion of CIVIL liberties and security in America, which I am not happy about.

As of the bill's passage into law in 2010, CBO estimated the legislation would reduce the deficit by $143 billion[185] over the first decade, but half of that was due to expected premiums for the C.L.A.S.S. Act, which has since been abandoned.[186] Although the CBO generally does not provide cost estimates beyond the 10-year budget projection period (because of the great degree of uncertainty involved in the data) it decided to do so in this case at the request of lawmakers, and estimated a second decade deficit reduction of $1.2 trillion.[180][187] ...

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Affordab...

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/

Still, I want to say 3 things:

1) After getting into office, he actually addressed the fiscal and economic crisis that was developing, and we can definitely say that today the charts are a little higher than in 2008. That took some re-prioritizing.

2) All politicians promise something. Just hear Romney's promises: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlnaYOv0DZY ... so believing everyone's promises is silly. For me it's more about how competent the guy is to actually achieve/maintain the stuff I think we need as a country. And even so, I don't think the president can do that much these days. You should worry about the Senate, they have the lowest approval rating ever I think.

3) He has made some major reforms, the medical reform is a big one, perhaps one day he may tackle immigration reform. Also the JOBS act is bringing about some much-needed financial reform, but I can't give all the credit to Obama on this one. Actually here is what I think about the direction this country is headed: http://magarshak.com/blog/?p=108

Execution without judicial review.