I may be wrong around the edges, but I'm not "entirely wrong". This is at least 95% pragmatic political theater on Obama's part and there is no way to view it otherwise, it has zero to do with "eleventh dimension" crap.

At bottom, Obama thinks he's a Good Man and won't knowingly or intentionally harm the American people on his watch. He may even be that. The problem is, faced with the litany of crap left on his doorstep by a malevolent Bush Administration enabled by cowardly congressional acquiescence and a docile media, Obama rightly perceives the expedient route of keeping intact the powers usurped by Bush "but only using them for Good" and thus minimizing right wing flak as he pursues his other agendas (for the Good of the Country, to be sure).

If this strategy succeeds, the Constitution fails. Not because Obama is a Bad Man, though, but because the Well-Intentioned Man would leave our system of government weakened for the abuse of those who may follow. And it would be the fault not only of Obama, but also of the Congress, the Supreme Court, a synchophantic media and a docile electorate.

You point out that the photos are already "largely public". Yep. And this means Obama is evil? Doesn't it instead mean he's obviously gaming the system: we know what's in the photos, we know the arguments about "protecting the troops" already have been fully aired and rejected by the courts, what we are seeing is Obama trying to pry extended political cover from what is arguably a substantively meaningless gesture (to be fair, it is also not without substance to say that publication of the photos is likely to incite additional anti-American animus, it's just that this risk already has been weighed and found insufficient by statute and court) buying time and seeking to put this genie back in a bottle. Not because it's actually back, but because "he tried" and, "therefore", he "supports the troops".... Given a 90 to 6 vote by the United States Senate driven by inane "terror" over incarcerating an accused terrorist on US soil, can you really suggest he is reading the tea leaves wrong?

Whether Obama "wants" to eviscerate the Constitution really isn't the point. Whether Obama believes the political and media landscape will allow him to get away with a series of expedient acts to facilitate his own agenda is the point. And if he does these things, as he IS doing, the question is not whether Obama himself is a bad guy who wants to undercut the Constitution -- he will protest that he is not, he will convene "meetings" with "liberals" in the White House and express "concern" at being portrayed as abandoning principles -- but whether the effect of his actions nonetheless does that. And there is no doubt that they do. Congress ain't doing squat about it. The courts actually have done some valuable things (the Second Circuit's photos decision comes immediately to mind), and the courts are going to need to do more.