Obama is laying the groundwork - Page 5 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #41 of 63 (permalink) Old 04-21-2009, 08:49 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
TNTRower's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2007
Vehicle: '98 E320 Wagon (non 4matic)
Location: Atlanta, GA & Malabo, Equatorial Guinea
Posts: 6,663
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to TNTRower
(Thread Starter)
Quote:
Originally Posted by theonlybiker111 View Post
reputable, and quite unbiased sites to gather "truthful" information on guns.
here's a quote from the first article:


"Well, the survey mostly generated results pretty consistent with those of a dozen previous surveys which generally indicates"


not for nothing but, using those words isn't so concise. I'm not sure he is SURE of his findings.

besides the fact that firearms and liberty is the name of the site.

I'm not saying it isn't true... I'm just doubting.
So the articles that people who are interested in the Second Amendment and their rights post are to be suspected of something in your eyes?

Please do not fall into that Liberal mindset of attacking the messenger instead of the message.

And read the whole article. When you do that you will see that the author was presenting a balanced and honest interpretation.

Both sides of the argument are guilty of trying to portray the issue as 100% either way. I must admit that I fall prey to that sometimes in my zeal to protect my rights and those of other citizens of this country.

Who's John Galt.

"Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes" - Virgil, The Aeneid, Book 2

If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel. --Benjamin Netayahu
TNTRower is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #42 of 63 (permalink) Old 04-21-2009, 08:51 PM
Moderately subtle
 
edfreeman's Avatar
 
Date registered: Dec 2003
Vehicle: 94 E500, 97 500SL
Location: Soddy Daisy, TN
Posts: 8,510
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Send a message via AIM to edfreeman
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNTRower View Post
Ahh yes Habeas Corpus. How does that exactly translate into unlawful holding or imprisonment?

The Bush Administration made a call that was based upon the understanding of the law. Turns out that 5 out of 9 justices disagreed with him on Habeas Corpus.

So now they get to go to the Ameican Court system. Ok.

Again, how did Bush violate the Constitution? Show me where the court found that Bush committed the crime of violating the constitution?
In short, as part of the executive branch, they chose to implement new and unprecendented "interpretations" on what due process meant, altering the standing laws. That is not a job our constitution gives to that branch of government. Congress is supposed to do that.

edfreeman is offline  
post #43 of 63 (permalink) Old 04-21-2009, 08:56 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNTRower View Post
Ahh yes Habeas Corpus. How does that exactly translate into unlawful holding or imprisonment?

The Bush Administration made a call that was based upon the understanding of the law. Turns out that 5 out of 9 justices disagreed with him on Habeas Corpus.

So now they get to go to the Ameican Court system. Ok.

Again, how did Bush violate the Constitution? Show me where the court found that Bush committed the crime of violating the constitution?
You CANNOT be this dense. Violation of Habeas Corpus IS a violation of the Constitution. Is that simple enough for you?

Either look at the post from which you made the comment and question or dig through here. Knock yourself out. This should be fun.

Gitmo Habeas Corpus Ruling

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #44 of 63 (permalink) Old 04-21-2009, 08:59 PM
Moderately subtle
 
edfreeman's Avatar
 
Date registered: Dec 2003
Vehicle: 94 E500, 97 500SL
Location: Soddy Daisy, TN
Posts: 8,510
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Send a message via AIM to edfreeman
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcbear View Post
In the Amendment process and by Congressional and Executive action. That has been fully sanctioned by the SCOTUS for 200 years. Every time a new Cabinet is established it is challenged and it is shot down. Every controversial [and many that aren't]law that is passed and signed is challenged and run through the court system and, on nearly NO time has Congress been told they have no right to make laws or that the President has no right to sign and enforce them. Seems that the Amendment process is for very fundamental issues, not simply the laws that run our daily lives [equal rights, voting rights, term limits, voting age, etc].
Huh?

The amendment process was included to allow changes to the constitution when it was deemed necessary. We don't use it when we should. Other than that, I have no clue what you are pontificating about.

edfreeman is offline  
post #45 of 63 (permalink) Old 04-21-2009, 09:05 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by edfreeman View Post
Huh?

The amendment process was included to allow changes to the constitution when it was deemed necessary. We don't use it when we should. Other than that, I have no clue what you are pontificating about.
What I am saying is that Congress has taken the authority to pass many laws that some would consider Amendment Territory. SCOTUS has, for 200 years supported their actions and not smacked them with overreach for doing so.

Executive has also done things like added Cabinet positions and extended its reach in ways that would also be considered by many to be in Amendment Territory and much of the time SCOTUS has also allowed that to stand.

So, with 200 years of historical context, Congress and the Exec have taken on much of the role that a theoretical Constitutionalist would consider solely in the confines of the Amendments process.

Not to justify it one way or the other but does that make more sense?

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #46 of 63 (permalink) Old 04-21-2009, 09:08 PM
Administratoris Emeritus
 
GeeS's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2021 SL770
Location: Fountain Hills, AZ
Posts: 44,915
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 591 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNTRower View Post
If anything Republicans have been the ones who are steadfast and consistent on the constitution.
That some funny sh*t right there, I don't care who you are. Has the Bush admin now been officially excommunicated from the GOP for historical reasons?

Let's see, warrantless wiretaps, Jose Padilla, attorney-client privacy violations, political/religious dissent surveillance, etc, etc. We won't even mention the wanton disregard of our COTUS and the rule of law via Bush's egregious abuse of signing statements.

"If spending money you don't have is the height of stupidity, borrowing money to give it away is the height of insanity." -- anon
GeeS is offline  
post #47 of 63 (permalink) Old 04-21-2009, 09:09 PM
Moderately subtle
 
edfreeman's Avatar
 
Date registered: Dec 2003
Vehicle: 94 E500, 97 500SL
Location: Soddy Daisy, TN
Posts: 8,510
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Send a message via AIM to edfreeman
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcbear View Post
What I am saying is that Congress has taken the authority to pass many laws that some would consider Amendment Territory. SCOTUS has, for 200 years supported their actions and not smacked them with overreach for doing so.

Executive has also done things like added Cabinet positions and extended its reach in ways that would also be considered by many to be in Amendment Territory and much of the time SCOTUS has also allowed that to stand.

So, with 200 years of historical context, Congress and the Exec have taken on much of the role that a theoretical Constitutionalist would consider solely in the confines of the Amendments process.

Not to justify it one way or the other but does that make more sense?
Yes and no. The 200 years thing I don't buy.

edfreeman is offline  
post #48 of 63 (permalink) Old 04-21-2009, 09:22 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
TNTRower's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2007
Vehicle: '98 E320 Wagon (non 4matic)
Location: Atlanta, GA & Malabo, Equatorial Guinea
Posts: 6,663
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to TNTRower
(Thread Starter)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcbear View Post
You CANNOT be this dense. Violation of Habeas Corpus IS a violation of the Constitution. Is that simple enough for you?

Either look at the post from which you made the comment and question or dig through here. Knock yourself out. This should be fun.

Gitmo Habeas Corpus Ruling
No it is not. Please actually read what you linked to. It says it is a Constitutional Privilege and it can be suspended and the decision is that Congress did not do the necessary legislation to suspend this privilege.

So again, where is the crime?

And quite honestly I view the decision to be flawed. Much like Chief Justice Roberts, Scalia, Alito, and Thomas find as well.

Quote:
The majority's overreaching is particularly egregious given the weakness of its objections to the DTA. Simply put, the Court's opinion fails on its own terms. The majority strikes down the statute because it is not an "adequate substitute" for habeas review, ante, at 42, but fails to show what rights the detainees have that cannot be vindicated by the DTA system.
Just another example of a politicized court overreaching.

So now again. What is the crime?

Who's John Galt.

"Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes" - Virgil, The Aeneid, Book 2

If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel. --Benjamin Netayahu
TNTRower is offline  
post #49 of 63 (permalink) Old 04-21-2009, 09:30 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNTRower View Post
No it is not. Please actually read what you linked to. It says it is a Constitutional Privilege and it can be suspended and the decision is that Congress did not do the necessary legislation to suspend this privilege.

So again, where is the crime?

And quite honestly I view the decision to be flawed. Much like Chief Justice Roberts, Scalia, Alito, and Thomas find as well.



Just another example of a politicized court overreaching.

So now again. What is the crime?
Again, the crime was the failure to provide the Constitutional protection of Habeas Corpus.


SCOTUS OPINION <from the link>
Petitioners are aliens designated as enemy combatants and detained at the United States Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. There are others detained there, also aliens, who are not parties to this suit.

Petitioners present a question not resolved by our earlier cases relating to the detention of aliens at Guantanamo: whether they have the constitutional privilege of habeas corpus, a privilege not to be withdrawn except in conformance with the Suspension Clause, Art. I, §9, cl. 2. We hold these petitioners do have the habeas corpus privilege. Congress has enacted a statute, the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 (DTA), 119 Stat. 2739, that provides certain procedures for review of the detainees' status. We hold that those procedures are not an adequate and effective substitute for habeas corpus. Therefore §7 of the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA), 28 U. S. C. A. §2241(e) (Supp. 2007), operates as an unconstitutional suspension of the writ. We do not address whether the President has authority to detain these petitioners nor do we hold that the writ must issue. These and other questions regarding the legality of the detention are to be resolved in the first instance by the District Court.


Don't like the Opinion? Guess what, again you are in the minority.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #50 of 63 (permalink) Old 04-21-2009, 09:30 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
TNTRower's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2007
Vehicle: '98 E320 Wagon (non 4matic)
Location: Atlanta, GA & Malabo, Equatorial Guinea
Posts: 6,663
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to TNTRower
(Thread Starter)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GermanStar View Post
That some funny sh*t right there, I don't care who you are. Has the Bush admin now been officially excommunicated from the GOP for historical reasons?

Let's see, warrantless wiretaps, Jose Padilla, attorney-client privacy violations, political/religious dissent surveillance, etc, etc. We won't even mention the wanton disregard of our COTUS and the rule of law via Bush's egregious abuse of signing statements.
Oh yes, let's see. What about Barney Frank lying to the people of the US about the shape of FM/FM? What about Clinton's disregard for equal protection with his numerous policies of favorable treatment of certain preferred groups? What about Obama's egregious use of signing statements? What about Clinton's egregious use of Pardons? What about FDR's illegal detainment of Japanes Americans? What about Obama's sanctioning of Bush's policies? What Obama's takeover of private business and refusal to accept the repayment of loan monies?

Hmm...

I can blather on about all sorts of stuff just like you. Especially when I don't need sources.

Let's just talk about one thing that I know you have sources on. Warrantless Wiretaps. Shall we?

Who's John Galt.

"Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes" - Virgil, The Aeneid, Book 2

If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel. --Benjamin Netayahu
TNTRower is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Similar Threads
    Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
    Laying carpet... Fotografa R/C107 SL/SLC Class 23 03-23-2009 05:18 PM
    Anybody got any of these parts laying around...... trx440 R129 SL-Class 6 09-26-2008 07:01 PM
    Anyone have this laying around? nickCR W124 E,CE,D,TD Class 2 06-01-2006 11:43 AM
    laying some rubber snakoiler C208/A208 CLK-Class 12 04-13-2006 02:31 PM
    Anybody have an old shifter laying around? Cyberbach W124 E,CE,D,TD Class 2 02-27-2006 03:19 PM

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome