Is Bush trying to pardon himself?

You mean by destroying the economy, losing valuable lives (American and non-American) in senseless fabricated wars, and undermining the Constitution?

Hells yeah! Dem Presidents kick @ss!!!

 

They dont destroy the economy. If anything Congress has more to do with the economy then the President. Plus most of the economic problems are a result of the media making up a fake recession.

The wars are hardly fabricated and are justified on so many levels. I admit that Iraq was given various different reasons over different time periods but all of the reasons stated have been justified. And the Constitution has hardly been undermined. If anything the Supreme Court has done that.

Does Row vs Wade sound familar to you?

 

That same Republican Congress managed to balance the budget with Clinton.

Do you watch Fox News perchance? The Iraq war is universally excepted as having been fabricated for false reasons. There was no proof of yellowcake uranium. There were no WMDs. Saddam had no ties to Al Queda. I'm not going to go through this. Because you're either incredibly naive, or intentionally evil to think that way.

Let's see. Suspension of habeus corpus. Torture. And undeclared war.

Need more?

You better go further back than that if you want to build a strong case.

 

Found these comments interesting: http://www.whereistheoutrage.net/wo...-to-undermine-the-constitution/#comment-48191

 

The economy was failing by the time Clinton was leaving office. Yet the media did not say a word about it. Look at now. The media will not shut the hell up about our economy. Bias? Yea it is.

I love how you all go and try to say Foxnews whenever somebody is conservative. Because it has been provened that Foxnews is one of the few media outlets that are not slanted far to the left.
There were WMD's. Tell that to the Kurds. And if he was not actively producing them at the time he had full intention of doing so and had admitted it even after capture.

He had ties to a lot of terror groups. The tie was not as strong to al queda as it was tos ome but he was indeed supporting terror groups. And he did house the bomber of the WTC back from 1993 or so.

Yea I would like some more. How about some real examples.
Habeus corpus aplies to American citizens. Our rights are not given to people of other nations. So you are wrong. War was declared so once again you are wrong. Congress voted on the war. It passed. War was declared.
Do not be one of those idiots that try to say they only voted to fund the war because that is not true. They al knew they were voting for war and only changed their minds later to try and gain political approval.

How about a real example?

How about this. I mentioned Roe v Wade.
Then there are the cases where the SC decided it was illegal to wire tap when technically it is legal.
You remember how there used to be segregation and all of that? I wonder which court system said it was alright for the longest time....hmmmmmm....I wonder.

The SC has screwed up time and time again and has never ever done anything worthwhile. They break the Constitution and try to dictate
the law when that is not their job.

 

You've sold me.

We need to get rid of this thing called the constitution 'which the supreme court comes from' your own words above show you do not give a shit about the constitution and install a dictator!

Long live the dictator of the US!

 

Typical liberal tactic. Take something said and twist it out of context to try and make the other person look bad.

You know very well what I meant about the SC.

And not once did I say to install a dictator.

 

Only one problem with that buddy, I am NOT a liberal.



You did not say install a dictator. You however wish to remove something that is given to us by the constitution, yet have the balls to say the Supreme Court is against the constitution.

You also appear to have no problem with one all powerful entity, which in many instances would be a dictator. There is a point behind the checks and balances, one of them to make sure we do not have a dictator, getting rid of these checks and balances gets us that much closer to a dictator, pretty black and white in my eyes. It might not be your intent, it however is a real possibility of what could happen.

 

Is no problem with that. Since I never said you were.

Which is where you took me out of context. You know that I did not mean to literally do so and that I was using a hyperbole to make a point.

I agree there is a need for checks and balances. I do not support a dictator at all. So do not try to say I do since nothing I said could indicate that unless of course you TWIST WHAT I SAY.

I was just pointing out the extreme flaws the SC has committed.




[/QUOTE]

 

I can agree with that.

I can admit I use shock and awe so to speak at times to get a point a crossed, or to see how someone responds

 

Good stuff then.

 

What does that have to do with what I wrote?

You all go... ??? Hunh? I just read on AlterNet recently that 80% of Fox viewers and 23% of NPR/PBS viewers have the Iraq war facts all wrong. Since you have the facts wrong, I ascertained there was a higher probability that you would be a Fox viewer than an NPR/PBS one.

Fox News is so far slanted to the right, that 80% have the facts wrong. It's the worst news service out there, and that says a lot, because they all suck to one degree or another.

Dude, you realize this is all BS right?

That Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Powell have all come clean and admitted no WMDs and that there were no ties to Al Queda? I mean seriously, there are people who have and will be voting, who absolutely believe things that are totally untrue.

It has been suspended for citizens. Under the (IIRC) MCA of 2006, any citizen can be designated an enemy combatant on the basis of "secret" evidence and help without trial or representation.

We haven't declared war since WWII.

Idiots like Republican Chuck Hagel who has accused the President of misleading the Senate? I just want to know if you are calling Hagel an idiot, because he's a Republican and a war hero.

From,
http://www.whereistheoutrage.net/wo...-to-undermine-the-constitution/#comment-48191

Art. 2, §1 - reads:

Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, [the President] shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”​

As he violates the Constitution almost daily, and in the myriad of ways described herein (and throughout this comment thread), this is the primary breach.

Art. 2, §3 -

“…he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed…”​

See above.

Art. 3, §2 -

The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury…​

See, e.g., the kangaroo courts of Guantanamo.

1st Amendment -

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.​

He’s breached this one so many ways, it’s hard to choose. The Office of Faith-Based Initiatives have funded no non-Christian projects; protesters are regularly arrested for nothing more than showing up in an offending t-shirt or holding an offending sign; etc. etc.

3rd Amendment -

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.​

Soldiers regularly invade and take over homes of Iraqis and Afghanis without any kind of legal nicities.

4th Amendment -

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause…​

Wiretapping, sneak & peak searches…

5th Amendment -

No person shall be … deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.​

Bush’s executive order allowing the seizure of property of political activists working to end the occupation of Iraq.

6th Amendment -

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury…​

See, e.g., Jose Padilla, Guantanamo, etc. etc.

8th Amendment -

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.​

Torture, and Bush’s signing statement excusing him from torture. The signing statement was in Jan. 2006, but it continues to do unconstitutional harm.

9th Amendment -

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.​

Just because the President is Commander-in-Chief doesn’t mean he gets to order people seized and rendered to black sites, for instance.

10th Amendment -

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.​

Just because the government can enter your property with a warrant, you can still say “No” if the try to enter your property without one. See 4th Amendment, above.

24th Amendment -

The right of citizens of the United States to vote … shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.​

Bush’s Justice Department continues to back voter ID requirements aimed at lowering minority turnout. The cost of such IDs has been determined to be an unconstitutional poll tax.​

Are you living in a bizarro opposite world or something? Wiretapping without a warrant is illegal. It always has been, it always will be. Bush would not be asking for immunity from prosecution, if he didn't think he had committed a crime.

You don't know about a declaration of war, habeus corpus, or warantless wiretaps. Sounds to me like you're just as capable of breaking the Constitution.

 

It is slanted towards the middle more then anything. And all media outlets lie and say crap.

They have said that there were no wmds being made by Saddam but he did have them at one point and WAS trying to develop them and acquire technology for them.

I google (IIRC) MCA of 2006, and I am finding nothing about this so if you could please give more details that would be apreciated.

That is because Congress passed the War Powers Resolution which is technically unconstitutional.

Not really.

Still not really because you give no specific examples that can not really be argued.

Not American citizens being held there.

What christian projects has he funded. And protestors are arrested for more then wearing tshirts.

That is talking about in America and you know it.

Technically wire tapping is legal by the Constitution but the SC is so idiotic they reversed a previous decision to say otherwise. Right to privacy is not in the Constitution. And search and seizures falls under tangible items.
It is sad how that has been twisted over the years.

Can you give me details on this and also it is not an occupation by definition.

Not American citizen?

Not Americans once again and what we do honestly should hardly be considered torture.

to black sites?

Still not right

24th Amendment -

ID should be required. It is hardly an attempt to lower minority turn out rates.

Not true. It used to be legal and IS constitutional.

Just like you I guess since you provided no real valid cases.

 

I've always thought your posts were BS, so I agree with that statement. They all have the same theme:

1) Tear America down

2) Tear Israel down

3) Kind words for terrorists and rogue dictators

4) Lack of truth, as above

It would appear you are demonstrating your sensitivity for terrorists again. After all, when it comes to the American Constitution, the only time you bring it up is when you believe it will benefit them.

Despite having knowledge otherwise, you repeat that no WMD were found. This is a lie. Some were found. You repeat that there were no ties to al qaida. This is a lie, there were many ties to al qaida. I've corrected you on habeus corpus before, but here you are again, lying about it and being corrected about it by someone else. There is no illegal wiretapping. This has been covered before to. Repeating a lie for the sake of tearing your country down.

Looks like the same old tactic. Anyone that doesn't agree with your alex jones induced delusion doesn't know what they are talking about. Only guerilla can know the facts, because he gets his news from prison planet

 

Whatever.

25 years ago. It's all been debunked, even by the President himself bro.

IIRC = If I Remember Correctly <==== Ignore this

MCA (Military Commission Act of 2006)

Violating the Constitution is not a failure to uphold the oath of office?

He's ordered members of the executive branch not to answer to Congressional subpoenas.

The Constitution doesn't apply only to citizens. Illegal immigrants have a right to trial by jury, correct?

The Christian thing was a joke, this section was copy/pasted from another site. The protesters were arrested for wearing T-Shirts.

I agree, that one was a little weak, although in court, it might be valid. IANAL, IDK.

Brandeis covered the right to privacy. Can you provide specifics on your positions? Cases, dates etc?

American citizen.

It is an occupation. What definition are you using?

I forget where it is, but I think the details pertain to a change in law, that allows Bush to confiscate property from anyone participating in an anti-war agenda.

If you had electrodes attached to your genitals, subjected to loud music for days, while being refrigerated, and deprived of sleep, then someone simulated drowning on you, it wouldn't be torture?

Would you be ok with this being done to one of your loved ones?

Do you know what Rendition is?

Please source this.

When? Again, please source this. Because Bush is begging for immunity from prosecution for it.

 

The debate over the MCA of 2006:

More information about the Military Commissions Act of 2006 can be found here

 

I'm at the office right now, so I don't have access to my files, but can someone else post a link to the youtube video of Bush admiting there were no WMD...?

------------------
EDIT: I think this was it...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=soohikNdbWs

 

Good job. Now you just have to convince another 100 million people, and we will be getting somewhere....

 

You mean this one?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_A77N5WKWM

 

A few quick points, I love these a chance to disagree with everyone and be on my own in the middle.

#1 The constitution may allow for illegals to have protections as it's currently being interpreted, I however myself do not agree with this. I firmly believe the constitution is only for legal citizens of this great nation.

However...

#2 One of the main reasons I disagree with Bush on things such as the patriot act. Had it specifically stated it only applies to non US citizens, or as in the case of the MCA of 06 specifically only effect non citizens, I would have absolutely no problem with it.

I stand for US citizens not losing a single right, I stand for others not harnessing protections I believe only entitled to US citizens, pretty simple really

I fear the constitution of this great land being eroded far more than a few sheep farmers from a crossed the world hitting us with another attack. Our government is much, much more powerful than the terrorists, that goes both ways, in both protecting and destroying us.