Originally Posted By davewasbaloo "It's now "Give me a nice house in the 'burbs and a big car. I'll give you anything you want as long as you don't let them kill me." Sounds like the start of Nazi Germany to me.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo "The president doesn't think he is bound by the law of the land." Chencellor Hitler found a way to change the laws in a democracy as well.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip For the record… Presidential oath of Office: "I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of the President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." Military Oath of Allegiance: “I, {insert name here}, do solemnly swear, (or affirm), that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.â€
Originally Posted By TomSawyer Thanks, RT - notice that no where in those oaths does it say that they're protecting the "country". Their solemn oath is to defend the Constitution.
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom <<I have never had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky. I've never had an affair with her. >>
Originally Posted By RoadTrip ^^^ And your point would be??? As far as I know there was no Constitutional violation there.
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom He's an attorney and was President at the time and lyed before a grand jury. Is it lawful for the Head of the Executive Branch of Government to be breaking the law and the Constitution?
Originally Posted By TomSawyer >>Is it lawful for the Head of the Executive Branch of Government to be breaking the law and the Constitution?<< According to the current Administration, if the president does it it isn't breaking the law.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy <<I truly can't believe ANY patriotic American would say such a thing. You are no patriot Beaumandy. You are just one more coward wanting nothing other than to preserve what YOU PERSONALLY have no matter what the cost to our country and way of life.>> Hey Roadtrip, you better answer this. Perhaps one of the hysterical libs would like to chime in also? Was FDR and congress cowards for setting up internment camps, installing media blackouts and intercepting peoples mail during WWII?? Was Abe Lincoln a coward for suspending Habeas Corpus during the civil war? These could EASILY be considered violations of the constitution but guess what? You and your buddies are proud that we won WWII and that we stopped the South from breaking away and we freed the slaves. With your current mindset we would have lost those wars. But at least you could say you took the high ground and follow the rule of law as you watched your country become history. The current Islamic threat is MUCH worse than Hitler ever was for us here in America. Hitler couldn't destroy a million people in one attack here in America like the current Islamic nutjobs are trying to do as we speak. Where is your bogus outrage about the constitution and civil rights regarding those wars of the past?? Wars we won that made us a superpower and allow you to take your family trips to WDW??? Well?? Spare me the patriot speech when you can't even admit history makes you a total hyppcrite. But... I still lova ya.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Was FDR and congress cowards for setting up internment camps, installing media blackouts and intercepting peoples mail during WWII??>> Internment camps were completely useless and a terrible violation of the rights of U.S. citizens. I believe media blackouts were for the most part voluntary, just as during the Iraq war the media have withheld the release of information at the request of the government. Intercepted mail was limited to that sent by soldiers to make sure that critical information was not released and mail sent from foreign countries to the U.S. Typical mail between U.S. citizens was not intercepted. The interception of soldier's mail was later discontinued because it was decided the manpower needed to review the letters was not justified by what they were finding. I have no real problem what the Bush administration has done in the way of intercepting international phone calls etc... I just don't understand why they didn't do it through the legal means available to them. Besides… that was then; this is now. Sixty years ago racial discrimination was perfectly legal too. Times change... thank God for that.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer >>Was FDR and congress cowards for setting up internment camps, installing media blackouts and intercepting peoples mail during WWII??<< On the internment camp issue, yes. That was a decision based entirely on fear and not on an actual threat, and the government admitted that mistake and paid for it. As far as the other things go, the declaration of war granted the President extraordinary powers - but the court system remained in operation throughout the entire war. >>Was Abe Lincoln a coward for suspending Habeas Corpus during the civil war?<< The courts actually overturned his order to suspend Habeas Corpus, and the Supreme Court found it to be unconstitutional - google "ex parte Milligan". >>These could EASILY be considered violations of the constitution but guess what?<< Guess what? The internment of Japanese citizens AND Lincoln's suspension of Habeas Corpus WERE both found to be unconstitutional.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy <<Guess what? The internment of Japanese citizens AND Lincoln's suspension of Habeas Corpus WERE both found to be unconstitutional.>> So what?? We won and the nation survived.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy <<I have no real problem what the Bush administration has done in the way of intercepting international phone calls etc... I just don't understand why they didn't do it through the legal means available to them.>> What he did was legal. Every court that has looked at the program has said it's legal.
Originally Posted By jasmine7 <<So what?? We won and the nation survived.<< So I guess for you, any actions are okay as long as we win, regardless of whether the Constitution is violated. So what? So so many innocent people were locked up for absolutely no reason. So natural US citizens were treated like scum and locked up for no reason other than the way they looked. Yeah, so what. . .
Originally Posted By Beaumandy <<So I guess for you, any actions are okay as long as we win, regardless of whether the Constitution is violated.>> Soes " winning " mean we live and losing means the terrorists kill massive amounts of Americans?? If that is the case then, yes you do what ever it takes to win. If that means rounding up ever Muslim in every Mosque so be it. If that means racial profiling so be it. If that means torturing a prisoner to get information that will save Americans lives so be it. Trust me, if we get hit again and thousands, or god forbid millions of Americans die... you will get out of liberal fantasyland and join me in my views. Lucky for us Bush gets this before the big one(s) hit... it's why he has stopped so many attacks already.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo "What he did was legal. Every court that has looked at the program has said it's legal." And Hitler was able to make genocide legal. Legal is as legal does.
