Political Forums

Political Forums (http://www.politicalchat.org/index.php)
-   Politics (http://www.politicalchat.org/forumdisplay.php?f=25)
-   -   Presidential Power (http://www.politicalchat.org/showthread.php?t=4028)

bhunter 05-20-2012 08:25 PM

Presidential Power
 
Finding a common cause between two usually opposing groups is always interesting IMHO. Here both the left and right seek to limit government power.

Quote:

Last week saw another setback for the Obama Administration. Led by Pulitzer Prize-winner journalist, Christopher Hedges, a group of plaintiffs that includes, among others: Pentagon Papers whistle-blower, Daniel Ellsberg; M.I.T. professor and American dissident, Noam Chomsky; several Occupy groups, and U.S. Day of Rage, won a temporary injunction against part of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) signed by Mr. Obama back on December 31, 2011. Ironically, this set of plaintiffs would generally be regarded as part of Mr. Obama’s left-wing political base.

A further irony is that several conservative groups filed amicus (friend) briefs in support of the liberal plaintiffs. They are: the Gun Owners Foundation, Gun Owners of America, Inc., Conservative Legal Defense and Education Fund, Restoring Liberty Action Committee, the Tenth Amendment Center, and the Center for Media and Democracy.

On May 16, 2012, U.S. District Judge Katherine Forrest suspended the enforcement of Section 1021 of the NDAA.
...
...
The plaintiffs argued that Section 1021 was vague to the point that the President could have virtually anyone picked up off of American streets by the U.S. military and taken to Club Gitmo for an indefinite, “throw-away-the-key” stay in the tropics. In agreeing with the plaintiffs, Judge Forrest found that terms such as: “substantially supported,” “directly supported,” or “associated forces” were not clearly defined.

From “Central View,” by William Hamilton, J.D., Ph.D.
Even if one trusts this particular President, the potential for abuse far outweighs any potential law enforcement advantage.

budgetaudio6 05-20-2012 09:40 PM

hope that damn thing gets thrown out

d-ray657 05-20-2012 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by budgetaudio6 (Post 103130)
hope that damn thing gets thrown out

The statute or the lawsuit?

Regards,

D-Ray

budgetaudio6 05-21-2012 12:16 AM

the statute. the whole law. Right along with obama care.

bobabode 05-21-2012 12:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhunter (Post 103127)
Finding a common cause between two usually opposing groups is always interesting IMHO. Here both the left and right seek to limit government power.



Even if one trusts this particular President, the potential for abuse far outweighs any potential law enforcement advantage.

I wonder who wrote that provision, there's a ton of horse trading going on with the defense appropriations. All sorts of crap gets in there from both sides of the aisle as the congress authors and offers it up to potus for a sig.

I'm with Chomsky on a lot of things and certainly agree that granting sweeping powers to the Justice dept is not to be done lightly. Scrap that provision, absolutely. Since the Patriot Act was signed into law a large part of the protections afforded by the Constitution were put on hold. That's one big piece of crap legislation that should go bye-bye,IMO.

BlueStreak 05-21-2012 12:30 AM

It's nice seeing radicals left and right pulling together for a common cause.

I wish them luck in their endeavor.

No, I'm not voting for Romney.

piece-itpete 05-21-2012 09:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueStreak (Post 103143)
....

No, I'm not voting for Romney.


Darn you to heck!

:)

Pete

Charles 05-21-2012 04:19 PM

Is there anyone the federal government hasn't pissed off?

Chas

whell 05-21-2012 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charles (Post 103271)
Is there anyone the federal government hasn't pissed off?

Chas

the list continues to get smaller by the day....

d-ray657 05-21-2012 05:04 PM

If you're going to make tough decisions, someone is going to be pissed off.

With respect to the OP though, it sounds like the judge is on the right track. When freedom of association and expression are to be restrained, there must be a compelling public interest and the restraint must be explicit and minimal as possible. It sounds like the language was anything but clear and explicit. Certainly could have a chilling effect.

Regards,

D-Ray

d-ray657 05-21-2012 05:05 PM

If you're going to make tough decisions, someone is going to be pissed off.

With respect to the OP though, it sounds like the judge is on the right track. When freedom of association and expression are to be restrained, there must be a compelling public interest and the restraint must be explicit and minimal as possible. It sounds like the language was anything but clear and explicit. Certainly could have a chilling effect.

Regards,

D-Ray

Charles 05-21-2012 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by d-ray657 (Post 103282)
If you're going to make tough decisions, someone is going to be pissed off.

With respect to the OP though, it sounds like the judge is on the right track. When freedom of association and expression are to be restrained, there must be a compelling public interest and the restraint must be explicit and minimal as possible. It sounds like the language was anything but clear and explicit. Certainly could have a chilling effect.

Regards,

D-Ray

Tough decisions? The bunch we got now???

Let's try unfair and politically expedient decisions. If it's a tough decision, about all they do is kick the can down the road and attempt to blame it on the other guy.

I'd welcome some tough decisions, so long as they were tough for everyone.

Especially for the bastards who were making them.

Chas

budgetaudio6 05-21-2012 11:11 PM

charles, i agree.

bobabode 05-22-2012 12:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charles (Post 103284)
Tough decisions? The bunch we got now???

Let's try unfair and politically expedient decisions. If it's a tough decision, about all they do is kick the can down the road and attempt to blame it on the other guy.

I'd welcome some tough decisions, so long as they were tough for everyone.

Especially for the bastards who were making them.

Chas

Much as i would like to say channeling some of that pissed offedness towards getting more people to vote and toss the corrupt bastards out, I'm getting to believe that without an amendment facing these politicos we don't have a chance affecting their decisions. The game is rigged. The boys with the ten thousand dollar chips have sat down to the five dollar table and are buying every pot. (Not to mention the dealer is in on their side and isn't above dealing off the bottom - ala scotus) That's just my take on it and your mileage may vary and all but not by so much, I fear.

So, drowning any worms, lately? Here's a chuckle for you.

The old lady kicked my ass out of bed yesterday and said, "You need an airing out! Get some jeans on, we're going down to the beach." Grumbling and pissin' and moaning got me nowhere except in the car headed to the beach. I live three miles off the beach and it's been a couple of years since I got my toes wet and sand in my shoes. Funny how that shit works,you know.. All that I've been seeing of the ocean is out the window of my worktruck.
I did get a meal at the Golden Dragon out of it afterwards. Tsing Tao beer and mushroom chicken. MMmmm, chinese.:)

Saw a few corbina in the surf and a kid was there catching perch on sand crabs. I think I'll invest in a fishing license and go have some light weight fun. Corbinas go two to maybe four pounds and all your bait is right there in the sand, just scoop up a crab when the wave goes out. A 6 to 8 pound test spinning rig and you're good to go. Shit if I'm real lucky a halibut might be in lurking but a 22" limit makes that a tough one to land in the surf. Those mothers have needle sharp teeth and super vision but they are excellent eating. California halibut are similar to those Alaskan behemoths, you don't need a .38 to land 'em though.:rolleyes:

Charles 05-22-2012 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobabode (Post 103312)
Much as i would like to say channeling some of that pissed offedness towards getting more people to vote and toss the corrupt bastards out, I'm getting to believe that without an amendment facing these politicos we don't have a chance affecting their decisions. The game is rigged. The boys with the ten thousand dollar chips have sat down to the five dollar table and are buying every pot. (Not to mention the dealer is in on their side and isn't above dealing off the bottom - ala scotus) That's just my take on it and your mileage may vary and all but not by so much, I fear.

So, drowning any worms, lately? Here's a chuckle for you.

The old lady kicked my ass out of bed yesterday and said, "You need an airing out! Get some jeans on, we're going down to the beach." Grumbling and pissin' and moaning got me nowhere except in the car headed to the beach. I live three miles off the beach and it's been a couple of years since I got my toes wet and sand in my shoes. Funny how that shit works,you know.. All that I've been seeing of the ocean is out the window of my worktruck.
I did get a meal at the Golden Dragon out of it afterwards. Tsing Tao beer and mushroom chicken. MMmmm, chinese.:)

Saw a few corbina in the surf and a kid was there catching perch on sand crabs. I think I'll invest in a fishing license and go have some light weight fun. Corbinas go two to maybe four pounds and all your bait is right there in the sand, just scoop up a crab when the wave goes out. A 6 to 8 pound test spinning rig and you're good to go. Shit if I'm real lucky a halibut might be in lurking but a 22" limit makes that a tough one to land in the surf. Those mothers have needle sharp teeth and super vision but they are excellent eating. California halibut are similar to those Alaskan behemoths, you don't need a .38 to land 'em though.:rolleyes:

I agree, the game is rigged.

I'm three weeks out from drowning worms.

Best of wishes on your shoulder.

Chas

Big_Bill 05-22-2012 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charles (Post 103271)
Is there anyone the federal government hasn't pissed off?

Chas



Gosh Chas,

There's damn few that the Government hasn't pissed on ?

Zeke 05-22-2012 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big_Bill (Post 103507)
Gosh Chas,

There's damn few that the Government hasn't pissed on ?

I have yet to see them turn on rich white males... :rolleyes:

finnbow 05-22-2012 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charles (Post 103271)
Is there anyone the federal government hasn't pissed off?

Chas

The frequently bemoaned military-industrial complex and their hundreds of beltway bandit contractors have been neither pissed off or pissed upon by Uncle Sam. Uncle Sam is a very generous sugar daddy.

Big_Bill 05-22-2012 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeke (Post 103511)
I have yet to see them turn on rich white males... :rolleyes:



That is simply because there are less than 1% of them in our population.

And because if they do, those rich white men will take their money away from them, as they are doing now :rolleyes:

budgetaudio6 05-29-2012 11:36 PM

bummere. the rich arent paying their fair share! There fore we need to tax them more.

Rich, But we are creating Jobs!
Bummer, Pay your fair share!

Americans YAY!!! As the rich pay more and the jobs go away...sad

bobabode 05-30-2012 01:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by budgetaudio6 (Post 104641)
bummere. the rich arent paying their fair share! There fore we need to tax them more.

Rich, But we are creating Jobs!
Bummer, Pay your fair share!

Americans YAY!!! As the rich pay more and the jobs go away...sad

There you have it. The most simplistic craptastic post yet. Bravo!:rolleyes:

historian 05-30-2012 01:48 AM

My rule of thumb for granting new power to the government is simple.
Would you grant it to the worst "leader" we have or have had.

BlueStreak 05-30-2012 03:28 AM

Somewhere along the line, I noticed that giving a rich man more money is, well, just giving a rich man more money. Sometimes, he may even use it to buy more politicians, pay them to help keep me under control..........

I love going to work and listening to my coworkers bitch, then turn around and support giving "the man" even more freedom to hold their livelyhoods over their heads. Like a bunch of lifelong slaves who feel disconcerted without the bosses boot up their asses........

And, no. I'm not talking about the president. He may not have been the greatest, but I honestly don't see the evil and malicious intent in him that others apparently do.

Meanwhile time keeps tickin', the body aches a little more every year, takes a little bit longer to recover from exertion, illness and hangovers...............What did Brando say in Apocalypse Now? A snail crawling along the edge of a razorblade......the further he crawls, the deeper it cuts.

Dave

merrylander 05-30-2012 07:23 AM

Wake up, the top 1% have bought off the politiciams and a majority of SCOTUS yet y'all sit here and blame everything on Obama. Why does he not do this, or that, well maybe it is because people like McConnell keeps saying NOPE. Of course Dr. No still take his salary and health care paid for by you and I. But you knew that.

piece-itpete 05-30-2012 08:10 AM

Obama is one of thier minions too....

Quote:

Originally Posted by historian (Post 104659)
My rule of thumb for granting new power to the government is simple.
Would you grant it to the worst "leader" we have or have had.

Excellent! But, government is now in this brave new millennium as harmless and cute as a puppy. A puppy with super powers!

Pete

BlueStreak 05-30-2012 04:48 PM

I thought it was the "small businessman" that 's going to solve all of our problems?

bhunter 05-30-2012 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by historian (Post 104659)
My rule of thumb for granting new power to the government is simple.
Would you grant it to the worst "leader" we have or have had.

I'm beginning to like you, but I wouldn't grant it regardless of the leader.

bhunter 05-30-2012 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueStreak (Post 104825)
I thought it was the "small businessman" that 's going to solve all of our problems?

Imagine the country without small business. Perhaps, individuals ought run their lives with the prudence of businessmen. Ooops, I forgot, some people are not capable of such disciplined behavior and need to be coddled by political elites. It would almost be a non-issue if more were not continually imported and created by government policies.

icenine 05-30-2012 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhunter (Post 104852)
Imagine the country without small business. Perhaps, individuals ought run their lives with the prudence of businessmen. Ooops, I forgot, some people are not capable of such disciplined behavior and need to be coddled by political elites. It would almost be a non-issue if more were not continually imported and created by government policies.

Imagine San Diego without the US Navy....your house would not be worth the $300,000 it is now, give or take a few dollars. It would worth about as much as house in Michigan if the big government left you (unless your right on the beach or in La Jolla). Imagine all those small businesses drying up when big government left....

It is a symbiotic relationship...there is place for government and business duh.
You suck on big government tit every time you get on the I-5, along with eveyone else here.

budgetaudio6 05-30-2012 10:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by piece-itpete (Post 104696)
Obama is one of thier minions too....



Excellent! But, government is now in this brave new millennium as harmless and cute as a puppy. A puppy with super powers!

Pete

This is why we should vote small guvmint. But who. Both are for big guvmint. Romneycare and obama care. Difference is Romney will give states rights on whether or not to accept the care. If he doesnt appeal it...

merrylander 05-31-2012 06:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhunter (Post 104852)
Imagine the country without small business. Perhaps, individuals ought run their lives with the prudence of businessmen. Ooops, I forgot, some people are not capable of such disciplined behavior and need to be coddled by political elites. It would almost be a non-issue if more were not continually imported and created by government policies.

Gee I really did not notice all this. Having worked for a couple of small businessmen I never did see the halos ovr their heads.:rolleyes:

merrylander 05-31-2012 06:51 AM

The funny thing is that I was watching the National Business Report last evening. The host Tom Hudson was interviewing some Wall Street wizard about the world economy. The wiz said that the U.S. with its annual growth of 2.2% is the economic shining star of the world. Wonder if the Mittster was watching.

Oerets 05-31-2012 06:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by merrylander (Post 104873)
The funny thing is that I was watching the National Business Report last evening. The host Tom Hudson was interviewing some Wall Street wizard about the world economy. The wiz said that the U.S. with its annual growth of 2.2% is the economic shining star of the world. Wonder if the Mittster was watching.

Your assuming that the GOP and fact based reality can be used in the same sentence.




Barney

BlueStreak 05-31-2012 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhunter (Post 104852)
Imagine the country without small business. Perhaps, individuals ought run their lives with the prudence of businessmen. Ooops, I forgot, some people are not capable of such disciplined behavior and need to be coddled by political elites. It would almost be a non-issue if more were not continually imported and created by government policies.

Who said anything about eliminating small businesses? And, I have as yet to have met more than a handful of businessmen who exhibit "prudence". As a matter of fact there have been times in my life I have gotten screwed pretty badly, by unscrupuous businessmen. Which wouldn't happen as often, if we didn't tolerate it.

budgetaudio6 05-31-2012 10:23 PM

there are far many more small businesses then there are large business/corporations? NOt sure where the weight, would tip to though. think scales. As i dont know how to follow them stats.

merrylander 06-05-2012 08:53 AM

All this talk about self-discipline and coddling by the government. Now tell me who is more coddled than ExxonMobil, Chevron, Conoco Philips, or Goldman Sachs, or J.P. Morgan Stanley, or Citi. The government had to pick the banks up and wipe their snotty noses, and they are still wiping. You want to talk about "entitlements" take a look at the big casino in lower Manhatten. Oh I forgot they call them Derivatives or Credit Default Swaps. Or tax breaks for Big Oil, and freedom from certain economic rules in the case of Big Pharma. Self discipline? Don't make me laugh.

BlueStreak 06-05-2012 04:36 PM

Here's a term you may not have heard in a while "self regulate". It used to be one of those catch phrases the rightwing mouthpieces threw around in the '80s-90s, as in, "We believe Wall Street can self regulate".

How'd that work out?

Dave


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:56 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.