tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20794947.post2273398660218336359..comments2023-06-14T10:38:45.174-05:00Comments on A Nerd's Country Journal: TyrannyJeff Heberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13732306951663286466noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20794947.post-35783632336083737762006-10-04T08:26:00.000-05:002006-10-04T08:26:00.000-05:00There is one thing I do agree with - we need to re...<i>There is one thing I do agree with - we need to read the bills and get the facts. You'd be amazed by reading what the "other side" is saying rather than the side that's out of power - in fact, the Republican's views may (and I think they do) contain more truths and facts than what's being said by the left and should be read. For example, McCain and the majority are not capitulating idiots</i><br /><br />Yes, that would be the John McCain and Arlen Specter who said they doubted this bill was constitutional after it passed, but that they voted for it anyway. They weren't sure because they didn't know what it said once it came out of committee because they didn't have time to read it afterwards. The most troubling aspects of it came out of that committee, and most of it abrogated what McCain et. al. had reached in "compromise". He got suckered, again. The specific language that's so troubling is the definition of what an "enemy non-combatant" is, using very vague terms that easily can apply to a US Citizen. The concern is that a President who has already shown that he's willing to violate the rights of citizens suspected of terrorism (Padilla) will use that vagueness to take a law that people thought was about foreigners, and apply it to US citizens. <br /><br />The right to habeus corpus is written into the Constitution. A law to bypass it is, prima facea, unconstitutional. What's appalling is that McCain and Specter and Warner voted for it anyway, knowing it probably was illegal. Their oath is not to protect the President, or their Party, or their jobs -- their oath is to protect the <i>Constitution</i>, and by their own admission they failed on this particular law.Jeff Heberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13732306951663286466noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20794947.post-65222186868586286492006-10-04T00:25:00.000-05:002006-10-04T00:25:00.000-05:00Okay, I'm going to go against the grain here again...Okay, I'm going to go against the grain here again, sorry. <br /><br />Let's be factual here rather than reactive - none of this allows the President to "pretty much do anything he wants" in either situation. The Unitary Executive article is also disingenuous and very misleading. These are scare tactics being used to obscure the important details. The bills specifically focus on those criminals who are trying to kill innocent Americans while still abiding by the rules of warfare and ethical treatment of criminals or prisoners. Killing this legislation has nothing to do with protecting US citizens' liberties, it only makes it easier for foreigners to kill us. <br /><br />There is one thing I do agree with - we need to read the bills and get the facts. You'd be amazed by reading what the "other side" is saying rather than the side that's out of power - in fact, the Republican's views may (and I think they do) contain more truths and facts than what's being said by the left and should be read. For example, McCain and the majority are not capitulating idiots - they are comfortable with the approaches and legal framework here. However, I certainly would not go anywhere near MoveOn or the ACLU if the truth is what you're after.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20794947.post-80161389123698062742006-09-27T13:29:00.000-05:002006-09-27T13:29:00.000-05:00One more specific thing you can do is to contact t...One more specific thing you can do is to contact two key moderate Senate Republicans who have a chance of stopping this particular bill. Both of these women have shown in the past that they are willing to stand up for true conservative principles (smaller, more controlled government), the hope is that they can withstand White House pressure on this bill and vote against it, effectively killing it for this term so we can have some time to understand exactly what we need to do:<br /><br />Susan Collins<br />461 Dirksen Senate Office Building<br />Washington, DC 20510<br />Phone: (202) 224-2523<br />Fax: (202) 224-2693<br /><br />Olympia Snowe<br />154 Russell Senate Office Building<br />Washington, DC 20510<br />Phone: (202) 224-5344<br />Toll Free: (800) 432-1599<br />Fax: (202) 224-1946<br /><br /><a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/mydd/~3/28406518/4703">Thanks to MyDD for the contact info. </a>Jeff Heberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13732306951663286466noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20794947.post-14000952356743091602006-09-27T10:35:00.000-05:002006-09-27T10:35:00.000-05:00I want to stress that many Democrats in the Senate...I want to stress that many Democrats in the Senate (including, apparently, Harry Reid, the Minority Leader) are also supporting the Torture Bill (<a href="http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/09/27/dems_and_torture/index.html">see here for more details)</a>.<br /><br />This is not a partisan issue, this is an American issue. If the Democrats aren't willing to stand up and say that torture is wrong, they are every bit as culpable on this as Bush is for asking for it in the first place.<br /><br />If you're a Democrat or liberal-leaning person reading this, pick up the phone and call Harry Reid, Barak Obama, and Joe Lieberman and let them know that they have got to finally stand up and walk the walk on this moral issue like they keep scolding the rest of us to do.<br /><br />If this bill passes the Senate, every Senator who votes for it deserves to have their hands held to the fire, just as they're making it legal for us to do to those in our custody.Jeff Heberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13732306951663286466noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20794947.post-60790289261584473242006-09-27T07:59:00.000-05:002006-09-27T07:59:00.000-05:00Give some possible suggested actions to take to pr...<i>Give some possible suggested actions to take to prevent it from happening.</i><br /><br />1) Write your Senator and/or congressional representative.<br /><br />2) Contribute money to one of the organizations fighting this -- MoveOn or ActBlue if you're a Democrat, the ACLU if you're neutral, or to John McCain if you're a Republican (McCain has apparently capitulated to the White House on this, but I think he just is interpreting what the bills say, thinking they are more limiting than they really are).<br /><br />3) Encourage people to pay attention to the issue if you can -- I know you're like me, you don't like bringing up politics, but this is really important. <br /><br />4) Write a letter to your local paper.<br /><br /><i>Jeff, where is the bill, do you know its name and the status of the bill in the legislature? </i><br /><br />There are two sets of legislation, the detainee/torture proposal (basically allowing the US to reinterpret the Geneva Conventions against torture so we can do pretty much whatever we want to uncharged detainees in our custody -- much like the Soviet Union used to do. Remember when that was bad?) and the FISA wireless wiretapping proposals (allowing the President to spy on anyone he wants -- even US citizens -- at any time he wants without either congressional or judicial oversight). <br /><br />There are several versions of the detainee/torture bill working their way through the House and Senate. They're all bad. The worst is Arlen Specter's version, the almost-as-bad one is the McCain/Warner one. Part of the problem is that this is getting crammed through Congress so fast that <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/26/AR2006092601475.html">no one's really quite sure just what any of them entail.</a><br /><br />This stuff is too important to blast through it so hastily. I'd encourage everyone to let legislation on both the detainee/torture stuff and the FISA wireless wiretapping stuff wait until the next session of Congress.<br /><br />Actually I'd encourage everyone to ask their congressmen to completely annihilate both sets of legislation because I think they're rotten to the core. But barring that, let's at least have an open, honest, and (most importantly) thorough debate about exactly what we're doing here. Democracy in secret is not democracy at all.<br /><br /><i>As a conservative, I never want to see any one person have unlimited power, nor do I want to see one branch of government bigger and stronger than another.</i><br /><br />Amen to that. This whole Unitary Executive crap sets my conservative teeth on edge far more than my liberal sensitivites.Jeff Heberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13732306951663286466noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20794947.post-19084475473543291702006-09-26T23:35:00.000-05:002006-09-26T23:35:00.000-05:00Jeff, where is the bill, do you know its name and ...Jeff, where is the bill, do you know its name and the status of the bill in the legislature? As a conservative, I never want to see any one person have unlimited power, nor do I want to see one branch of government bigger and stronger than another. After a couple of American history classes and some additional reading, I have no doubt that none of the Founding Fathers ever wanted to see a president with unlimited powers. Thanks for the heads up, and I'd like to read more about it. - DeniseAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20794947.post-80451902394068882912006-09-26T23:16:00.000-05:002006-09-26T23:16:00.000-05:00Give some possible suggested actions to take to pr...Give some possible suggested actions to take to prevent it from happening.David Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07069646659482687749noreply@blogger.com