Romney And Giuliani: If There Was Any Doubt Why You Should Not Vote For These Two Dangerous People...
...here it is:
"Crane says he was disappointed with Romney's answer to his question the other night. Crane asked if Romney believed the president should have the authority to arrest U.S. citizens with no review. Romney said he would want to hear the pros and cons from smart lawyers before he made up his mind. Crane said that he had asked Giuliani the same question a few weeks ago. The mayor said that he would want to use this authority infrequently."
via NRO
The above qoute clearly reveals the basic disregard and contempt Romney and Giuliani (and, I wager, the Republican Party, in general) hold toward the United States The Bill of Rights.
Many of you may recall this from Civics class:
Amendment IV
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, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
I've italized part of the 5th Amendment to indicate where the current President of the U.S. says he is taking his authority for detaining U.S. citizens. The problem is, war has never been declared (only congress can do that, "Article One, Section Eight of the Constitution says 'Congress shall have the power to ... declare War,'")
What BushCo has done is say that because they this is not a normal or conventional "war" (which, remember, has not been declared!) where the U.S. is fighting a country (meaning no battle field in the traditional sense like Bull Run or Iwo Jima, etc.), but an ideology, BushCo feels everywhere is the battle field and, because of that, Bush feels he has the authority to treat the whole of The United States of America as a petentioal "battle field." When the whole country is a battle field in BushCo's eyes, that means we are all potential enemy cambatents and are, therefore, exempt from the 5th Amendment. This philosophy seems to be the same philosophy of Romny and Giuliani.
Stay informed.
Update
I just noticed Glenn Greenwald has a much more detailed post about this very subject. It's, like, synergy, man! Synergy
"Crane says he was disappointed with Romney's answer to his question the other night. Crane asked if Romney believed the president should have the authority to arrest U.S. citizens with no review. Romney said he would want to hear the pros and cons from smart lawyers before he made up his mind. Crane said that he had asked Giuliani the same question a few weeks ago. The mayor said that he would want to use this authority infrequently."
via NRO
The above qoute clearly reveals the basic disregard and contempt Romney and Giuliani (and, I wager, the Republican Party, in general) hold toward the United States The Bill of Rights.
Many of you may recall this from Civics class:
Amendment IV
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, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
I've italized part of the 5th Amendment to indicate where the current President of the U.S. says he is taking his authority for detaining U.S. citizens. The problem is, war has never been declared (only congress can do that, "Article One, Section Eight of the Constitution says 'Congress shall have the power to ... declare War,'")
What BushCo has done is say that because they this is not a normal or conventional "war" (which, remember, has not been declared!) where the U.S. is fighting a country (meaning no battle field in the traditional sense like Bull Run or Iwo Jima, etc.), but an ideology, BushCo feels everywhere is the battle field and, because of that, Bush feels he has the authority to treat the whole of The United States of America as a petentioal "battle field." When the whole country is a battle field in BushCo's eyes, that means we are all potential enemy cambatents and are, therefore, exempt from the 5th Amendment. This philosophy seems to be the same philosophy of Romny and Giuliani.
Stay informed.
Update
I just noticed Glenn Greenwald has a much more detailed post about this very subject. It's, like, synergy, man! Synergy
Labels: Bill of Rights, Bush, Constitution, Giuliani, Romney
posted by Michael at 8:04 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home