I've said it many times before and I'll say it again. The United States of America is the greatest nation to ever exist because of two very special documents. The Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution. Without these two documents, especially the constitution, we would have been no different than England or France or Italy or any other European country. If you don't believe in the genius of the constitution, if you don't believe in the tenets of that document then you don't believe in America.
The Constitution begins, "We the people" but, to the left, both the people and the Constitution are just things to circumvent in order to carry out their agenda.
You don't believe that?
Well then listen to this: Jan Schackowski
23 comments:
Once again, your newfound concern for the Constitution is touching. Really.
Maybe you should go back and read our five years of archives before making such an asinine comment.
I don't think I could take it. Perhaps you could provide a link to the posts where you strongly criticized the Bush administration's trashing of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
We don't believe he did.
Please cite examples.
Ok we get it. Bush Lied Kids Died, No Blood For Oil, Bush Is Hitler, blah blah fucking blah.
One thing Ive learned throughout the years is that whatever libs accuse you of, is what they are most guilty of being.
Destroying the Constitution and everything it stands for is Gary's and his liberal ilk's entire political philosophy, but they realize that kinda doesnt poll well so they point fingers at Bush.
To further illustrate my point, allow me to cite a passage from Daniel Hannan's new book, The New Road To Serfdom.
"The US Constitution, in particular The Bill of Rights, is mainly about the liberty of the individual. The EU Constitution is mainly about the power of the state.
The US Declaration of Independence, which foreshadowed the constitutional settlement, promises 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.' The EU's equivalent, the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms, guarantees its citizens the right to strike action, free care, and affordable housing."
Ill let you kids figure out which one sounds more like the liberal way, but Ill give you hint...it rhymes with European.
Examples? OK, here' one to start. Bush took an oath to uphold the Constitution and to faithfully uphold the law. The Constitution states that Treaties "shall be the Supreme Law of the Land." Yet Bush violated the Geneva Conventions and the UN Convention on Torture, two treaties. This was clearly an impeachable offense, if the Congress had been so inclined.
That's it?
The opinion of the experts who reviewed it before it was done declared that waterboarding was NOT torture.
And even if you believe that it was there was MAYBE a handful of people who were waterboarded.
That's your example of SHREDDING the constitution? Eight years and you come up with 1 controversial action?
Try harder!
OK gary, you gotta do better than that. Seriously? That is what you consider shredding the constitution? Weak.
The Constitution does not say that "treaties are the supreme law of the land". You misquote a sentence in a feeble effort to make a point, yet inadvertently make our point for us that liberals hate the Contstitution, and therefore America, with your willingness to so quickly concede foreign law soveriegnty over American affairs.
....and a side note, why dont libs, when citing the geneva convention also make mention to the fact that enemy combatants not in uniform, and therefore considered spies, are allowed to be executed on site? Guess you missed that chapter in the cliff notes. Fraud.
The Constitution doesn't say that treaties are the supreme Law of the Land? You should have actually checked with the Constitution before saying anything so stupid:
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land"
Second, Common Article Three of the Geneva Convention clearly applies to the prisoners in question, whether or not they wear uniforms, and the Supreme Court has so held.
And while I strongly disagree with you on waterboarding not being torture, it doesn't make that much difference. Cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment is also illegal, and it would be difficult to argue that waterboarding doesn't meet that standared.
Thank you for manning up and posting the entire sentence, which makes my point.
You tried to edit the sentence .... "treaties are the supreme law of the land" .... to give the appearance of legal precedence to foreign law over the Constitution, whereas in context and in its entirety its obvious that the Constitution rules supreme.
That your first instinct when reading that sentence was to defer to foreign law shows just how much disdain you have for the Constitution. You would have been tarred and feathered in 1787.
Regarding treaties, allow me to quote Henry John Temple...
"nations have no permanent friends or allies, they have only permanent interets."
Upholding the United States Constitution is in our permanent interest. If you dont agree, move to Geneva.
Donkey, that's idiotic. Treaties are not foreign law, they are under the Constitution the "supreme Law of the Land." Also I might point out that The United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, to use its full name, has also been incorporated into U.S. domestic law, as called for under that treaty.
Bush disregarded this treaty, as well as the Geneva Conventions, and was thus guilty of impeachable offenses. You are guilty of torturing common sense and the law.
I'm no expert on the constitution or the geneva convention but i'm pretty sure waterboarding a few terrorists doesn't constitute "shredding" the constitution.
In fact, I'm pretty sure the wiretapping was worse than that and apparently EVERY president has done that since Carter so it's pretty much standard practice.(on a personal note i'm in favor of the warrantless wiretap)
You got anything else? Something that Bush did to "shred" the constitution? Something that wasn't done before and hasn't been done by Obama since?
Do some homework. I'll wait.....
First, waterboarding was only one technique that violated the laws against treatment of prisoners. That was one example of the Bush administration violating his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the laws.
The warrantless wiretaps were another, yes, as a clear violation of the FISA laws and the fourth amendment.
I think the problem here is that you are in favor of torture and other cruel and degrading treatment of prisoners, and of warrantless wiretaps, the law be damned.
Anyway, two serious unconstitutional and impeachable violations of law are enough, don't you think?
Recap.
You cite the Geneva and UN Conventions as examples of Bush violating the US Constitution, and use a heavily edited quote to do so.
When alqaeda start adhering to your beloved international laws, I hold my country to the same standards, but so long as terrorists continue to fight like cowards I will expect my my govt to do everything and anything to uphold their end of the bargain regarding until Art 1 Sect. 8 will do fine for me...
"to suppress insurrections and repel invasions
Ok, I first paraphrased the Constitution from memory but then quoted the whole passage, which supported the obvious FACT that the Constitution calls treaties the supreme Law of the Land. You clearly support disregarding what international law, despite the language of the Constitution, although I pointed out that the UN Convention Against Torture is also codified into US domestic law.
Al Qaeda has beheaded prisoners. Would you be OK with the US doing the same?
Well gary my opinion of these actions aside YOU only came up with 1 thing. The wiretapping was mine and like I said it's been used by every other president since the technology has been available so I don't think it really counts as "Bush SHREDDING the constitution" If you want to say he used the same previously ripped piece that clinton used before him and Obama is continuing to use since his departure that would be acceptable to me, however "shredding" the constitution is a pretty big statement.
If you want to now change that statement and say Bush didn't adhere to every single tenet of the constitution exactly to the letter just like every president before or after him and therefore he is not perfect but by and large was a pretty good president then I will say you have a point. And if you want to villify him for allowing the republican congress to spend money like drunken sailors and NEVER veto any spending bill that came to his desk I will also say you have a point and I agree with you.
And if you want to say he was too soft on illegal immigration and it became an even bigger problem under his administration than under Clinton I will agree with you.
You see if you can come to me with legitimate beefs I am more than willing to concede that you have a point.
The problem you face of course is that Obama is WORSE on all of these points (except he hasn't waterboarded anyone yet....yet)
If by pretty good President you mean one of the worst in history, perhaps THE worst, then I would agree with you. Anyway if Bush disregarded treaties, as he did, and engaged in torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, as he did, then that is a serious violation of the law, and I only need one white crow to prove that all crows aren't black.
I don't know what heckle and jeckle have to do with anything but i'm pretty sure you haven't given me any evidence of Bush shredding the constitution.
Why don't you just admit that you just regurgitate the talking points from kos and you have never really given it any critical thought on your own?
We already know that's the truth so you're really only lying to yourself anyway.
Also to answer your earlier question, yes i am in favor of beheading prisoners.
If Bush is "perhaps the worst" how do grade Obama so far, considering he has continued every single policy of Bush you oppossed?
Lemme guess, the BEST EVAH!!!!!!!
You are a fraud in every conceivable way; intellectually, morally, and politically.
You have been unable to refute that treaties are the supreme Law of the Land under the constitution. You can quibble as to whether waterboarding is torture under the law or merely cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, but both are illegal. It seems to me that I have won this round on the merits. But obviously the law means nothing to you--you are in favor of beheading! You must agree that beheading would be illegal under several treaties, and thus contrary to the supreme law of the land. A President who doesn't faithfully execute the Law is in violation of his oath of office.
Oh well that settles it, Gary has said he has won the debate is over!
But one quick thing first...
Read this
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land"
And now read the last part you left out as you were "paraphrasing", and think about it
"and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."
And now once more altogether...
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land, and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."
Chew on that for a while and take your time getting back to us.
You either are incredibly stupid or you hate America and its Constitution so much that when asked for one example of how Bush "shredded" the Constitution, you cite the Geneva Convention, and then try and argue the semantics of international law because you dont have a leg to stand on and you have a higher opinion of the very eurocrats that our forefathers revolted against.
You need Bush to be the continue to be the devil, because your God has been exposed as an empty suited Bush water carrying hack.
and btw I missed your reply to my question of "If Bush is "perhaps the worst" how do grade Obama so far, considering he has continued every single policy of Bush you oppossed?
Lemme guess, too soon to judge? baahahahahahaha! Im almost beginning to feel bad for liberals.
You can't change the argument in the middle of the debate.
You didn't say Bush "didn't faithfully uphold the law" we can have that argument next if you like.
However, you said Bush "Shredded the constitution!"
Are you now conceding this argument? Admitting that you're just repeating what you're told by the kos kids without actually thinking for yourself?
Again, I already know this is the case. Just admit it an we can move on.
Post a Comment