[Rhodes22-list] political: CNN Poll Finds Rhodes 22 Owner As #1 Political Irritant

[Hank]

Brad,

What's an idot?

Hank <grin>


On 5/5/08, Brad Haslett <flybrad at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Pete,
>
> I'm learning from Rummy about the new rules.
>
> You're an idot!
>
> Brad
>
> On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 2:13 PM, petelargo <petelauritzen at earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > Just got back from 3 day cruise in the florida keys. It was awesome.
> Then,
> > Herb, I saw your posts. You ask me for my sources (verbally denigrating
> me
> > and doubting that I even have them). Then when I give them to you, you
> > don't
> > like them or go "so what". It seems as if you are just going to hide
> > behind
> > the 3 monkeys rule and regurgitate your views (while acting like you are
> > the
> > only one without an agenda-laughable by itself).
> >
> > I don;t know what it means that the troops supported Ron Paul as their
> > number one candidate. I just thought  it was interesting that they did.
> > Don't you think it's interesting that they supported a fringe candidate
> > like
> > him? It's open for discussion. But it's true as I said it was. Why, why,
> > why.
> >
> > When ANY politician hides their past records it is a red flag for
> concern.
> > Lack of transparency in politics is the road to ALL evils. And again it
> is
> > a
> > fact that Bush made his service records confidential. Why, why why.
> >
> > You are not up to date on the illegality of Bushes DOMESTIC wiretapping.
> >  Or
> > again you are hiding behind the 3 monkeys rule (see no..hear no.. speak
> > no..
> > about Bush). And yes I am doing something about it as a supporting
> member
> > of
> > IMPEACHBUSH.ORG. However, I have made it clear that if Bush is caught in
> a
> > proper sex scandal I will immediately drop my membership.
> >
> > data for all your illegal domestic wiretapping reading needs:
> > http://thewall.civiblog.org/rsf/house_nsabrief_docs_012006.html
> >
> > 1) "Now, I want to be absolutely clear. What the President ordered in
> this
> > case was a crime.... and we have to deal with that as citizens and,
> > unfortunately, You have to deal with that as Members of Congress....Now,
> > Members that stay silent are making a choice.  Very few Members have
> faced
> > this type of test of Faith.  But You are facing it now, and as Citizens
> > and
> > as Members, it's now up to us.  We are called to account to the many
> > benefits that we have gotten from this system. We are called to account
> to
> > do something, and not to remain silent."
> > Jonathan Turley
> > Professor of Constitutional Law,
> > George Washington University
> >
> > 2) "...so indiscriminate and sweeping a scheme of domestic intrusion
> into
> > the private communications of American citizens, predicated entirely on
> > the
> > unchecked judgment of the Executive Branch, violates the Fourth
> Amendment
> > 'right of the people to be secure . . . against unreasonable searches
> and
> > seizures' even if it otherwise represents an exercise of constitutional
> > power entrusted to the President by Article II or delegated to the
> > President
> > by Congress in exercising its powers under Article I......the argument
> > goes... Invasion of that citizen's privacy was, alas, but one of war's
> sad
> > side effects — a species of collateral damage. The technical legal term
> > for
> > that, I believe, is poppycock. "
> >
> > Laurence H. Tribe
> > Professor of Constitutional Law
> > Harvard University
> >
> > 3) "...it is not simply a claim that the President has the sole power to
> > decide which laws to violate and when to go outside the judicial power,
> > but
> > that he has the power to do so in secret....until the New York Times
> > reviewed this program, he withheld the fact from the American people
> that
> > his view was that FISA did not limit his powers.  He secretly believed
> > that
> > he had broader authority than was laid out in the public statutes, but
> he
> > withheld and misled the American people about that view of his own
> > powers......examine what kind of misleading statements, if not
> deception,
> > were put before the Congress in connection with this"
> > Kate Martin
> > Director
> > Center for National Security Studies
> >
> > 4) "...when Congress enacted the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
> in
> > 1978, it expressly rejected the President's claim of inherent authority
> to
> > conduct warrantless wiretaps. It then went further and made it a crime
> to
> > conduct such wiretaps. The President has acted contrary to the express
> > will
> > of the Congress. The Supreme Court has never approved a claim of
> > presidential authority to authorize acts outlawed by the Congress."
> >
> > Kate Martin
> > Director
> > Center for National Security Studies
> >
> > 5) "...under his interpretation ... he could suspend the writ of habeas
> > corpus, ... saying: This authorization enabled me to do anything in
> > furtherance of the war effort. I can suspend the writ of habeas corpus
> > unilaterally even though Congress hasn't ...He could authorize breaking
> > and
> > entering of homes in order to secure intelligence to fight the war
> against
> > terrorism, despite the fact that there is an authorized procedure in an
> > amendment to FISA that governs physical searches......the principle that
> > the
> > President has established here, if gone unchecked, will, as Justice
> Robert
> > Jackson said, lie around like a loaded gun and be utilized by any future
> > incumbent who claims a need. And the history of power teaches us one
> > thing,
> > that if it's unchecked, it will be abused."
> >
> > Bruce Fein
> > Deputy Assistant Attorney General
> > Reagan Administration
> >
> > 6) "In each case the president's answer has been the same ... Courts and
> > Congress have little or no place to question his decisions....it is
> > nonetheless a dangerous path for our nation. Our laws provide ample
> tools
> > for fighting terrorism without eroding basic liberties. No one, not even
> a
> > wartime president, is above the law"
> > Michael S. Greco
> > President,  American Bar Association
> >
> >
> > --
> > View this message in context:
> >
> http://www.nabble.com/political%3A-CNN-Poll-Finds-Rhodes-22-Owner-As--1-Political-Irritant-tp17068794p17068794.html
> > Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>