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

[Michael D. Weisner]

Thena,

I like that one.  One-eyed ... hmmm

The reason that many of us are on this list slugging it out while we are not 
sailing is because none of us were able to come up with the next great Apple 
product called the iDot or Simon Cowell's next blockbuster, American Idot 
(that one might fit with Brad's original.)

Mike
s/v Shanghai'd Summer ('81)
Nissequogue River, NY

From: "Thena Carville" <thenacarville at bellsouth.net>Sent: Monday, May 05, 
2008 4:12 PM
> And here I thought it was a one eyed idiot....go figure...
> Thena
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org
> [mailto:rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org] On Behalf Of Herb Parsons
> Sent: Monday, May 05, 2008 3:08 PM
> To: The Rhodes 22 mail list
> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] political: CNN Poll Finds Rhodes 22 Owner As 
> #1
> Political Irritant
>
> Boy... all you folks that "know so much", and you have to have simple
> things like that answered.
>
> It's the dot, over in i. Sort of like a jdot, but differentimicated.
>
> Hank wrote:
>> 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-Poli
> tical-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
>>>
>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>
>