If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Miami Herald)   Supreme Court officially in Bush's pocket   (miami.com) divider line 242
    More: Scary  
•       •       •

25074 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Jan 2004 at 4:06 PM (10 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



242 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2004-01-13 02:55:13 PM
Ummm...okay.
 
2004-01-13 03:39:12 PM
First road blocks for no reason, now getting thrown in jail with no recourse for no reason. I just love America!
 
JPN
2004-01-13 04:06:39 PM
about time.
 
2004-01-13 04:07:56 PM
they were illegal immigrants, they shouldn't be here anyways.
 
2004-01-13 04:08:24 PM
Get your marshmellows ready kids.
 
2004-01-13 04:09:07 PM
What the hell kind of fark-knuckle headline is that?!

/tired of liberal whiny farktards
 
2004-01-13 04:09:15 PM
welcome back coat hanger abortions
 
2004-01-13 04:09:23 PM
My political affiliation can beat up your political affiliation!
 
2004-01-13 04:09:27 PM
Welcome to the new Soviet Union. Our new gulag should be built in Alaska any day now.

Are you papers in order?
 
2004-01-13 04:09:28 PM
Wow, three out of four. Pick your flamewar, folks! Guns, file-sharing, and Bush/War on Terror! Too bad the workday is ending in the east.
 
2004-01-13 04:10:25 PM
Where's that seatbelt buckle warning when you need it?
 
2004-01-13 04:11:06 PM
w00t. I always wanted to live in a country run by an idiot dictator. /got nothin
 
2004-01-13 04:12:04 PM
hi fives magnus205
 
2004-01-13 04:12:24 PM
Secret arrests, people held incommunicado indefinitely, prison camps in remote, inaccessible locations (Gitmo)... sheesh, good thing the US is the Land of the Free(tm), or there might really be some bad sh*t happening.
 
2004-01-13 04:12:24 PM
I need a job where I'm appointed for life. Then I can do the stupidest crap and have no worries.
 
2004-01-13 04:12:30 PM


How do you think he became President?

Wasn't by the people, that's for sure.
 
2004-01-13 04:12:42 PM
Where's Senator McCarthy when we need him?
 
2004-01-13 04:13:07 PM
Captain D seems to have ordered the ship hard to port today.
 
2004-01-13 04:13:14 PM
now how is the court in bush's pocket when libs have been blocking his attempts at appointing judges?
 
2004-01-13 04:14:07 PM
Ah....
where is John Marshall when you need him....
 
2004-01-13 04:14:16 PM
We must move forward, not backward, upward, not forward, and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom!
 
2004-01-13 04:14:27 PM
If anyone, of any political affiliation, does not see the dangerous precedent this sets, then I have a very dim view of your intelligence.

Burden of proof on the accuser is the mainstay of our law. It is based on a principle that our Constitution says is based in the rights of mankind, of all individuals, not only for citizens.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Ben Franklin
 
2004-01-13 04:14:59 PM
boobies?
 
2004-01-13 04:15:44 PM
Stigmata

Just the legislative branch did with the last Executive.

Sad huh? Darn Legislative Branhc doesn't know when it jsut needs to be a rubber stamp.
 
2004-01-13 04:15:51 PM
What this means, kiddies, is that if you're somehow detained for a terrorism-related crime, then you can be detained indefinately and nobody will ever know. You'll disappear. Seeing how various crimes now are being prosecuted under the USA PATRIOT Act that have no relation to terrorism, it gives the Executive branch the power to arrest anyone, anywhere, for nearly anything, and make them disappear with the blessing of the American people and the court system.

Of course, folks are saying "Bah, that'll never happen. It'll never go THAT far, and that's not what it was meant for!" Yeah, the USA PATRIOT Act wasn't meant to be used against drug peddlers or even drug users, but it IS.

Wake up and notice the slow stripping away of American freedoms before you wake up in a cell.
 
2004-01-13 04:16:18 PM
The solution is simple: MOVE TO CANADA. We're giving our citizens MORE FREEDOM.
 
2004-01-13 04:16:23 PM
tbond:

How do you think he became President?

By winning a majority of the votes in the Electoral College.

This is basic stuff that you should have learned in your fifth grade civics class. Were you asleep that year?
 
AV1
2004-01-13 04:16:24 PM
The main page says 2 comments, but I count over 20. What gives?
 
2004-01-13 04:17:03 PM
Obdicut

I think you need to read the article.
 
2004-01-13 04:17:33 PM
Obdicut, what does burden of proof have to do with the media not getting the juicy tidbits they've been fed from the table for the last 200 years?

The media neither needs nor is entitled to receive any information whatsoever from the government. NONE. That's not what freedom of the press is about.
 
2004-01-13 04:17:47 PM
Of course, folks are saying "Bah, that'll never happen. It'll never go THAT far, and that's not what it was meant for!" Yeah, the USA PATRIOT Act wasn't meant to be used against drug peddlers or even drug users, but it IS.

Are there examples of this? If so, how do we know about these examples?
 
2004-01-13 04:18:30 PM
magnus205

Since when is reading the article important on Fark?
 
2004-01-13 04:18:50 PM
/tired of liberal whiny farktards

/Tired of idiots who, in the face of unjustified secret arrests, indefinite prison terms w/ no charges and the quiet picking apart and wholesale distribution of the civil liberties of the citizens of this country, still insists on turning it into a farking "convservative vs. liberal" debate. Don't you think maybe this goes a bit beyond that? Or would you rather sit on your high horse spouting off worthless bullshiat flamebaits while some hick with an agenda unravels a century of global social reform?

/thought so
 
2004-01-13 04:18:59 PM
Get used to this kind of stuff. And when the election seems like it's going the Democrats' way, the Supreme Court will step in and hand it to Bushie again.

/willing to take bets
 
2004-01-13 04:19:00 PM
Yeah, the USA PATRIOT Act wasn't meant to be used against drug peddlers or even drug users, but it IS.

Those poor innocent drug pushers an addicts.
 
2004-01-13 04:19:04 PM
LincolnLogolas

That's true. And I heard on the radio this morning that they're even trying to arrest people for stuff they did while in college in the mid-1980s.

I, for one, do not welcome our freedom-stealing overlords. Sheesh.
 
2004-01-13 04:19:14 PM
The argument is if they release any information on how they caught these guys, that particular method would be avoided by more of these guys in the future. These aren't Americans they've got locked up. Don't forget that. It's not like one of us could be held like this. It's them, the turrrists. The Enemy Combatants hiding in wait for the next time.
 
2004-01-13 04:19:17 PM
AV1

If the comment counts were updated real-time, Fark's servers would explode.
 
2004-01-13 04:19:48 PM
underdog

Unless global warming is legit, I'll be staying away for now. I hear Costa Rica calling my name
 
2004-01-13 04:19:52 PM
I'm curious, has a Supreme Court Justice ever been assassinated? Or even the victim of an attempt?

*Note to Gub'ment boogey-men scanning the intrarweb: I do not wish to assassinate anybody. Please don't open up a can of Patroit Act on my ass.
 
2004-01-13 04:20:02 PM
now how is the court in bush's pocket when libs have been blocking his attempts at appointing judges?

Democrats in the Senate are currently holding up the nominations of 3 ultra-conservative judges. They have approved 168 judges. That means they have blocked a whopping 1.78% of Bush's chosen judges.
Plus, your question is lacking logic, in that sitting judges have nothing to do with the appointment of the new judges. Many of the ejudicators on the bench now were appointed by Reagan and Bush I, making them Bush II's easy allies.
 
AV1
2004-01-13 04:20:44 PM
paranoidandroid

Ah, thanks.
 
2004-01-13 04:20:54 PM
everybody who is actively being repressed by the government raise his hand...

(no, not you down there in the mud talking about autonomous collectives)

thought so.
 
2004-01-13 04:21:45 PM
Thanx

Clamp38
 
2004-01-13 04:21:56 PM
Agree with the dangerous precedent part...however, similar incarcerations were done by Lincoln during the Civil war and the Supreme Ct. ruled that he could not, but then Lincoln ignored them, proving that the court only has as much power as the enforcers of its decisions want it to.

I'm basically against the whoe idea of secretly arresting people based on evidence that is unadmissable in court (i.e. because of nat'l security). Esspecially america citizens. IF they are so guilty, deport them to their own countries and then torture the hell out of them. It'll save the taxpayers a few bucks for the whips, I say (rant).

On the other hand, the Constitution is not a suicide document. IT is intended to protect us, but these are despret times and despret times call for...(cliche). Should we cling to it, even if it is obviously not allowing our protectors (FBI, CIA, armed forces, etc.) to do their job to protect as best as they can?

Very tough issue, but think the court did the right thing. Thank God they are all sticking around till after the 2004 election though. Bush is so stupid, he'd probably try to appoint Robert Bork all over again.
 
2004-01-13 04:22:02 PM
Am I the only one stunned Michael Moore, Howard Dean and the other democrats haven't "dissapeared" yet? What kind of a totalitarian republican is this?!
 
2004-01-13 04:22:08 PM
/Tired of idiots who, in the face of unjustified secret arrests, indefinite prison terms w/ no charges and the quiet picking apart and wholesale distribution of the civil liberties of the citizens of this country, still insists on turning it into a farking "convservative vs. liberal" debate. Don't you think maybe this goes a bit beyond that? Or would you rather sit on your high horse spouting off worthless bullshiat flamebaits while some hick with an agenda unravels a century of global social reform?

I, for one, welcome our social reform stealing overlords. Does this mean that less dope-smoking wasteoids will believe that CO2 is a pollutant and not plant food?
 
2004-01-13 04:22:11 PM
fark_indiana:

And when the election seems like it's going the Democrats' way, the Supreme Court will step in and hand it to Bushie again.

/willing to take bets


I'm game. $50 says you're wrong.

Well?

Oh, and you do know that it was Al Gore who initiated the court battles, and the Florida Supreme Court that violated Florida's own voting laws, and a 7-2 Supreme Court majority that told the Florida court to quit rewriting the law as they went, right?

/gotten used to misinformation about the 2000 election
 
2004-01-13 04:23:21 PM
HumanTeam

My pleasure. I used the word "judge" too many times, though.
 
2004-01-13 04:23:22 PM
No surprise there, I'm quite sure that the Court is afraid that they are next on the list. Expect them to roll over on the rest of the items, and to say Enron was cool, too.
 
Displayed 50 of 242 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report