Don’t Like SCOTUS Upholding the Constitution? Change The Constitution
June 20th, 2008, 3:09 PM EDT
That’s what McCain’s number one advocate, Lindsey Graham, says he’d do, and McCain doesn’t object.
Graham, a close adviser to McCain on military and justice issues, said Thursday the Constitution might need to be amended to override the Supreme Court ruling. McCain did not rule out that option yesterday but said there are other avenues available, including drafting a new law to limit detainees’ access to federal courts.
why not change the constitution? all you have to do is disguise it or amendment to homeland security, create some fear…it will get things passed.
June 20th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
Sometimes amendments become necessary…
June 20th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
I’d like to say the republicans are crazy, but I get tired of it…
June 20th, 2008 at 4:03 pm
Is it not the Constitution of the United States of America? Since when do our laws pertain to other countries and foreign nationals not in our country? I am going to say that it does not. One of the biggest complaints I hear from the left is that the U.S. is trying to impose our way of life on other peoples there by stamping out their unique identity. This time however you are upset because you think our laws should apply to other peoples. You cannot have it both ways. Either out laws should pertain to everyone or only us.
June 20th, 2008 at 4:25 pm
Made my stomach turn over reading that. That’s pretty frightening.
June 20th, 2008 at 4:34 pm
If the Constitution of the US can only be seen as a grantor of rights, applicable only to Americans, than the principles contained in it are not truly believed.
What is the value of a right that is exclusivey defined by and limited to a document as opposed to being one that that document gives recognition to as being inalienable? The Constitution isn’t only a basis for some of our morality, it’s also an understanding of our innate ethics (albeit ethics that may change over time, but not necessarily for the better) which are not approved, but respected, by the Constitution.
Amendments should be for the purpose of improving us, not lowering us.
June 20th, 2008 at 4:59 pm
The Constitution does not grant rights. It simply declares what the inalienable rights are. It does not give anything simply makes an observation of what is. That is a mistake many people make so I forgive you.
What I believe in this country, and the men and women who protect it. If I can keep just 1 of them from getting killed by torturing a terrorist that is more then acceptable to me. It is sad to see that the left can so readily turn their backs on our troops. What, pray tell, would happen if the troops one day up and turned their backs on you? How long would you survive? How long would you go before begging for their protection again. If they are willing to die for us what are we willing to do for them. I have the answer, LET THEM DO WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. If you are too weak to do it get the hell out of the way someone with some fortitude can do it for you.
June 20th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
I fairly well indicated that I know that, so what are you forgiving me for?
June 20th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
WFG,
I do apologize; I read your post incorrectly. You are 100% correct you did indicate that. At least we are on the same page, when it comes to this that is hard to do a lot of times. Again my mistake!
June 20th, 2008 at 5:41 pm
I agree with McCain. The Supreme Court should have respected Congress’ law regarding alien detainees.
The Constitution was instituted for Americans, not for the world.. and certainly not for those who seek to destroy us.
It’s totally asinine to think that Habeas Corpus rights were implicitly meant to apply to ANYONE who comes into our custody. But these are silly times. The Leftists think themselves “above” the real world. They are on a higher plane of existence.
For them, there is no consequence for their high-mindedness and loftiness.
They have absolutely no clue that rulings like this are transmitting a message of weakness to our enemies. An enemy that is very sensitive to honor, strength and weakness.
June 20th, 2008 at 5:54 pm
Sen. Lindsey Graham practically led the way to impeach President Clinton and he has staunchly defended President Bush. I don’t get it? Bush shattered the Constitution reading “My Pet Goat” and blaming the anthrax on Iraq. Clinton did have sex with that woman and refused to admit it. Which one is worse? Sen. Graham is worse because he is trying to use the powers of the Constitution to crown a King. He’s throwing away the parts he doesn’t like and hyping the fear to make us close our eyes. The only way to protect and defend the Constitution is to vote people like this out of office. Isn’t he from South Carolina and that huge black population behind Barack?
June 20th, 2008 at 5:58 pm
No Vince P. the leftist simply do not care. They are too narrow minded to realize that if these people continue to get these types of rulings that on day the whole world will be under Islamic rule. So much for human rights then, and feminism, and all the other wonderful things liberals care so deeply about.
I am pretty sure that time is referred to as the end of the world.
June 20th, 2008 at 5:58 pm
Actually, I’m probably closer to Epiphany.
June 20th, 2008 at 6:28 pm
Karma: We’re on the same page. In their self-regarded moral superiority they see themselves as infallible… so the effect of things like the court decision on our enemy’s thinking isn’t even a consideration. Actually that Muslims even exist isn’t something they worry about .. it’s only when America interacts with Muslims, and the leftist can find something to attack America for about that interaction that suddenly the Muslim is noticed.
That the Muslims have their own motivation, their own agenda, their own aspirations.. their own time-frame etc.. isn’t anything they care about either. As far as Mr lefty is concerned, everything that happens in the world is a result of what America does. The fact that Muslims have been at war against the world for 1,400 years and far as the Muslims are concerned for another 1,400 years in the future until they win does not register with them.
The Lefty regards religion as silly, and thus because the Lefty thinks EVERYONE thinks like he does, he simply dismisses what Muslims say about themselves and transpose onto the Muslim some Marxist paradigm to explain what they are doing.
And if anyone dare to speak the truth.. why that person is a hater!
June 20th, 2008 at 6:34 pm
They think religion is silly therefore since it is silly there is no need to worry about it. The left just cannot seem to get over that hump in the road with their thinking. A shame really.
June 20th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
1865:
How dare we create the 13th and 14th amendments to overrule Dred Scott! It’s just frightening and makes my stomach turn!
–
That said, giving enemy combatants habeas corpus rights, in my opinion, doesn’t rise to the level of Constitutional Amendment.
Good points Vince and Karma…an Islamic majority would make hardcore Christian conservatives look like San Francisco libs.
June 20th, 2008 at 8:17 pm
I believe the argument is over whether habeas corpus does apply, not yet over whether it should.
As for the sarcasm about the amendments, if I’d attacked our existing amendments, characterized them as largely bad, then a clever and relevant point would be made by it. So I must assume the sarcasm wasn’t meant for me, otherwise it just wouldn’t make sense. Of course.
June 20th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
Socialism is a demolition of the 10th Amendment. So it would be cool to have things like universal health care, social security, medicare/medicaid, etc. put to the test as amendments.
Then vaguely libertarian twits like me could cork just cork it.
June 20th, 2008 at 9:46 pm
Christianity sucks!
June 20th, 2008 at 10:16 pm
That’s not fair FuRy, there are many really good Christians out there and many are also Democrats and liberals as well.
June 20th, 2008 at 10:25 pm
Jesus was a liberal. :)
June 20th, 2008 at 10:26 pm
Jesus was a Liberace!
June 20th, 2008 at 10:27 pm
In fairness to the Pastor, his message to his congregation doesn’t create a religious test in violation of the Constitution. It might in “spirit,” or whatever, but I don’t see a religious test being created by him expressing his opinion. His congregation can choose not to follow him.
June 20th, 2008 at 10:30 pm
I forgot which thread I was in.
June 20th, 2008 at 10:31 pm
Christianty sucks! Bunch of assholes…
June 21st, 2008 at 10:06 am
Karma and others who express support for our military saying torturing a terrorist isn’t so bad if it saves a life haven’t read the Uniformed Code of Military Justice or listened to the totally negative take on torture by the AG’s of the military services. Hard as it is to follow, they believe there is a code of soldiering, and that what goes around comes around. Further there is the little issue of illegality. Now we aren’t fighting a war in which the enemy is uniformed, commanded by recognized authority unless you consider any Muslim an enemy. Many of the so called terrorists picked up were sold to us by war lords with hardly any real evidence of mis-behavior…so they were abused, some tortured until we felt justified. Once at Gitmo, the ugly truth appeared and to not look as bad to the world as we were, we fudged,lied, diverted the IRC. allowed torture induced testimony, secreted “evidence” against the accused etc. Then we politically interfered with the prosecution. To their credit, the military defence lawyers assigned would have none of that. The Constitution conveys its rights on “persons” (not limited to citizens). There are truely some bad eggs at Gitmo who deserve every adverse judgement and adequate punishment. But there are detailed a much larger number who are either totally innocent and were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time, or for who evidence is mostly lacking either way. That is why they need the right to challenge their detention. If you look at the law now passed, any of us, you, me or they can be held as an enemy combatant simply on a warrant from the DOD and given absolutely no right to object to that categorization or indefinite detention under abusive conditions. If that is the Christian thing to do…it’s not my view of Christianity. If its the right thing to do, that’s not my view of right. Don’t blame “liberals” for not understanding the real world. For the most part, they’re taking up a less than popular position to protect themselves, you and I, and our beloved nation.
June 21st, 2008 at 1:17 pm
The Bush/Cheney hate us for our freedoms!
June 22nd, 2008 at 5:51 pm