Texas Congressman Wants To Send Detainees To Live At The Supreme Court
Republican Texas Congressman Louie Gohmert doesn’t like the Boumediene Vs. Bush ruling by the Court that upholds habaes corpus for detainees. So disgusted is he by the majority decision that did a little thing like uphold the Constitution, that he has introduced legislation to send detainnees to the grounds of the Supreme Court so the justices can take care of them. He says he wants the justices “to have a little skin in the game.”
By transporting all of the detainees to the court’s grounds, my bill, H.R. 6615 – “To provide for the transport of the enemy combatants detained in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba to Washington, D.C., where the United States Supreme Court will be able to more effectively micromanage the detainees by holding them on the Supreme Court grounds, and for other purposes” – will give the justices plenty of opportunities to interact with these terrorists and therefore do a better job of supervision.
And Republicans blame Democrats for Congress’ low approval ratings?
All the Supreme Court justices should be ORDERED to appear before congress to hear this legislation and the discussion.
Having them wear clown outfits is optional
July 29th, 2008 at 7:39 pm
What a buffoon!
From LewRockwell:
The constant repetition over talk radio that “the surge is working” has convinced me that the surge in Iraq has worked. No longer do I ask: “Working compared to what?” Additional American casualties are fewer in Iraq today than a year ago, and that’s enough for me. No longer do I ask: “Fewer than if we pulled out of Iraq?” or “When will the casualties end?”
No, the surge is a rousing success.
Here are my new beliefs:
- I believe that if we give just one trial to some towel-headed Muqbar, Islamofascism will take us over and impose Islam on my family. I believe this most sincerely even though I repeat every hour – on the hour – we have the best, most powerful and most technologically advanced military in the world, a military that sits on a pile of nuclear weapons.
- I believe that when our soldiers interrogate detainees and use as a guide a chart which claims to explain “Communist Attempts to Elicit False Confessions,” that our interrogators will extract only truthful information that is vital to our safety. We should base our whole national security policy upon this information.
- I believe the jurisdiction of the U.S. Constitution does not reach outside of the geographic United States … except in cases where the President wants our military to strike, which is just about everywhere.
- I believe people who support the Bill of Rights are living in a September 10th worldview.
I believe the Constitution is not a suicide pact, so we must do away with all that Constitution stuff about trials, torture, habeas corpus and prohibition against warrantless surveillance.
- I believe we must strike the right balance between liberty and security, which means we should err on the side of security and strike out liberty. Clearly, we can not have both liberty and security. Ben Franklin was just as wrong as Thomas Jefferson.
- I believe in the Founding Fathers’ concept of limited government, but only when the Republican Party leadership and Fox News Channel (or do I repeat myself) tells me to do so.
Yes, I have evolved. I believe what I hear.
Repetition is all. I have to end this column now, because Sean Hannity is about to go on the air.
July 29th, 2008 at 8:18 pm
Come on, Alan, have a sense of humor. Whether you agree with his point or not (and I’m not sure I agree with him completely myself), the idea drives home his point rather well.
July 30th, 2008 at 1:16 am
“After reading through Boumediene v. Bush, I cannot help but feel that it is simply about the judiciary expanding its own power by usurping the clearly defined constitutional powers of Congress and the president.”
And obviously Gohmert comes to this conclusion because, according to the totalitarian Rightist mindset, anyone who challenges the absolute power of the executive is a traitor.
“In essence, the Supreme Court ruled in this case that when Congress and the president followed the decisions the court itself made in crafting law regarding enemy combatants, they did not act within the bounds of our Constitution.”
Yes, because the president did a lousy job “following the decisions of the court”.
One-third to one-half of the Gitmo detainees did nothing, and maybe ten percent had any connection with al Qaeda.
Gitmo, in the end, is a testament to incompetence.
July 30th, 2008 at 2:01 am
The liberal mindset expressed in the USSC (supreme court) is the testament to incompetence.
They want attention and power so they are happy to put terrorists into a position whereby they can be set free and rewarded, rather than say to congress hey, do your job and write up the legislation to make it say what you want it to do
anyone who challenges the absolute power of the executive is a traitor?
When the Clintons were in office those who challenged the absolute Clintonian executive were smeared or they ended up mysteriously not living anymore, or both.
But you liberals dont mind the murder of anyone who disagrees with YOUR totalitarian mindset, huh?
July 30th, 2008 at 3:52 pm
Bradley you crack me up!!
Totalitatian mindset!!
I love it when people use words that they dont know the meaning of.
July 30th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
Nice picture.
July 31st, 2008 at 2:06 am
Dave are you referring to what I said? if so how would you know if I know the correct meaning or not?
and if you think its not correct, then why not?
just an example, when Californias Gov Arnold had won the primary or whatever timeline it was, the Calif democrat chairman said now Arnold would have to face real, literal bullets, spoken in a way that meant the dnc would want to use real bullets;
Al Franken said a few years ago on radio something about a Bush or ? policy he didnt like in some air america radio commercial with the punchline something like this is what we think… (sound of a gun being fired); the US Secret Service had to check into it because of the threat
just 2 examples of zillions, even average liberal left joe posters who reply with death threats to right wingers who disagree. its not an isolated reaction, its a mainstream liberal left reaction, death to those who oppose them.
why does the liberal left hate America so much?
you know im right, right? so then?
July 31st, 2008 at 3:13 am
All Hail our Liberal Warlords!
July 31st, 2008 at 3:32 am
Thank Jebus this ass isn’t wasting anyone’s time in Congress. Congress is pathetic, no matter who is in the majority. They’re always more concerned about their next election and too afraid to jeopardize it…
July 31st, 2008 at 3:34 am
why does the conservative right hate the rest of America so much?
July 31st, 2008 at 3:35 am
Oh and zillion isn’t actually a real number, asshole…
July 31st, 2008 at 3:36 am
From the Boston tea party, to the abolition of slavery, to women’s sufferage, to gay rights, to the rights of ANYONE picked up ANYWHERE in the world, conservatives are ALWAYS on the wrong side of EVERY major issue in America.
“True patriotism hates injustice in its own land more than anywhere else.”
~Clarence Darrow
July 31st, 2008 at 6:49 am
Um, RESPECT…. this is the Supreme Court of the United States.
July 31st, 2008 at 3:59 pm
“why does the conservative right hate the rest of America so much?”
probably because of not being open to look at all the facts objectively, the ‘why’ could be accidental, they dont realize the lack of objectivity or the why not enough objectivity, and wrong decisions or belief mechanisms are formed
***
Oh and zillion isn’t actually a real number, %$#@!
by FuRyUs July 31, 2008 at 3:36 am
and how is zillion not a real number? zillion is an imaginary number and it exists in dictionaries, what is wrong with using zillion as a numerical reference? why do you hate ‘zillion’? Is there some reason? does it cause you to cringe like the sound of crunching fresh styrofoam packaging together, or scratching ones fingernails across a blackboard?
August 5th, 2008 at 1:30 am