Restoring Habeas Corpus

[Cadrid]

Well, the bill got shot down with a vote of 56 yeas and 44 nays. The roll call vote results are here. It's pretty disgusting how feebly people argue against this bill, making it seem like terrorists and murderers will be given a "Get Out of Jail Free" card. I don't usually like to let my indignation boil over, but I'd like nothing more than to imprison every single person that doesn't support this bill and detain them indefinitely.

Even worse, the Democratic party throughout the entirety of Bush's rule has been made up of the biggest cowards in the history of our nation. There's been no filibustering, no outrage, no fight whatsoever. In my opinion these skulking mongrels are just as guilty of treason as Bush and anyone who supports him.

[Tolanin]

knowing how hard to impossible it is to put away mafia leaders etc in normal courts, you have to acknowledge that it is entirely possible terrorists would be set free by it... our judicial system is set up so that we ere on the side of caution and let guilty people free instead of jailing innocents, works fine when its shop lifters or druggies or petty thieves, not so fine when the guys are raping and murdering people or plotting to blow up our infrastructure.

[Cadrid]

And that is what I'm talking about: saying it's okay for millions of people's lives and rights to be buried so that we can be 100% certain we're detaining people who may or may not be out to get us. Will some be let free mistakenly? Yes, unfortunately sometimes guilty people are released because there isn't enough evidence to justly imprison them, but it's a two way street; we can't stick innocent people in prison just because we think they might be bad.

You can't strip the rights of millions based on fear and a hunch. It's immoral and goes against the Constitution and everything our forefathers stood for.

[Soriak]

Chaser's war on everything had a short segment on American views about Muslims. Hilarious to see support for special IDs, tattoos on their forehead, special clothes, patches and imprisoning them for either the duration of the war, or indefinitely. Feel free to point out that they just pick the craziest respondents, of course they do.

Still, I have no doubt that a non-trivial percentage does support such crazy statements - the same people who think Bush is doing a great job, and the same people who'll vote those opposing this bill back election after election.

[Rythonn]

Originally Posted by Lusiphur

As a non-American this cracks me up.

You guys have to plebiscite to restore a basic right that most Western civilisations have had in one form or another since the Middle Ages.

It's just mind-boggling ...

(As a caveat I dont think basic human rights are any safer here in the UK either).

You do realize this is a vote for non-citizens, right?

[Lithose]

Originally Posted by Lusiphur

As a non-American this cracks me up.

You guys have to plebiscite to restore a basic right that most Western civilisations have had in one form or another since the Middle Ages.

It's just mind-boggling ...

(As a caveat I dont think basic human rights are any safer here in the UK either).

Habeas corpus is only suspended for non-citizen enemy combatants and the status of enemy combatant can be appealed. If the court finds insufficient evidence to declare someone an “enemy combatant”, then your right to Habeas Corpus remains intact. (This is the comic book version, constitutional law isn’t my forte.)

This is an extremely limited suspension of Habeas Corpus, nothing like the suspension during the civil war. The senators on both sides are using this as a flash point, the ones for “restoring it” are being dishonest with the scope of the restriction, and the ones against it are diminishing the precedent and importance of denying it to anyone.

[Tolanin]

Originally Posted by Soriak

Chaser's war on everything had a short segment on American views about Muslims. Hilarious to see support for special IDs, tattoos on their forehead, special clothes, patches and imprisoning them for either the duration of the war, or indefinitely. Feel free to point out that they just pick the craziest respondents, of course they do.

Still, I have no doubt that a non-trivial percentage does support such crazy statements - the same people who think Bush is doing a great job, and the same people who'll vote those opposing this bill back election after election.

way to look at the most radical insane people and then try to play them off as anything close to mainstream... bush got elected and those bills fail to pass because many many americans think it should be that way... 99 percent of them dont take it to the extremes you try to say they do.

Ya this is way sensationalized.. zomg non citizen combatants dont have a right to a trial, clearly this matters to me as a citizen.

[Gahid]

As the current administration punches more and more holes into a legal system which has stood the stand of time they open up new loop-holes which are unaccounted for.

&&Allowing someone to talk to a lawyer before torturing a confession out of them is not a get out of jail free card.

[voodoochile78]

Originally Posted by Cadrid

Well, the bill got shot down with a vote of 56 yeas and 44 nays. The roll call vote results are here. It's pretty disgusting how feebly people argue against this bill, making it seem like terrorists and murderers will be given a "Get Out of Jail Free" card. I don't usually like to let my indignation boil over, but I'd like nothing more than to imprison every single person that doesn't support this bill and detain them indefinitely.

Even worse, the Democratic party throughout the entirety of Bush's rule has been made up of the biggest cowards in the history of our nation. There's been no filibustering, no outrage, no fight whatsoever. In my opinion these skulking mongrels are just as guilty of treason as Bush and anyone who supports him.

To quibble on one issue, the Democrats now control the Senate, so it's not them who are filibustering, it's the Republicans.

What is shameful about this situation is how the pussy-ass Democrats allow filibusters to happen painlessly. Back in the day, when Republicans were OPENLY allowed to express their burning hatred for blacks, filibusters would have to go on for days at a time. But today, the pussy-ass Democrats give up after 5 minutes. If the bill didn't get 60 votes, they give up.

The Republicans are basically shutting down every single Democratic bill. Check out this chart of how often Cloture Votes (i.e. to end filibusters) have been used over the last several decades. This congressional session it is off the fucking charts, as Republicans are basically trying to ass-fuck our country into the ground until the Boy-King is out of office.

[Havelock]

Originally Posted by voodoochile78

Back in the day, when Republicans were OPENLY allowed to express their burning hatred for blacks, filibusters would have to go on for days at a time.

You didn't show up for history class much, did you?

[Soriak]

Originally Posted by Tolanin

way to look at the most radical insane people and then try to play them off as anything close to mainstream... bush got elected and those bills fail to pass because many many americans think it should be that way... 99 percent of them dont take it to the extremes you try to say they do.

Although it's from last year, I don't think the number changed that much.

U.S. Poll: Large Minority Fear, Mistrust Muslims

39% of Americans favor a special ID for Muslims.

[Tolanin]

Originally Posted by Soriak

Although it's from last year, I don't think the number changed that much.

U.S. Poll: Large Minority Fear, Mistrust Muslims

39% of Americans favor a special ID for Muslims.

and saying those people also support tattooing them and imprisoning them wasnt sensationalist how?

[voodoochile78]

Originally Posted by Havelock

You didn't show up for history class much, did you?

Do you think your link is going to tell me that Republicans like Strom Thurmond weren't setting records for filibusters blocking legislation that was doing away with racist shit that Republicans love so much?

Really, what are you trying to get at here? Are you thinking that black-hating Dixiecrats like Strom Thurmond left the Democratic party for the black-hating Republican party reflects badly on the Democrats? Are you trying to bring up the fact that the Democratic Party was once the party of Southern racist fuckheads, but they all left to join the Republicans?

I don't get your angle here, but clearly you're the one in need of the history classes.

[Havelock]

Originally Posted by voodoochile78

Really, what are you trying to get at here? Are you thinking that black-hating Dixiecrats like Strom Thurmond left the Democratic party for the black-hating Republican party reflects badly on the Democrats? Are you trying to bring up the fact that the Democratic Party was once the party of Southern racist fuckheads, but they all left to join the Republicans?

I don't get your angle here, but clearly you're the one in need of the history classes.

Ah, watch the sands shift as you scurry to cover your tracks. Your consistently ignorant and hyperbolic posts waste so much precious bandwidth.

Anyway, reading is fundamental. If you read the link, you might be able to wrap your head around the angle. Robert Byrd, in his youth Exalted Cyclops of his local Klan chapter, didn't leave the Democratic party. Instead, he's one of its most powerful members, chairman of the most powerful committee in the Senate and third in the line of presidential succession by dint of support of his Democratic colleagues.

Don't forget William Fulbright, either, one of the most venerated Democratic Senators in recent memory and Bill Clinton's idol. Fritz Hollings wasn't as bad on civil rights, but he did vote against Thurgood Marshall's confirmation and called Howard Metzenbaum "the Senator from B'nai Brith" on the Senate floor. John Stennis, also with a mixed but questionable civil rights record, remained a Democrat until his retirement in 1989. George Wallace was a lifelong Democrat, though he did change his stance on black people after he became a born-again Christian in the late seventies.

In addition, your distorted view of history does a grave disservice to all the Republicans who supported the various Civil Rights Acts. The Republican party was founded on a platform of civil rights and continued to be the consistently-pro-Civil RIghts party through the landmark Civil Rights legislation of the latter half of the twentieth century.

Sure, the Republican party had people like Jesse Helms and Strom Thurmond - but in case you haven't noticed, neither is in the Senate anymore, and the Republicans who replaced them, Elizabeth Dole and Lindsey Graham, are hardly segregationists. On top of that, Thurmond mellowed quite a bit after he joined the Republican party. In the 70s, he was responsible for the appointment of the first Southern black man to the federal bench, former state NAACP chairman Matthew Perry, and he hired a number of black staffers including now-commentator Armstrong Williams.

But the bottom line is, you said "Back in the day, when Republicans were OPENLY allowed to express their burning hatred for blacks." That's a factually incorrect statement, and even if you try to spin it that some of the Democrats who did filibuster eventually became Republicans, they were Democrats at the time and quite a few of the obstructionists remained (or remain) Democrats to the end.

I deplore your Orwellian attempt to rewrite history. You have demonstrated not just a willingness but a desire to ignore truth, fact, and reality in your attempts to promote your political beliefs. You are what's wrong with American politics today. I hope someday you mature enough to be ashamed of the shit you post.

[voodoochile78]

WOW! Havelock is now claiming that the Republican Party isn't the party of Southern Racism, but that it's the Democrats instead.

Robert Byrd vs Strom Thurmond is an interesting pair to look at. Robert Byrd denounced his racist past, and Strom Thurmond joined the Republican Party to embrace it.

When signing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 into law, Lyndon Johnson famously said that he'd be handing over the South to the Republicans for decades. He was right, and Havelock is wrong, as usual.


"Back in the day," Republicans like Strom Thurmond were setting record filibusters (over 24 hours of talking!) to keep racism alive. Havelock, like Strom Thurmond, is on the wrong side of history.