It says in Article I that "[t]he privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it." Article I is the Article that covers the legislative branch, not the executive.
You are correct sir. It looks like there was even a court case over it, although it didn't reach SCOTUS. He should have gone to Congress first.
Beyond that, here's something I think is interesting: the South seceded.
Now I think you're quibbling over a distinction without much of a difference. Did the colonies rebel against the British or just secede?
LOL,...as if..(chuckle)Democrats would do any different than the Republicans
Yes, they would. See the difference between the Democrats on torture, warrantless spying, telecom immunity. There are some rotten Dems on those issues, but they're better than the Republicans who are 100% rotten.
I generally vote Libertarian.
It was Democrats, not Libertarians, who led the fight against telecom immunity for warrantless wiretaps.
Complaining generally just makes you look like an outed idiot
Maybe you should STFU and stop blathering bullshit. The point was that you have no more case to whine about Kennedy taking action on runaway executive power than I do to compare you to Michael Jackson.
So, you can't see anything that President Obama, as he's re-sending Secretary Of State Carter back to have another friendly sit-down with Hamas
Great idea, since Carter got them to accept Israel as a neighbor and an Israeli/Palestinian peace deal if it passed a referendum. See what happens when you actually (*gasp*) talk to people? But I'm sure you wont let anything as silly as facts interfere with your little hit piece on Obama.
The Dems need to look past their pathological Bush hatred
Bush has broken international and domestic law, four Constitutional Amendments, suspended habeas corpus even though we've suffered neither invasion nor rebellion, tortured people and gotten 10,000 Americans killed through his gross incompetence. If you aren't upset by that, you're either grotesquely ignorant or a sick tool. Which one are you?
Ah, so you're saying that we CANNOT trust a politician (the president, whose job is to head up the executive branch, which runs the sorts of operations in question) to use good judgement and keep the appropriate information from leaking out and damaging foreign relations or getting people killed, but you're willing to trust 400 politicians to exercise that judgement flawlessly?
Not a problem for a country that minds its own business. You don't see Al Queda trying to fly planes into buildings in Sidney or Toronto.
Do you mean people like Democrat rep. William Jefferson, caught with tens of thousands in bribe cash in his freezer, and who is not only still in office, but who might be considered to be a somewhat compromised keeper of sensitive information... and so Nancy Pelosi re-assigns him to committee that oversees the department of Homeland Security.
Of course you also know that Pelosi stripped him of his assignments when the news broke, right? Which is more than Republicans have done for the dozens of Republicans accused of equal or worse wrongdoing. Hell, House Republicans rewrote ethics rules to allow Tom Delay to retain his leadership position when he faced incitement. As for Jefferson, he hasn't been convicted and was (unfortunately) re-elected to office, so he had to be put somewhere.
He's only still in office because Pelosi didn't want the stain of having to go through the process of kicking him out damage the politics on her side of the aisle.
I wish they had. Republicans would be hard pressed not to vote to expel Jefferson, and then would be put on the spot if the House then investigated crimes committed by Republican politicians.
f course, she would scream (and has, and does) for that sort of action if it's her political opponents exhibiting anything like that very same behavior.
You mean Nancy "impeachment is off the table" Pelosi? I see we're at the part of the conversation where you just make shit up.
Or perhaps you're suggesting that Bill Clinton's ham-fisted handling of Bin Laden and Al Queda in the wake of the Cole incident, embassies, etc.
Ah, yes, the good old Clinton rules: whatever you do, it's the wrong thing. When he bombed Al Queda's aspirin factory, he was wagging the dog. Now he's at fault for not hitting them hard enough.
Only because he insisted on seeing an attack on a naval vessel in a foreign port, and attacks on our embassies, as criminal matters.
That's funny. All of our successes in fighting terrorism have come from treating them as criminal matters. All of our failures in fighting terrorism have come from treating them as military matters.
Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus and kept it a secret from the American public. John Marryman was being held without trial, and the Supreme Court issued a writ of habeas corpus. Lincoln basically ignored the writ.
Of course you know that was perfectly Constitutional, right? The president can suspend habeas corpus in the event of invasion or rebellion. Guess what the South did.
Whereas now we have not had invasion or rebellion, so these Bush/Lincoln comparisons are completely off base.
Why? You do know he's running for a 3rd Bush term in every conceivable way, right? The torture (despite being tortured himself), the budget busting (more tax cuts for the rich), the incompetence (on the economy and on the Middle East).
I never voted for Clinton because I think a guy who's family can't trust him shouldn't be trusted to run the country.
Oh, then you definitely can't vote for McCain then, since he's waaaaaaaay worse than Clinton in this regard. He cheated on his first wife, a former model who stuck by him through Vietnam, when she was badly injured in a car crash. Then he divorced her so he could marry a 25 year old heiress worth $100 million.
They play card tricks like, "Look at all that pork! There goes the money!" While we worried about $18B in pork (less than.2% of the budget)
Yeah, that's McCain's card trick. He wants to cut earmarks that will save $20 billion a year, while making tax cuts for the rich that will cost hundreds of billions more.
commit torture, open up prisons for people without even Habeas Corpus..
McCain has voted for both, as has Lieberman.
McCain would be part of it, and so would Lieberman and Powell.
Powell approved the Administration's use of torture.
Sounds like you need to pick up Glenn Greenwald's Great American Hypocrites. The book talks about how the GOP is the party of John Wayne: tough guy image, but in reality was a pill popping draft dodger.
No, he's (4), not susceptible to Republican horseshit. The Paula Jones case was nothing more than Richard Mellon Scaife spending a bunch of money to smear Bill Clinton. They even had a name for it: the Arkansas Project. The judge ruled that even if all of Jones's hearsay was true, it still didn't amount to harassment.
I don't have a problem with Clinton getting a blowjob. I don't have a problem with him lying about it. I DO have a serious problem when the lying is under oath as part of testimony in a court of law. They call this perjury. Last time I looked, it was a crime.
100%, Grade A bullshit. Not only did Clinton not commit perjury, he didn't lie under the court's definition of "sexual relations".
Republicans weren't investigating Clinton because they had probable suspicion that he committed a crime, they investigated him because they wanted and excuse to get him out of office. Period.
And no, that wasn't a misspelling of the name of the party. Both sides are the same side of the same rusty coin, only one side wears fake moustaches. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss...
Sorry, but Nader was pretty damn stupid to say that in 2000, and that was before 8 years of Bush's warmongering incompetence. There's a lot of crappy Dems to be sure, but it's better to improve the party that's only half rotten as opposed to the one that's 100% rotten. See telecom immunity. Or efforts like the one mentioned in the article.
Face it, there are a lot of things that are considered vile beyond belief...until YOUR Party does them.
False equivalency. The wingnut base is perfectly happy to flip flop on issues, like the importance of military service when Clinton was running against the first Bush, and the second when he was running against Gore, McCain and Kerry. Or how serious perjury is, when they invented perjury charges against Clinton, vs calling for a pardon for Scooter Libby's perjury conviction obtained under a Republican appointed prosecutor and judge. Hell, Fred Thompson, who voted to remove Clinton from office, gave a speech were he passionately called for the rule of law and a pardon of Scooter Libby. Our resident dumb fat fuck, Pudge, calls Barbra Boxer a liar for saying the vote to invade Iraq was about "WMD, period" and yet a week later he uses the Administration line that Social Security is in a "crisis" even though it wouldn't hit for almost 40 years and even then would pay out 75% benefits.
Whereas the Democratic base gets pissed when they're sold out by Democratic politicians. Crappy Dems like Joe Lieberman and Al Wynn have been successfully primaried. Lieberman retained his seat but at least he was booted out of the party. And it was the base of the Democratic party that led the fight against telecom immunity, not conservatives or libertarians.
There are a lot of crappy Dems to be sure (Hoyer, Reid, Pelosi) but at least the party is only half rotten as opposed to 100% rotten like the Republicans (see telecom immunity, torture, etc).
Alternatively, if a Democrat is elected, this'll be quietly forgotten, since it's just election year politics as usual.
Not gonna happen. Senator David Vitter, a Family Values Republican, was busted for prostitution. Wearing diapers. His Republican colleagues gave him a standing ovation when he returned to the Senate. Eliot Spitzer, a former prosecutor who prosecuted prostitution rings, was busted for prostitution. The Republicans in New York said they'd move to impeach him if he didn't resign in 48 hours. The press talked about Vitter for a couple days. They're still talking about Spitzer now, even though he resigned while Vitter is still in office.
The press will rediscover their backbone at the same moment Republicans regain their distrust in an executive branch: the second the next Democrat becomes president.
That never made a whole lot of sense to me. How is having a wife that works in intelligence going to make you less credible on matters of national security? Plame's job was preventing nuclear proliferation, and according to Siebel Edmunds, high level government officials were involved in the sale of nuclear secrets to Turkey and Pakistan. It looks like the real reason Plame was outed was she was getting too close to investigating those officials, so her cover was blown so she'd lose her cover and her access.
Allowing you around kids makes as much sense as letting Michael Jackson run a preschool. A woman dating you is like a woman seeing Jack the Ripper.
Carping about Democrats who actually stick up for your rights instead of complaining about the Republicans who have spent the last 8 years shredding the Constitution is like being the biggest fucking idiot on the face of the planet.
They always have 40 sales people there and each one has to get there "Can I help you find something?" quota in. Here's an idea. If I want help I'll come to you.
Yes, it's the fault of the employees for not reading your mind more clearly. The assholes.
If Apple's success is so heavily dependent on a single product I think they've got more important things to worry about.
I wouldn't be too concerned if I was an Apple shareholder. The company learned some harsh lessons in the 90's on inventory issues, product diversity and having too many projects that waste money and/or get canceled. They turned the company around and were one of the few to consistently make money all the way through the.com bust.
1. The first is they marketed it supernaturally well and got everybody hooked on their cockamamie interface so they didn't want to use anything else.
Aside from the 1.8" hard drive, they also used 400 Mbps Firewire when everyone else was using 11 Mpbs USB. And they had a good hardware/software interface, as opposed to other products like MusicMatch which was pretty much a big pile of shit.
Yup. Back in the day, PowerPC processors were not just faster than Intel's chips mhz for mhz, but they also had more mhz. Motorola had their own line of Mac clones target towards businesses, with -5- year warranties. When Stevo killed the clones, Moto's CEO was pissed and PowerPC development went from robust to being an embarrassment as Moto put all their attention into embedded processors.
Moral of the story: kill clones if you have to, but it's probably not a good idea to do it to the people that make your CPUs.
You talking about the media who's discussion of the war is as dominated by pro-war hawks today as it was in 2002? The media that continues to treat those who were wrong on every issue on Iraq as Very Serious Experts while completely ignoring those who were right from the beginning?
Look, Mr Barstow, you're trying to sell a story about the media being used to paint a false picture to the American public, yes? But you, yourself, are a member of the media? Reporting on a topic that paints a picture of the picture-painters to the American public? In an election year?
And then there's just being stupid. We want the media to admit when it's screwed up, as the NYTimes did on Judith Miller and the role they played in selling the Iraq war. You tell them to STFU when they commit journalistic malpractice, as ABC did with the Democratic debate last week.
In an election year?
Yes, in an election year, you incompetent asshat. If the Times has broke the NSA wiretapping story when they learned of it instead of waiting until after the 2004 elections, we might have saved over a thousand American lives and over a trillion dollars just in Iraq. This year, John McCain might as well be running for George W. Bush's third term. He's pushing the same budget busting fiscal policies that give the majority of the benefits to the top 1%, he's sucking up to crazy end times Evangelicals faster than you can say "agents of intolerance", and is an even bigger warmonger than Dick Cheney.
Yes, I was shocked, shocked! that one of the worlds largest, most established cell manufacturers, based in Europe, would outsell a company completely new to the market. In Europe.
Slashdot Mirror
It says in Article I that "[t]he privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it." Article I is the Article that covers the legislative branch, not the executive.
You are correct sir. It looks like there was even a court case over it, although it didn't reach SCOTUS. He should have gone to Congress first.
Beyond that, here's something I think is interesting: the South seceded.
Now I think you're quibbling over a distinction without much of a difference. Did the colonies rebel against the British or just secede?
LOL,...as if..(chuckle)Democrats would do any different than the Republicans
Yes, they would. See the difference between the Democrats on torture, warrantless spying, telecom immunity. There are some rotten Dems on those issues, but they're better than the Republicans who are 100% rotten.
I generally vote Libertarian.
It was Democrats, not Libertarians, who led the fight against telecom immunity for warrantless wiretaps.
Complaining generally just makes you look like an outed idiot
Maybe you should STFU and stop blathering bullshit. The point was that you have no more case to whine about Kennedy taking action on runaway executive power than I do to compare you to Michael Jackson.
So, you can't see anything that President Obama, as he's re-sending Secretary Of State Carter back to have another friendly sit-down with Hamas
Great idea, since Carter got them to accept Israel as a neighbor and an Israeli/Palestinian peace deal if it passed a referendum. See what happens when you actually (*gasp*) talk to people? But I'm sure you wont let anything as silly as facts interfere with your little hit piece on Obama.
The Dems need to look past their pathological Bush hatred
Bush has broken international and domestic law, four Constitutional Amendments, suspended habeas corpus even though we've suffered neither invasion nor rebellion, tortured people and gotten 10,000 Americans killed through his gross incompetence. If you aren't upset by that, you're either grotesquely ignorant or a sick tool. Which one are you?
Ah, so you're saying that we CANNOT trust a politician (the president, whose job is to head up the executive branch, which runs the sorts of operations in question) to use good judgement and keep the appropriate information from leaking out and damaging foreign relations or getting people killed, but you're willing to trust 400 politicians to exercise that judgement flawlessly?
Not a problem for a country that minds its own business. You don't see Al Queda trying to fly planes into buildings in Sidney or Toronto.
Do you mean people like Democrat rep. William Jefferson, caught with tens of thousands in bribe cash in his freezer, and who is not only still in office, but who might be considered to be a somewhat compromised keeper of sensitive information... and so Nancy Pelosi re-assigns him to committee that oversees the department of Homeland Security.
Of course you also know that Pelosi stripped him of his assignments when the news broke, right? Which is more than Republicans have done for the dozens of Republicans accused of equal or worse wrongdoing. Hell, House Republicans rewrote ethics rules to allow Tom Delay to retain his leadership position when he faced incitement. As for Jefferson, he hasn't been convicted and was (unfortunately) re-elected to office, so he had to be put somewhere.
He's only still in office because Pelosi didn't want the stain of having to go through the process of kicking him out damage the politics on her side of the aisle.
I wish they had. Republicans would be hard pressed not to vote to expel Jefferson, and then would be put on the spot if the House then investigated crimes committed by Republican politicians.
f course, she would scream (and has, and does) for that sort of action if it's her political opponents exhibiting anything like that very same behavior.
You mean Nancy "impeachment is off the table" Pelosi? I see we're at the part of the conversation where you just make shit up.
Or perhaps you're suggesting that Bill Clinton's ham-fisted handling of Bin Laden and Al Queda in the wake of the Cole incident, embassies, etc.
Ah, yes, the good old Clinton rules: whatever you do, it's the wrong thing. When he bombed Al Queda's aspirin factory, he was wagging the dog. Now he's at fault for not hitting them hard enough.
Only because he insisted on seeing an attack on a naval vessel in a foreign port, and attacks on our embassies, as criminal matters.
That's funny. All of our successes in fighting terrorism have come from treating them as criminal matters. All of our failures in fighting terrorism have come from treating them as military matters.
Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus and kept it a secret from the American public. John Marryman was being held without trial, and the Supreme Court issued a writ of habeas corpus. Lincoln basically ignored the writ.
Of course you know that was perfectly Constitutional, right? The president can suspend habeas corpus in the event of invasion or rebellion. Guess what the South did.
Whereas now we have not had invasion or rebellion, so these Bush/Lincoln comparisons are completely off base.
I like McCain
.2% of the budget)
Why? You do know he's running for a 3rd Bush term in every conceivable way, right? The torture (despite being tortured himself), the budget busting (more tax cuts for the rich), the incompetence (on the economy and on the Middle East).
I never voted for Clinton because I think a guy who's family can't trust him shouldn't be trusted to run the country.
Oh, then you definitely can't vote for McCain then, since he's waaaaaaaay worse than Clinton in this regard. He cheated on his first wife, a former model who stuck by him through Vietnam, when she was badly injured in a car crash. Then he divorced her so he could marry a 25 year old heiress worth $100 million.
They play card tricks like, "Look at all that pork! There goes the money!" While we worried about $18B in pork (less than
Yeah, that's McCain's card trick. He wants to cut earmarks that will save $20 billion a year, while making tax cuts for the rich that will cost hundreds of billions more.
commit torture, open up prisons for people without even Habeas Corpus..
McCain has voted for both, as has Lieberman.
McCain would be part of it, and so would Lieberman and Powell.
Powell approved the Administration's use of torture.
Sounds like you need to pick up Glenn Greenwald's Great American Hypocrites. The book talks about how the GOP is the party of John Wayne: tough guy image, but in reality was a pill popping draft dodger.
No, he's (4), not susceptible to Republican horseshit. The Paula Jones case was nothing more than Richard Mellon Scaife spending a bunch of money to smear Bill Clinton. They even had a name for it: the Arkansas Project. The judge ruled that even if all of Jones's hearsay was true, it still didn't amount to harassment.
I don't have a problem with Clinton getting a blowjob. I don't have a problem with him lying about it. I DO have a serious problem when the lying is under oath as part of testimony in a court of law. They call this perjury. Last time I looked, it was a crime.
100%, Grade A bullshit. Not only did Clinton not commit perjury, he didn't lie under the court's definition of "sexual relations".
Republicans weren't investigating Clinton because they had probable suspicion that he committed a crime, they investigated him because they wanted and excuse to get him out of office. Period.
And no, that wasn't a misspelling of the name of the party. Both sides are the same side of the same rusty coin, only one side wears fake moustaches. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss...
Sorry, but Nader was pretty damn stupid to say that in 2000, and that was before 8 years of Bush's warmongering incompetence. There's a lot of crappy Dems to be sure, but it's better to improve the party that's only half rotten as opposed to the one that's 100% rotten. See telecom immunity. Or efforts like the one mentioned in the article.
Face it, there are a lot of things that are considered vile beyond belief...until YOUR Party does them.
False equivalency. The wingnut base is perfectly happy to flip flop on issues, like the importance of military service when Clinton was running against the first Bush, and the second when he was running against Gore, McCain and Kerry. Or how serious perjury is, when they invented perjury charges against Clinton, vs calling for a pardon for Scooter Libby's perjury conviction obtained under a Republican appointed prosecutor and judge. Hell, Fred Thompson, who voted to remove Clinton from office, gave a speech were he passionately called for the rule of law and a pardon of Scooter Libby. Our resident dumb fat fuck, Pudge, calls Barbra Boxer a liar for saying the vote to invade Iraq was about "WMD, period" and yet a week later he uses the Administration line that Social Security is in a "crisis" even though it wouldn't hit for almost 40 years and even then would pay out 75% benefits.
Whereas the Democratic base gets pissed when they're sold out by Democratic politicians. Crappy Dems like Joe Lieberman and Al Wynn have been successfully primaried. Lieberman retained his seat but at least he was booted out of the party. And it was the base of the Democratic party that led the fight against telecom immunity, not conservatives or libertarians.
There are a lot of crappy Dems to be sure (Hoyer, Reid, Pelosi) but at least the party is only half rotten as opposed to 100% rotten like the Republicans (see telecom immunity, torture, etc).
Alternatively, if a Democrat is elected, this'll be quietly forgotten, since it's just election year politics as usual.
Not gonna happen. Senator David Vitter, a Family Values Republican, was busted for prostitution. Wearing diapers. His Republican colleagues gave him a standing ovation when he returned to the Senate. Eliot Spitzer, a former prosecutor who prosecuted prostitution rings, was busted for prostitution. The Republicans in New York said they'd move to impeach him if he didn't resign in 48 hours. The press talked about Vitter for a couple days. They're still talking about Spitzer now, even though he resigned while Vitter is still in office.
The press will rediscover their backbone at the same moment Republicans regain their distrust in an executive branch: the second the next Democrat becomes president.
That never made a whole lot of sense to me. How is having a wife that works in intelligence going to make you less credible on matters of national security? Plame's job was preventing nuclear proliferation, and according to Siebel Edmunds, high level government officials were involved in the sale of nuclear secrets to Turkey and Pakistan. It looks like the real reason Plame was outed was she was getting too close to investigating those officials, so her cover was blown so she'd lose her cover and her access.
Not a problem if you're a country that minds its own business.
There's healthy cynicism and then there's false equivalency. You're engaging in the latter.
Allowing you around kids makes as much sense as letting Michael Jackson run a preschool. A woman dating you is like a woman seeing Jack the Ripper.
Carping about Democrats who actually stick up for your rights instead of complaining about the Republicans who have spent the last 8 years shredding the Constitution is like being the biggest fucking idiot on the face of the planet.
Yes, and it has less space than a Nomad. Lame.
Would you like some cheese to go with that thin skinned whine?
They always have 40 sales people there and each one has to get there "Can I help you find something?" quota in. Here's an idea. If I want help I'll come to you.
Yes, it's the fault of the employees for not reading your mind more clearly. The assholes.
If Apple's success is so heavily dependent on a single product I think they've got more important things to worry about.
.com bust.
I wouldn't be too concerned if I was an Apple shareholder. The company learned some harsh lessons in the 90's on inventory issues, product diversity and having too many projects that waste money and/or get canceled. They turned the company around and were one of the few to consistently make money all the way through the
That would suck, since polar bears are the fiercest predators in the animal kingdom.
Apple did only two things well with the iPod.
1. The first is they marketed it supernaturally well and got everybody hooked on their cockamamie interface so they didn't want to use anything else.
Aside from the 1.8" hard drive, they also used 400 Mbps Firewire when everyone else was using 11 Mpbs USB. And they had a good hardware/software interface, as opposed to other products like MusicMatch which was pretty much a big pile of shit.
Speaking of discounts, students now pay full price for iPods. You used to be able to save $20-$30 on them.
Scully virtually ran the company into the ground. Then when Jobs was brought back he was able to turn it around.
One good thing Scully did was push the Newton, which was spun off into a (profitable) subsidiary before Jobs came back and killed it.
Yup. Back in the day, PowerPC processors were not just faster than Intel's chips mhz for mhz, but they also had more mhz. Motorola had their own line of Mac clones target towards businesses, with -5- year warranties. When Stevo killed the clones, Moto's CEO was pissed and PowerPC development went from robust to being an embarrassment as Moto put all their attention into embedded processors.
Moral of the story: kill clones if you have to, but it's probably not a good idea to do it to the people that make your CPUs.
You talking about the media who's discussion of the war is as dominated by pro-war hawks today as it was in 2002? The media that continues to treat those who were wrong on every issue on Iraq as Very Serious Experts while completely ignoring those who were right from the beginning?
Look, Mr Barstow, you're trying to sell a story about the media being used to paint a false picture to the American public, yes? But you, yourself, are a member of the media? Reporting on a topic that paints a picture of the picture-painters to the American public? In an election year?
And then there's just being stupid. We want the media to admit when it's screwed up, as the NYTimes did on Judith Miller and the role they played in selling the Iraq war. You tell them to STFU when they commit journalistic malpractice, as ABC did with the Democratic debate last week.
In an election year?
Yes, in an election year, you incompetent asshat. If the Times has broke the NSA wiretapping story when they learned of it instead of waiting until after the 2004 elections, we might have saved over a thousand American lives and over a trillion dollars just in Iraq. This year, John McCain might as well be running for George W. Bush's third term. He's pushing the same budget busting fiscal policies that give the majority of the benefits to the top 1%, he's sucking up to crazy end times Evangelicals faster than you can say "agents of intolerance", and is an even bigger warmonger than Dick Cheney.
Is it wrong to expect people to stop whining and get products with the features they want and stop bitching about those that don't?
Yes, I was shocked, shocked! that one of the worlds largest, most established cell manufacturers, based in Europe, would outsell a company completely new to the market. In Europe.
Well, maybe not that shocked.