.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}
Visit Freedom's Zone Donate To Project Valour

Monday, September 13, 2010

I Sorrow For My Country

The events of last week were literally tragic.

That an American administration could take a stance that fosters and justifies Islamic terrorism and essentially makes a dead letter of the Constitution is almost beyond belief. These thoughtless adolescents running the country are terrifying. They now have a lot of blood on their hands.

We have got to get the lawyers out of government. Apparently they believe in nothing.

It will be a long, long while until 2012. Everyone who is loyal to the Constitution should be actively seeking candidates from any party who will at least support the Constitution.

I think this came close to impeachment level. The most fundamental duty of a president is to support and uphold the Constitution. Our current president is at war with it.

I also think we should end the action in Afghanistan. It is far too dangerous with the current leadership. They are insane, literally insane. Or they are traitors. Logically, it must be one or the other.

MOM, I assume you're referring to the "fire at any civilians present when an IED goes off" policy? A little context would help me to be sure.
MoM,this should come as no surprise. Clinton wanted the patriot act and the military commissions act but couldn't push them through. Bush did get them through with Bi Partisan support and Obama has simply continued to push in the same direction. Scotus rule that "Enemy Combatants" are not persons at the urging of the current administration and thus not subject to the Rule of Law.The legal framework for tyranny has been put in place with complete "Legality". We now have an unfettered executive,something that Dick Cheney and others espoused for decades,stridently. A horror,but why the surprise?
Tom Stone-

"Scotus rule that "Enemy Combatants" are not persons at the urging of the current administration and thus not subject to the Rule of Law."

Sorry, I'm not clear on this -- are you referring to the use of drones against suspected Taliban?

Apologies for not "getting it"...
No, I am not. SCOTUS has ruled that anyone,including an American Citizen who is ruled an "Enemy Combatant" by POTUS or his authorized designee is not a "Person" under the law.Thus an "Enemy Combatant" can be subject to rendition or extreme methods of questioning without violating any laws or treaties.They are "Other" and outside of the law. Happy Days are here again!
I suspect that MoM means the decision to promise to skeedadle from the source of "unpleasantness".

I see just one hope of impeaching the current president. If, with a Republican Congress, a Treasury auction were to fail and he were to refuse to sign bills repealing a massive amount of spending, I think that would be cause. But there's a Vice President behind him who has even more understanding of politics as the art of getting elected and even less understanding of any kind of statecraft.

Actually, Congress and the Executive are both to blame for not declaring war against "any and all foreign organizations shown to plan acts of violence on American soil (including Embassies), against American armed forces, against American installations that exist by the voluntary invitation of the sovereign of the land, or against American citizens abroad." Such a declaration would answer clearly the complaints about the improper use of force and would recognize that "non-state actors"--Philip Bobbitt's "Market States"--are becoming a force in the world, too often as "anti-States." (Find the first term in The Shield of Achilles, the second in Terror and Consent. Both highly recommended with the caveat that you WILL have to spend at least a week of evenings on The Shield of Achilles.)
Tom, I'm not familiar with this. Are you talking about the Jeppesen case? Or the Al-Aulaqi case? I don't think either of those has been appealed yet.

Last I checked, the case law is still pretty clear--an American citizen caught in the U.S. is subject to the criminal court system. Citizens caught on the battlefield are not--in the current situation, that generally means they are "brigands" or undeclared combatants (uniforms and respect for noncombatants being so unfashionable these days), and their status under the Geneva Conventions is a topic of debate.
I really need to know *which* outrage M_O_M is bewailing.

With Obama, and this CONgress, it is literally a new outrage every damn day.

I now call him LimbObama - no matter how low you set the bar, he'll find a way under it.
I think that post was a bit of a Rorschach test, because I took it to mean the statement that "if you burn it, they might cut off a missionary dentist's head." I guess that everyone found some of the events of last week tragic, but not the same events. In the last couple weeks, two religious leaders have undertaken perfectly constitutional plans that angered large numbers of people. When the people angered were Americans at the Muslim religious leader, the President told us to suck it up because his plan was legal. When the people angered were Muslims, he told the pastor to not exercise his rights because it would make Muslims mad.

Has the memo not gone out yet that anyone who would kill others because of a rude act are really just looking for an opportunity to kill. The book burning is just the excuse they are looking for, but they are killers at heart.

This is in no way to say that I think burning a book to anger people is a wise idea. I think it is rude, and maybe intentionally so. But so is the building of monument to Islam so near the sight where people were killed in the name of Islam.

Both are rude. Both are legal. The president expects Americans to act like adults. Muslims are allowed to act like children throwing a tantrum. There's my constitution abandoning tragedy of the week.

M - yes, it is a Rohrshach test.

Mind you, one of my grandfathers got out of Germany and then Europe pretty much in the nick of time before the late Inglorious Revolution and WWII, so I might have a familial culture more attuned to the concept that when things go bad, they can go all the way before you know it.

The logic and ethics we adopt do create the futures of our societies.
One of my proudest internet moments was when you complimented one of my comments. I was afraid when I posted the above that you would take down my interpretation of the Rorschach for being inflammatory. My new proudest moment is your post which tells me I see what you see in the inkblots. You are an amazing writer who verbalizes what I intuit. If financial reform ruins your employment (which I hope it does not), my silver lining to your dark cloud will be that you will have time to write a book. I can't wait until it comes out.
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?